The Death of Modern Liberal Feminism (And its Rebirth in the Conservative Movement)

[Guest050715-1]

Because I didn't do a dissertation like some, please don't think I in any way have forgotten the 1960's or the varying phases in the feminist movement. CIPT, I've read the “Feminine Mystique”, and I am quite familiar with American and World History. My point is this: Feminism is about empowering women legally and financially. Anything that comes of that is wonderful. One can be a “sex positive” feminist if she wants, but without legal and financial independence you aren't going to get very far down the road because you would not have been allowed to. You would either been forbidden by society by way of being declared a whore, forbidden by your father or husband without protection from the legal system if they were abusive or a prostitute. Take your pick.

I agree with both of you. There are as many differing positions on just about every kind of social or political topics as there among any demographic. I for one, do not care for pornography. However I think, unlike Nina, think prostitutes or women that “suck cock”, as it was so eloquently put, through out history have been far more liberated than most women because we/they have their own purse. I even think financial independence is one of the main reasons prostitution is illegal. I am pro-abortion. And so on. I think there are plenty of feminists that disagree on some or all of these points.

Declaring feminism out of date to me is an ungrateful statement made by someone that is enjoying the spoils of her foresisters struggle. The struggle is not over. Women and children are the largest demographic in poverty. Debating the wonderful side effects of feminism is secondary to receiving equal pay, living free of abuse and equal treatment under the law.

Originally Posted by Can I Play Too???

Feminism is about getting more taxes from 2 parents and putting your child in daycare. It's about debasing the feminine Principle/essence in favor of masculine traits and emasculating the males. Women and men can't produce children if they hate each other (Battle of the Sexes, anyone) and become gay. More eugenics posts from Mashall, I see.

Do you honestly think that being a feminist precludes women from being a loving, feminine partner to my man? Are you trying to say that feminism is a precursor to homosexuality? The government secretly wants women to work so they can get more taxes for their coffers? Would you prefer we be bare foot and pregnant? Is the entire reason men and women come together to produce children? If that’s the way you feel, I think this is the wrong board for that lol.

[pjorourke]

I guess I'm living in a weird world -- because feminine equality is a reality where I live. When I'm not opining on places like this I tend to hang around with high level execs and board members in decent sized and larger companies. I'd venture to say that probably half the CEO's I know are women and a good number of the Board members too. Its a high enough percentage that someone being a woman is not even remarkable.

I was there in the late 60's when a lot of this got started. You've come a long way baby!

[Doove]

Who the hell is Robert Eugene Simmons Jr, and why should i care what he thinks any more than i care what Marshall thinks?

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

I guess I'm living in a weird world -- because feminine equality is a reality where I live. When I'm not opining on places like this I tend to hang around with high level execs and board members in decent sized and larger companies. I'd venture to say that probably half the CEO's I know are women and a good number of the Board members too. Its a high enough percentage that someone being a woman is not even remarkable.

I was there in the late 60's when a lot of this got started. You've come a long way baby!

I would say it is more-or-less equal at the high mid-to-upper level socioeconomic strata. It's not in the lower to lower-middle class and minority women. We have come a long way.

I think a lot of people confuse feminism with the ugly hammer that people use in the name of feminism. I'm talking about people that play the "woman" card, sex-PCness and I-a-better-man-than-you women. It's crazy that in everyday corporate life you have to worry about HR because someone has done something so minute as not being PC, or when women will play the poor helpless me and turn around and jack boot you for complimenting them. That is the kind of thing that ruins it for everyone and gives the word feminism an ugly name.

[Camille]

Originally Posted by Doove

Who the hell is Robert Eugene Simmons Jr, and why should i care what he thinks any more than i care what Marshall thinks?

I wondered that too..and had a quick glance to see.
If he's the one I found, he's a tech guy from Alabama with a really shitty website for a tech guy. If he concentrated on fixing his site, he wouldn't have as much time on his hands to write teenage fiction.

[Rudyard K]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

I guess I'm living in a weird world -- because feminine equality is a reality where I live. When I'm not opining on places like this I tend to hang around with high level execs and board members in decent sized and larger companies. I'd venture to say that probably half the CEO's I know are women and a good number of the Board members too. Its a high enough percentage that someone being a woman is not even remarkable.

I was there in the late 60's when a lot of this got started. You've come a long way baby!

Agreed. I think, for the most part (at least in my world) folks don't care too much if you male or female...gay or straight...black, brown or white. If you deliver on what needs to be delivered?...you're gonna keep getting the work. If you don't?...you won't.

