RE: Why feminism is still nessecary

RE: Why feminism is still nessecary (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

egern -> RE: Why feminism is still nessecary (10/24/2013 3:27:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: egern I would like to pose that question to all: is feminism really only us in the western world, and does the bravery shown in the rest of the world not count, all because of semantics??? No, it has nothing to do with semantics. It has to do with not putting bullets in the gun of my enemy which is pointed at my head. I happen to be a member of this western culture you speak of. So if I support "feminism" then I am shooting my own self in the head because implicitly I'm supporting what WE mean by feminism. Now, how exactly would you have me support "feminism" in some far off land? Periodically I do sign petitions but I'm way more likely to do so if it is presented as a human rights argument and not a feminist one. A sense of self-preservation is in play here not "semantics". I do not know if it is because I am from another culture (Scandinavian) which is markedly different form the US that I do not understand what you say. But in truth, I don't. Are you seriously saying that feminism is a gun at your head, as well as at western culture??

egern -> RE: Why feminism is still nessecary (10/24/2013 3:30:30 AM)
"JeffBC & slavekate80, no question this is a Human Rights issue, whether it had been a male or a female accused, tried, found guilty of possessing a mobile phone, then unjustly turned over to relatives to be executed in a barbaric manner by stoning. Nonetheless, I find it sad not only that a female was singled out in this manner, but that the both of you distance yourself from Feminism as you perceive it as more of an institution instead of a grass-roots movement, which it should be. It's almost as if this concept represents a threat or the irrational belief that by promoting Women's Rights to ensure the protection of disenfranchised women around the world, somehow men are giving up a portion of their basic human rights. Until this kind of scarcity mentality can be reconciled, no global citizen is safe from wantonly arbitrary persecution. " Is TigressLily right? Is this the problem? If she is, she is also right in her conclusion which is scary, frankly, as well as completely baffling.

Zonie63 -> RE: Why feminism is still nessecary (10/24/2013 6:35:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: egern "JeffBC & slavekate80, no question this is a Human Rights issue, whether it had been a male or a female accused, tried, found guilty of possessing a mobile phone, then unjustly turned over to relatives to be executed in a barbaric manner by stoning. Nonetheless, I find it sad not only that a female was singled out in this manner, but that the both of you distance yourself from Feminism as you perceive it as more of an institution instead of a grass-roots movement, which it should be. It's almost as if this concept represents a threat or the irrational belief that by promoting Women's Rights to ensure the protection of disenfranchised women around the world, somehow men are giving up a portion of their basic human rights. Until this kind of scarcity mentality can be reconciled, no global citizen is safe from wantonly arbitrary persecution. " Is TigressLily right? Is this the problem? If she is, she is also right in her conclusion which is scary, frankly, as well as completely baffling. I might look at the question from a different perspective and ask whether feminism is still necessary in the West. During my lifetime, feminism has mostly focused on the policies of Western governments and the traditions of Western culture as applied to gender roles. The archetypical "male chauvinist pig" in the West is a relatively mild and innocuous creature (usually limited to only being verbally offensive to feminists) in comparison to those who would stone a woman for owning a cell phone. However, I can see where some men would feel guarded against being lumped together with murderers, rapists, and other violent scumbags in this world. I'm not saying that all feminists do that, nor do I believe there's any such implication here in this thread. I would also point out that, on a practical level, taking into consideration geopolitics and the realities of the political entrenchment one would have to challenge in order to address and deal with the problem you raised in your OP, feminism may not be enough. We're talking about nations and cultures which have been colonized by the West, exploited by the West - with wars, massacres, atrocities, and the whole nine yards. They're wary of the West and don't want to be influenced by the West, so it's a whole different kettle of fish we're dealing with. Another issue being addressed by your OP is that of religion, so it's possible that one could make a thread entitled "Why Atheism is still necessary," although I think that atheism may not have very much political capital in certain areas of the world so that may not be an effective approach to the problem either. Sadly, I'm not sure exactly what we can do at this point. Going to war with Pakistan isn't really an option at this point. Perhaps we can go the sanctions route, but that's an iffy prospect for a nation like Pakistan in an unstable region. If we press this too far, it could destabilize their regime and could lead to radicals being in control of a nuclear-armed nation. We're worried about Iran getting nukes, but Pakistan already has them. These are the issues we're going to have to consider in dealing with a problem like this.

