Is Feminism a sign of an unhealthy society?

[Loki]

Why is it that the most radical feminists are those who have had the cushiest lives? It's really quite silly to see women who have never wanted & have never suffered abuse ranting about injustices done to women, because of inequality.

Probably because those people you mentioned have grown up in liberal-minded political homes (i.e. Democrats). Those kind of people you will also find in strongly capitalist countries.

Money greed > individualism > liberal politics > feminism.

[Æmeric]

Money greed > individualism > liberal politics > feminism.

By your logic I should be a liberal & a feminist.

[Loki]

By your logic I should be a liberal & a feminist.

Not necessarily. It's just that those economic conditions are breeding grounds for individualism, which leads to all sorts of isms.

[Óttar]

Probably because those people you mentioned have grown up in liberal-minded political homes (i.e. Democrats).

More like "those people...have grown up in liberal minded political homes (Communists)."

We should rather call them "champagne socialists." These women are most likely also spoiled brats.

[Æmeric]

Russia was the first Communist nation & the experimental 'lab' of isms for much of the 20th century. They even endorsed radical female equality in the 20s. It was neither wealthy nor liberal before hand. I also don't think they had much individualism either as they were only about a generation removed from feudalism/serfdom.

[Loki]

They even endorsed radical female equality in the 20s.

There's nothing wrong with equality, though. In fact it's only right. Aggressive feminism is something else.

[Æmeric]

I'm sure it was aggressive, radical, feminism. Free love, abortion-on-demand, no-fault divorce. Generally anti-family. In the name of female equality.

[Loki]

I'm sure it was aggressive, radical, feminism. Free love, abortion-on-demand, no-fault divorce. Generally anti-family. In the name of female equality.

My knowledge about that event is not so great, so I'll give you the argument. I'll have to read up on it.

[Óttar]

no-fault divorce

No fault divorce!? Divorce proceedings favor females! Why on earth would they espouse no fault divorce, when, according to our gynocratic divorce courts, it's always our fault?!

[Aemma]

In their rabid obsession with how women are supposedly being constantly wronged by an omniscient, oppressive "patriarchy" whose main objective as a machine is to oppress women, feminists are hypocrites in that they fail to realize that men are just as much subject to oppression, and double-standards. You don't see women out marching for father's rights, or lobbying against circumcision. All you ever see nowadays are these initiatives to aid women. Women's this, women's that; women are strong and independent and yet strangely they are apparently victims. All these initiatives and networks to aid women, to have women create wealth in developing countries, schools for women etc. Are there also not poor men who are missing out on their potential due to poverty and oppression? Why does a man get disqualified merely on account of being a man?

You're absolutely right Ottar and my own notion of "feminism"--a term I am not happy with myself actually and DON'T use to describe myself--has much more to do with looking at individuals than it does with making blanket assumptions about people based on gender. As I posted previously, if a woman has a certain aptitude for an activity, she should be able to enjoy pursuing this activity unfettered. And the same goes for a man of course. That was my point in my post.

But to come back to this paragraph of yours, it hits the nail on the head and speaks to a deeper ill. In all the gains that Women-as-a-Collective have made, it also unfortunately created a monster in that men have been dehumanised and devalued. I'll always remember a line from Roseanne (of all shows) when Dan is talking to DJ about something and then Dan (John Goodman) says: "DJ it's been a long time since it's been a good thing to be a white man." Or something to that effect anyway. Telling, even for a show from the what 80's?

I'm not happy with the fact that The Boy Scouts of Canada is now Scouts Canada and is co-ed. I'm not happy with some parents training their boys to sit down to take a pee (!!!...asked why, most parents say, well it keeps the bathroom cleaner!!). I'm not happy with the fact that one day my son who will have qualifications for some career or line of work somewhere will AUTOMATICALLY not be looked at simply because he has a penis and is of Northern European heritage. I'm not happy with the number of boys being unnecessarily treated with Ritalin for supposed ADD/ADHD. I'm not happy with teachers being so focused on girls' learning that boys' learning and applicable methodologies geared towards boys has been pushed off to the side. I'm not happy that men cannot enjoy their own clubs anymore without it creating a kerfuffle. I'm not happy that boys cannot just be boys.

Please dear gentlemen, don't make assumptions about women that just because they agree with some aspects of feminist thought means that they can't see the forest for the trees neither.

I'm far from happy with the situation of our present society. But it is not only up to mothers of sons to take up the fight. Men have to do it for themselves as well. We all have to fight to redress this.

Cheers Ottar and all!...Aemma