Where I'm not sure the gap will ever close completely is in buddys. I'm not going to enjoy playing a round of golf...or fishing or hunting...with a woman as much as I am with a male buddy. I'm probably always going to tone down the crude jokes in front of a woman, where I might not think about it with a guy. In other words, I think guys are more relaxed with other guys. And I'm not sure how the world will ever take that "feeling" away.

People like to hang with those where they have things in common. That "common feel" is probably always going to line up (at least somewhat) along gender lines.

[Mazomaniac]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

I would say it is more-or-less equal at the high mid-to-upper level socioeconomic strata. It's not in the lower to lower-middle class and minority women. We have come a long way.

+1

I agree that things are leveling out to a great extent at the high end where educated women are willing to stickup for themselves and get the treatment they deserve.

Below Fortune 1000, though, things start to drop off pretty fast. I think that's particularly true in a few fields like manufacturing and engineering where I see plenty of women on the production floor but only a few in manager's chair. That is, of course, partly due to the time it takes to build a pool of women who are interested, educated, and experienced in those fields, but there's also a bias against them from what I can see.

The other place where there's good and bad news is the law. Women have made HUGE advances in penetrating the bar, but a lot of lawyers still treat women as second class citizens inside the firm.

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by Mazomaniac

but a lot of lawyers still treat women as second class citizens inside the firm.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

[Mazomaniac]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Yeah, no shit.

Part of the problem is that female partners are not considered "employees" of the firm. They're manager/directors and as such cannot sue for discrimination under current law. That lets firms get away with all kinds of crap with them.

Associates and other junior staff could sue, but doing so is instant career death. You had better be ready to open your own solo office before going down that route because you're never steppin' through the door at big law again.

Best lawyer I've ever had was a woman at a big DC firm. I've never seen anybody better at international arbitration. She was a crushing opponent in every case she was in. She represented countries in some of her cases. The amount of fees she dragged in must have been staggering. Even so it took her years to make partner because she had the audacity to take maternity leave and have a couple of kids.

Give it another fifteen years and it'll straighten out. Right now, however, I feel sorry for women in big firms.

[Rudyard K]

Originally Posted by Mazomaniac

Yeah, no shit.

Part of the problem is that female partners are not considered "employees" of the firm. They're manager/directors and as such cannot sue for discrimination under current law. That lets firms get away with all kinds of crap with them.

Associates and other junior staff could sue, but doing so is instant career death. You had better be ready to open your own solo office before going down that route because you're never steppin' through the door at big law again.

Best lawyer I've ever had was a woman at a big DC firm. I've never seen anybody better at international arbitration. She was a crushing opponent in every case she was in. She represented countries in some of her cases. The amount of fees she dragged in must have been staggering. Even so it took her years to make partner because she had the audacity to take maternity leave and have a couple of kids.

Give it another fifteen years and it'll straighten out. Right now, however, I feel sorry for women in big firms.

Maybe they should vote for a union shop.

[Mazomaniac]

Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Maybe they should vote for a union shop.

We have unionized lawyers.

They're called "politicians".

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Because I didn't do a dissertation like some, please don't think I in any way have forgotten the 1960's or the varying phases in the feminist movement. CIPT, I've read the “Feminine Mystique”, and I am quite familiar with American and World History. My point is this: Feminism is about empowering women legally and financially. Anything that comes of that is wonderful. One can be a “sex positive” feminist if she wants, but without legal and financial independence you aren't going to get very far down the road because you would not have been allowed to. You would either been forbidden by society by way of being declared a whore, forbidden by your father or husband without protection from the legal system if they were abusive or a prostitute. Take your pick.

I agree with both of you. There are as many differing positions on just about every kind of social or political topics as there among any demographic. I for one, do not care for pornography. However I think, unlike Nina, think prostitutes or women that “suck cock”, as it was so eloquently put, through out history have been far more liberated than most women because we/they have their own purse. I even think financial independence is one of the main reasons prostitution is illegal. I am pro-abortion. And so on. I think there are plenty of feminists that disagree on some or all of these points.

Declaring feminism out of date to me is an ungrateful statement made by someone that is enjoying the spoils of her foresisters struggle. The struggle is not over. Women and children are the largest demographic in poverty. Debating the wonderful side effects of feminism is secondary to receiving equal pay, living free of abuse and equal treatment under the law.



Do you honestly think that being a feminist precludes women from being a loving, feminine partner to my man? Are you trying to say that feminism is a precursor to homosexuality? The government secretly wants women to work so they can get more taxes for their coffers? Would you prefer we be bare foot and pregnant? Is the entire reason men and women come together to produce children? If that’s the way you feel, I think this is the wrong board for that lol.