TigressLily -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/24/2013 6:36:46 AM)
If I may interject here to say IMHO the majority of men here in the U.S. perceive Feminism to be a threat to the ever-shifting status quo, a de facto psychological emasculation of sorts. Perhaps it's the legislative or judicial form in which Equal Rights amendments get implemented (i.e., the political process) which provokes such ire. We Americans are a renegade bunch and don't like being told what to do. We want to be self-regulating much as an errant child thinks it knows what's best for him but lacks the maturity to do what is best for the common good. Not to mention there have been a few loud-mouthed spokespersons over the decades who have been media attention whores (not meant with sexist intent [:-] ). This would be the modern equivalent of Rush Limbaugh being representative of the views of all conservative Republicans, which of course he isn't by a longshot. quote: ORIGINAL: egern Are you seriously saying that feminism is a gun at your head, as well as at western culture?? What has been as good as lost to posterity is the historiography of how early Feminists and Christian groups such as the Quakers were instrumental in spearheading the Abolitionist Movement, which gave our society the first [ideologically drafted] version of Equal Rights for disenfranchised African-Americans. (Quakers, among others, risked life, limb, liberty & personal property to harbor runaway slaves via the Underground Railroad.) It was the same groups of progressive thinkers & doers who rose up to protest against the ubiquitous exploitation of child labor practices during the Industrial Age (which is still prevalent in third-world countries today). Neither of these were strictly women's issues per se apart from the Women's Suffrage movement for women to be "granted" the right to vote. Notably, efforts to advocate for basic human rights of our Native American Indians never achieved a comparable level of success during this period. ETA: In general, Europeans - especially Scandinavians, although the French & Italians may dispute this - have always been more progressively minded insofar as social reforms are concerned than us Americans; I daresay more visionary. Our entertainment industry is chalk full of British/European imports adapted for American audiences. Ironically, we "borrow" many of our lagging ideas from the Old World.

PeonForHer -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/24/2013 4:19:56 PM)
quote: We Americans are a renegade bunch and don't like being told what to do. Oh I wouldn't say that. TL. I think Americans are just a bit stupid, that's all. [:)]

egern -> RE: Why feminism is still nessecary (10/25/2013 8:05:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 quote: ORIGINAL: egern "JeffBC & slavekate80, no question this is a Human Rights issue, whether it had been a male or a female accused, tried, found guilty of possessing a mobile phone, then unjustly turned over to relatives to be executed in a barbaric manner by stoning. Nonetheless, I find it sad not only that a female was singled out in this manner, but that the both of you distance yourself from Feminism as you perceive it as more of an institution instead of a grass-roots movement, which it should be. It's almost as if this concept represents a threat or the irrational belief that by promoting Women's Rights to ensure the protection of disenfranchised women around the world, somehow men are giving up a portion of their basic human rights. Until this kind of scarcity mentality can be reconciled, no global citizen is safe from wantonly arbitrary persecution. " Is TigressLily right? Is this the problem? If she is, she is also right in her conclusion which is scary, frankly, as well as completely baffling. I might look at the question from a different perspective and ask whether feminism is still necessary in the West. During my lifetime, feminism has mostly focused on the policies of Western governments and the traditions of Western culture as applied to gender roles. The archetypical "male chauvinist pig" in the West is a relatively mild and innocuous creature (usually limited to only being verbally offensive to feminists) in comparison to those who would stone a woman for owning a cell phone. However, I can see where some men would feel guarded against being lumped together with murderers, rapists, and other violent scumbags in this world. I'm not saying that all feminists do that, nor do I believe there's any such implication here in this thread. I would also point out that, on a practical level, taking into consideration geopolitics and the realities of the political entrenchment one would have to challenge in order to address and deal with the problem you raised in your OP, feminism may not be enough. We're talking about nations and cultures which have been colonized by the West, exploited by the West - with wars, massacres, atrocities, and the whole nine yards. They're wary of the West and don't want to be influenced by the West, so it's a whole different kettle of fish we're dealing with. Another issue being addressed by your OP is that of religion, so it's possible that one could make a thread entitled "Why Atheism is still necessary," although I think that atheism may not have very much political capital in certain areas of the world so that may not be an effective approach to the problem either. Sadly, I'm not sure exactly what we can do at this point. Going to war with Pakistan isn't really an option at this point. Perhaps we can go the sanctions route, but that's an iffy prospect for a nation like Pakistan in an unstable region. If we press this too far, it could destabilize their regime and could lead to radicals being in control of a nuclear-armed nation. We're worried about Iran getting nukes, but Pakistan already has them. These are the issues we're going to have to consider in dealing with a problem like this. I believe you are right in that it is difficult to help - though actually the UK ended up giving a home to the (then) 14 year old who stop up to the fundamentalist forces of her country. But that does not - immediately anyway - help matters there. What I can do is only to give something to the organizations trying to help women in various places in the world - something my humanist male friends rarely feel called to do btw - and think for myself that feminism and feminism are many things.

egern -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/25/2013 8:11:17 AM)
TigressLily If I may interject here to say IMHO the majority of men here in the U.S. perceive Feminism to be a threat to the ever-shifting status quo, a de facto psychological emasculation of sorts. You mean this is why so many American men are apparently so afraid of women?

JeffBC -> RE: Why feminism is still nessecary (10/25/2013 9:05:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: egern Are you seriously saying that feminism is a gun at your head, as well as at western culture?? Yes to my head, no to the western culture part. My own opinion is that there is sufficient gender bias against men in current (local) feminist movement that nowadays I agree with some things but choose not to line up under that banner because in supporting it I support the things which are actively against gender equality. In other words, enough feminists have lapsed over into male-hating that I no longer wish to support that cause or wear the banner. Issue by issue I will support or not but I avoid doing things which would look supportive of feminism as a whole. So, for instance, a petition on some site that relates to a specific issue is likely to get my support. If it also tosses in the feminist banner then I won't support it even if I might otherwise do so.

TigressLily -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/25/2013 11:22:12 AM)
You raise an interesting point, which falls within the subjective realm of personal observation. I might tend to agree with you, in that I haven't detected so much animosity among European men, who aren't hung up on machismo for the most part. Men who were raised in male-dominated cultures where females are denigrated are much worse (e.g., Asians/Middle Easterners, Hispanic/Latinos), I've found. It's the firstborn-son syndrome, a (false) sense of entitlement. quote: ORIGINAL: egern You mean this is why so many American men are apparently so afraid of women? I do appreciate Jeff's candor about not being supportive of the 'feminist banner.' I don't go around waving this banner myself, and male-bashing is just plain wrong. Prof. Camille Paglia did not jump on this bandwagon and was accused of being "the feminist's anti-feminist." When egos get involved, things inevitably go south. You could easily take any prevailing issue and judge it by its cover, then subsequently throw the baby out with the bath water. I try not to be swayed by the cult of personality and can support a principle without allowing myself to be unduly influenced by the players pushing said cause. The general public is not as discerning, but they are the ones who ultimately adopt the attitudes which form public opinion. For instance, I may not agree with the way the AFL-CIO goes about its business. My grandmother may have repeatedly said under her breath her entire life, "Those damned Democrats" because she & my grandfather once owned a zinc mine in Missouri that got shut down as a result of regulations requiring higher safety standards for the benefit of miners. Their business partner, on the other hand, took off for California and became a multi-millionaire. Sour grapes. America has never ceased being the land of opportunity for those who choose to take charge of their personal destiny instead of wallowing in recrimination and holding pity parties for themselves.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/25/2013 12:54:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TigressLily America has never ceased being the land of opportunity for those who choose to take charge of their personal destiny instead of wallowing in recrimination and holding pity parties for themselves.[/color] Oh, stop before you go too far. That type of thinking ain't safe 'round these here parts. (But, they are damn true words!!)

egern -> RE: Why feminism is still nessecary (10/27/2013 1:05:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: egern Are you seriously saying that feminism is a gun at your head, as well as at western culture?? Yes to my head, no to the western culture part. My own opinion is that there is sufficient gender bias against men in current (local) feminist movement that nowadays I agree with some things but choose not to line up under that banner because in supporting it I support the things which are actively against gender equality. In other words, enough feminists have lapsed over into male-hating that I no longer wish to support that cause or wear the banner. Issue by issue I will support or not but I avoid doing things which would look supportive of feminism as a whole. So, for instance, a petition on some site that relates to a specific issue is likely to get my support. If it also tosses in the feminist banner then I won't support it even if I might otherwise do so. Sounds to me like the 'feminists' in your local area are actually female supremacists. There is no end to the damage they do to the feminist movement. I understand what you say now, and I can only add that these fundamentalist types are as bad for women as they are for men.