Hi Olivia,
I think you misunderstood my criticism of feminist stereotyping genders into two binaries as seing feminism as out of date. I agree with you, that the real situation of women is still something to worry about, and i also agree or let consider the fact that most women are the enemies of other women (solve et coagula).

What i see as out of date is not the political issue of gender equality, but rather defining sexes and gender as a binary constitution of opposites. This is a merely intellectual criticism, it does not void the reality of a life. I don`t think that someone that has studied necessarily understands more about feminism than others. I am not a judgemental person, besides if you study one thing you can still be a complete dumbass in another area.

It just happens that queer theories and such is my expertise or an area i am aware of as being a kinky polyamorist and living such a thing for everyone visible.

Queer theory is the natural advance of feminism or lets say gender studies. It criticises heteronormativity. Theoretically it can be that due to the fact that feminism as well as patriarchy hold the bias of putting gender and sex in a diametrally opposite box per definitionem, that they broaden the gap by pretending men and women are soooo different like venus and mars (hell there have been books out there) and it needs a hoard of therapists or other enlightened species who hold the secret thumbshake and the hidden wisdom to smaller that gap again by giving us lectures on how to talk when talk with a woman , etc. etc. etc.

This bias or artefact may be taking the focus of an individuals need as a person to the stereotype behind it (being a woman / vs being a man) and chalking up problems towards sex-charismatics rather than behaviour problems that can be cured or adapted.

Plus, queer theories say that not even genetically the binary "male vs. female" exists: there are transgender, transsexual, gay, hetero, bisexual and whatnot identified people. Pretending we are just two opposite ends at a binary system is very shortsighted.
That is why i said feminism is "outdated" as an intellectual value, there are better models of thought nowadays. But not when it comes to socioeconomic values.
Plus, women that suck cocks for getting business jobs while pretending to be capable in an area of expertise that others work hard for are in my opinion the REAL problem nowadays. and not intellectualising on problems of the concepts of feminism.

Other than that i agree with you about the founding fathers. I am proud of what they did. Nowadays every twat runs around pretending to be a feminist and having no clue what she is talking about. I consider that respectless. That is one reason of self reflection w hy i would never dare to call myself a feminist. Without support of males i would not be where i am today. Pretending i "did it all by myself" is deluding myself.

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

I guess I'm living in a weird world -- because feminine equality is a reality where I live. When I'm not opining on places like this I tend to hang around with high level execs and board members in decent sized and larger companies. I'd venture to say that probably half the CEO's I know are women and a good number of the Board members too. Its a high enough percentage that someone being a woman is not even remarkable.

I was there in the late 60's when a lot of this got started. You've come a long way baby!

That is something i consider to be true, and one of the reasons why i wanted to immigrate in the USA , no shit! The laws on treating people equal and for example on sexual harrassment are a LOT different than in europe. In europe many things considered offensive in the USA are still just a so called gentleman`s crime which deserves a pad on the back rather than a severe talk to. Talk about sexual harrassment. I have grown quite immune to it.

[Black Sedan]

If I could tag that article: #aynrand #trolling

That the author spends any thought at all on the implications of "Dancing with the Stars" and the pop media's gyrations about Bristol Palin and applying that to any relationship to liberal feminism....: ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

Letterman? TSA v NOW? Abortion rights as eugenics again (where are the forced abortion police)?

Oh never mind. Aldous Huxley nailed it.

[Can I Play Too???]

Originally Posted by Black Sedan

If I could tag that article: #aynrand #trolling

That the author spends any thought at all on the implications of "Dancing with the Stars" and the pop media's gyrations about Bristol Palin and applying that to any relationship to liberal feminism....: ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

Letterman? TSA v NOW? Abortion rights as eugenics again (where are the forced abortion police)?

Oh never mind. Aldous Huxley nailed it.

Glad to see another critical thinker who is well-read and not fully indoctinated by "Lies My Teacher Told Me".

I just need another soma so i can have sex w as many people as possible to get my fiat currency and buy designer crap that will be out of season in a few months so that I feel better about my own ineptitude. /sarcasm

There are several incredibly smart women here and I wonder how much lost potential is thrown to the wayside...that is all. Work smarter, not harder.

Nina, I greatly admire your honesty, ability to listen, and open-mindedness.


From a financial standpoint, in this US economic depression, more men than women were laid off. Although, women still only make 80% of what the men do. Gender lines are blurred w metrosexuals and butchisms. And yes, sex was originally not just for pleasure but for, gasp, procreation purposes. How much value do you place on a human life (but there was already a thread for that here)?