egern -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/27/2013 1:32:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TigressLily You raise an interesting point, which falls within the subjective realm of personal observation. I might tend to agree with you, in that I haven't detected so much animosity among European men, who aren't hung up on machismo for the most part. Men who were raised in male-dominated cultures where females are denigrated are much worse (e.g., Asians/Middle Easterners, Hispanic/Latinos), I've found. It's the firstborn-son syndrome, a (false) sense of entitlement. Broadly speaking Southern Europe is more machismo (in its negative concept) than Northern Europe. I certainly do not know anything about American men, never having been to the US, only draw my conclusions on what is said on this and other lists by American men. quote: I do appreciate Jeff's candor about not being supportive of the 'feminist banner.' I don't go around waving this banner myself, and male-bashing is just plain wrong. Yes! Any -bashing is. quote: Prof. Camille Paglia did not jump on this bandwagon and was accused of being "the feminist's anti-feminist." When egos get involved, things inevitably go south. When the argumentation go to 'if you are not with us you are against us' there is no more free discussion as any proper movement should have, and we are talking power mongers or fundamentalists, or both. quote: You could easily take any prevailing issue and judge it by its cover, then subsequently throw the baby out with the bath water. I try not to be swayed by the cult of personality and can support a principle without allowing myself to be unduly influenced by the players pushing said cause. The general public is not as discerning, but they are the ones who ultimately adopt the attitudes which form public opinion. With the net, things are often thrown around too fast and too irresponsibly, and that puts its mark on opinions and attitudes. But I do so hope that people are more into using their heads than that!! Following certain discussions it is my impression that while a certain number have knee-jerk reactions or respond to what sounds like authority, just as many do actually think for themselves.

egern -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/27/2013 1:42:49 AM)
TigressLily: "America has never ceased being the land of opportunity for those who choose to take charge of their personal destiny instead of wallowing in recrimination and holding pity parties for themselves." I have always been slightly confused by this mantra. In as far as it is true, it goes for any country. And it is certainly true that giving up doesn't do much for solving problems. But 'taking charge of your destiny?' No one can do that. We can play the cards we are dealt, more or less cleverly, but we do not decide which we are given.

egern -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/27/2013 1:44:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: TigressLily America has never ceased being the land of opportunity for those who choose to take charge of their personal destiny instead of wallowing in recrimination and holding pity parties for themselves.[/color] Oh, stop before you go too far. That type of thinking ain't safe 'round these here parts. (But, they are damn true words!!) BOO! ;-)

Zonie63 -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/27/2013 8:15:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: egern TigressLily If I may interject here to say IMHO the majority of men here in the U.S. perceive Feminism to be a threat to the ever-shifting status quo, a de facto psychological emasculation of sorts. You mean this is why so many American men are apparently so afraid of women? I suppose it's possible, although I generally find there to be a disconnect between how people perceive large-scale national issues like feminism as opposed to how they relate to individuals in their daily lives. I don't know that the majority of men in the U.S. view feminism as a threat, although I've seen reactions go up and down the spectrum over the course of my lifetime. I've observed the same with women, as not all women march in lockstep behind the same idea either, and their reactions have also been up and down the spectrum. Feminism itself has also changed, so men may be reacting to older versions of feminism and haven't been initiated to the newer versions which seem to keep coming out all the time. I don't think it's true that feminism has made men "afraid" of women, although there might be some level of confusion and uncertainty about what feminism actually is and what it entails. If there are issues where feminist principles coincide with my own set of principles, then I agree, although I generally take it on an issue-by-issue basis. Same with women, whom I take on an individual basis. I might fear some women, while others I do not fear, but feminism has absolutely nothing to do with it.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/27/2013 8:42:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: egern TigressLily: "America has never ceased being the land of opportunity for those who choose to take charge of their personal destiny instead of wallowing in recrimination and holding pity parties for themselves." I have always been slightly confused by this mantra. In as far as it is true, it goes for any country. And it is certainly true that giving up doesn't do much for solving problems. But 'taking charge of your destiny?' No one can do that. We can play the cards we are dealt, more or less cleverly, but we do not decide which we are given. But, you can upgrade your cards, to a point, with hard work. Plus, you can upgrade the cards of your kids through your hard work. Barack and Michelle Obama were not dealt great hands growing up. Some will claim they had a lot of help getting into their respective colleges, and some will claim they did it themselves, through hard work. Either way, they are playing with significantly different cards than they started with. Look at their girls now. The cards they have been dealt are much, much different from the ones their own parents were dealt. Why? Through the hard work of their parents (and, possibly, help from people outside the family). The key is in "earning" better cards. Simply wallowing in defeat and laziness isn't the right way to go about earning better cards. Few are fated to not be able to change the cards they are dealt. The "American Dream" was that you could go to America and make your life what you wanted, if you were willing to do the work it took.

TigressLily -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/27/2013 3:25:39 PM)
Exactly as DS puts it. We 'play the cards we are dealt' as you say egern, they change according to our strategy and how long we're willing to stay in the game. quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri But, you can upgrade your cards, to a point, with hard work. Plus, you can upgrade the cards of your kids through your hard work. <snip> The key is in "earning" better cards. Simply wallowing in defeat and laziness isn't the right way to go about earning better cards. Few are fated to not be able to change the cards they are dealt. The "American Dream" was that you could go to America and make your life what you wanted, if you were willing to do the work it took. Of course, life isn't a card game and there is much more at stake than a night's losses or gains. Why do we have such a problem with immigration? At the root of it - not wanting to get into an embroiled debate - is the hope and dream to make a better life here in the U.S., with the knowledge that it will more than likely take blood, sweat & tears to get from point A to point B, and so on. Benefit/cost ratio. ETA: Zonie, I hesitated when answering egern's question because I believe there are only certain kinds of American men who are afraid of women or feel threatened by them. Those are the men I had in mind to when I referred to 'psychological emasculation.' Namely, the ones who are caught up with an inflated sense of their own machismo and feel it necessary to project a macho-like aura. Men who are self-assured and confident in themselves have no reason to fear women or to resort to misogynistic behaviors. I trust I hadn't given anyone else the wrong impression.

tweakabelle -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/28/2013 2:28:31 AM)
quote: Tigress Lily I hesitated when answering egern's question because I believe there are only certain kinds of American men who are afraid of women or feel threatened by them. Those are the men I had in mind to when I referred to 'psychological emasculation.' Namely, the ones who are caught up with an inflated sense of their own machismo and feel it necessary to project a macho-like aura. Men who are self-assured and confident in themselves have no reason to fear women or to resort to misogynistic behaviors. I trust I hadn't given anyone else the wrong impression. Too true. Sadly, if these men could take a step back for a minute and discover for themselves what feminism is really about (as opposed to the caricature presented in the popular media) they could realise that adapting feminist approaches to their lives offers a far better, more productive way out of their insecurities and fears. Feminism offers women a platform that we have used to ‘re-invent’ ourselves for the better, to reject and abandon compulsory servility, to discard out-dated roles that confined women to permanent second class status. It has allowed women to reshape our half of the gender divide to better suit ourselves and the lives we want to lead. The same opportunity is available to men. Just as traditional notions of femininity were untenable for us, traditional notions of masculinity are a prison that confine many men to roles that are unsuitable, often impossible for them - this is the source of many of the insecurities and fears that find unproductive expression in anti-feminism. Men have the opportunity to use the strategies that succeeded for women to ‘re-invent’ themselves, to cast off forever untenable impositions of traditional masculinity and to reshape the rules of the game to allow for the diversity of men in all their modes of self expression. This seems to me to be a far more positive option than knee jerk opposition to women trying to improve their lot in life. The ball is in your court guys. Are you up for the challenge?

Zonie63 -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/28/2013 5:49:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Barack and Michelle Obama were not dealt great hands growing up. Some will claim they had a lot of help getting into their respective colleges, and some will claim they did it themselves, through hard work. Either way, they are playing with significantly different cards than they started with. Look at their girls now. The cards they have been dealt are much, much different from the ones their own parents were dealt. Why? Through the hard work of their parents (and, possibly, help from people outside the family). The key is in "earning" better cards. Simply wallowing in defeat and laziness isn't the right way to go about earning better cards. Few are fated to not be able to change the cards they are dealt. The "American Dream" was that you could go to America and make your life what you wanted, if you were willing to do the work it took. True enough on its face, although I think Egern has a point in that this can be accomplished in any country and under any political system. There's nothing uniquely "American" about the "American Dream," aside from our propensity towards self-aggrandizing propaganda and sloganism (feeding into notions of "American Exceptionalism"). It also seems to carry the implication that hard work will always pay off (which it doesn't) and that wealthy people are in that position due to an honest, ethical life of hard work (which is rarely the case). There's also the not-so-subtle insinuation that people who are not wealthy or successful in America are in that position due to their own fault, either because they're too lazy, stupid, or not ambitious enough - just waiting for handouts and whining about their lot in life. We have enough rags-to-riches stories in American folklore to give us ample anecdotal justification for the notion we call the "American Dream," but part of that also carries the expectation that each succeeding generation must live better and have greater opportunities than the previous generations did. Everything is supposed to improve with each generation, but in the past 40 years, we've seen stagnation, regression, and an ever-increasing burden of debt being placed on future generations. That's not how the American Dream was supposed to work. Nowadays, Americans are having one big party, patting themselves on the back, while leaving the bill for their children and grandchildren - who will undoubtedly have to work very hard to pay it while getting none of the benefit.

Zonie63 -> RE: Why feminism is still necessary (10/28/2013 6:46:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TigressLily Of course, life isn't a card game and there is much more at stake than a night's losses or gains. Why do we have such a problem with immigration? At the root of it - not wanting to get into an embroiled debate - is the hope and dream to make a better life here in the U.S., with the knowledge that it will more than likely take blood, sweat & tears to get from point A to point B, and so on. Benefit/cost ratio. As I mentioned to DS, the "American Dream" has never really been all that it's cracked up to be. In America's case, it was simply a matter of being in the right place at the right time. It was never a fairy tale or some "dream" story. It wasn't our "Manifest Destiny" either, although if that's just another way of saying "dumb luck," that would still be closer to the truth than implying that it was all our idea (or that of the Founding Fathers). I don't know that immigration is necessarily a "problem," although the immigrants I know seemed to have completely different expectations of America than what they actually found once they got here. People might get their impressions of America from political propaganda (such as grandiose proclamations about the "American Dream"), the entertainment media, or from various renditions of our history. But when they get all this buffered and sanitized information about America, it just creates more confusion than anything else. quote: ORIGINAL: TigressLily ETA: Zonie, I hesitated when answering egern's question because I believe there are only certain kinds of American men who are afraid of women or feel threatened by them. Those are the men I had in mind to when I referred to 'psychological emasculation.' Namely, the ones who are caught up with an inflated sense of their own machismo and feel it necessary to project a macho-like aura. Men who are self-assured and confident in themselves have no reason to fear women or to resort to misogynistic behaviors. I trust I hadn't given anyone else the wrong impression. I understood what you meant. I'm well aware of the personality type which you're referring to, although I think it's changed a lot over the course of my lifetime. My grandparents' generation had certain views about feminism which were quite different from what is prevalent nowadays. Oddly enough, it was my grandmothers who seemed more critical of feminism, yet they were both independent and relatively outspoken, both retired teachers. As my fading memories of the 1970s can recall, it was staunchly anti-militaristic, which is partly where the anti-macho notion came into play, since being "macho" was viewed as contributory to a violent, warlike world. The so-called "sensitive male" came on the scene, while the "tough female" was also on the rise. It wasn't until the 80s that there was a bit of "macho" backlash, when a popular book title was "Real Men Don't Eat Quiche" and the idea of men's groups forming and chanting around the campfire to find their "inner male" or something like that. I'm not sure if it was a backlash against feminism or simply an attempt for men to try to regain some of their identity which they felt was lost. I don't know if they actually opposed feminism directly, since they ostensibly conceded the gains already made by feminists, but they seemed more into "doing our thing" which wouldn't impact or interfere with the feminist agenda. Another thing that rose in the 80s which is still with us today is the concept of "political correctness" which was non-existent in the more open and brazen 1960s and 70s. That's also caused the debate to be stifled in public (and especially in academia), so it's not surprising that more indirect reactions are being expressed.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.492188E-02