Feminism, can any good come from it?

[JamesG]

There is a difference between the feminist agenda promoted by the far left today and the historical feminist movement that produced basic human rights in a society like the right to vote.

Unless for some reason you feel women are in some way intrinsically unqualified to vote?

Thankfully, there are feminists today who can be intelligent, caring and make to most radical statements ever like insisting on raising their own children.

Don’t confuse the radical far left feminism of the 1970’s with the historical movement that gave women a voice in politics.

Unless you too think no good came from women suffrage?

I think that feminism is the cause of more suffrage of women then anything you listed. It wasn’t the feminists that gave women the right to vote, it was men. It was the advancement of technology that allowed women to focus on things that were traditionally done by men.

Furthermore, most women I know are downright depressed from all the feminist brainwashing that goes on in the media.

As a result of feminist women don’t know how to be a mother or a wife. They want a career and an education and each has to be aquired before they get married because they can’t trust their man. Sadly when their 30s arive they pick the first chump they can find and get married only to have it end in divorce.

From my perspective feminism has done more harm then good. Women are not victems and they shouldn’t be viewed as such.

“suffrage” = useless

 

[Black_Jaque]

What about women who do not have husbands? Not every man or woman is married. Do you think that single women should not have any voice? Who is going to stand up for them if their fathers are dead, and they don’t have husbands or brothers?

Good questions. I’m not pretending to have answers to my own questions. I’m just using a tidbit of psychology that I picked up somewhere and applying it to the situation. It could be a misapplication, or perhaps that little bit about boys losing interest as soon as girls are allowed to participate is false. But anecdotally it seems to be the case. I see lots of altar girls, not as many altar boys. The one parish I know that only allows boys I noticed the boys are also much older, young men rather.

As far as voting goes, these problems are better approached by looking at what is better for society as a whole.

 

[distracted]

i want to know what about the historical feminist movement was good.

did the catholic church support any aspect of the feminist movement of the 19th and 20th century? wasn’t dominated by white protestant women? has womens’ entrance into the workforce led to more animosity between men and women?

i consider myself a feminist (and a devout Catholic). I am pro-life. I am feminist in the sense that i believe women have virtually always been treated like 2nd class citizens in this country & in many others and that that is not the way God wants it to be. God loves women as much as he loves men, which, of course, should go without saying…
I believe the feminist movement has caused a lot of harm… To me, the biggest problem is how they don’t acknowledge that motherhood is the highest calling for a woman. They don’t appreciate women who stay at home to raise their children (but then, the rest of society, generally speaking, doesn’t either)…
I seem to be running out of space… but thought i would put in my 2 cents… God bless…

 

[Rach620]

I’d say that the historical feminist movement, at first, did achieve much good for women, but that it’s radicalization from the 1960s onward is what has left us with such an awful taste in our mouths.

Women and men are equal in dignity, but for much of human history, that fact was not recognized. This is what the first feminists fought for the recognition of, rather than trying to achieve the same-ness with men that feminists today seem to be going after. They sought to protect the right of a woman to determine what she wants to do with her life, rather than being trapped into an inferior lifestyle to men. I see those first feminists as fighting for the rights of women to discern their own vocations in life, regardless of what norms their societies impose on them.

And as far as good results of historical feminism… I see many! Most of the opinions on this thread would not have been expressed if it were not for feminism, because our opinions wouldn’t have really mattered to many people. As a student at a top-20 university, I appreciate the ability to be educated, and looked upon equally with my male peers in class. And while there are differences between the genders, there really aren’t significant enough ones to prevent me from choosing any of the careers I’m pondering because I’m a woman (journalism, research/writing, communications). And I like having my political voice heard…if there’s a general popular vote, there’s no valid reason not to include women as well as men.

 

[MariaG]

I think that feminism is the cause of more suffrage of women then anything you listed. It wasn’t the feminists that gave women the right to vote, it was men. It was the advancement of technology that allowed women to focus on things that were traditionally done by men.

Furthermore, most women I know are downright depressed from all the feminist brainwashing that goes on in the media.

As a result of feminist women don’t know how to be a mother or a wife. They want a career and an education and each has to be aquired before they get married because they can’t trust their man. Sadly when their 30s arive they pick the first chump they can find and get married only to have it end in divorce.

From my perspective feminism has done more harm then good. Women are not victems and they shouldn’t be viewed as such.

“suffrage” = useless

suffrage (suf-rij)]

The right to vote (see franchise). In the United States, the term is often associated with the women’s movement to win voting rights. (See suffragist.)

So specifically women sufferage, in the US is usually associated with winning voting rights. And why did men give the women the right to vote? Because they thought it was a good idea all on their own? No, because of women suffrage and bringing the issue to awareness.

And then you go into a rant on modern feminism that has a far left agenda.

AGAIN, there is a distinct difference between women suffrage and women gaining the right to vote as well as the historical fight for women to be allowed to be educated, not be treated as property, and modern feiminist agenda. What IS depressing is people who apparently think that women never should have been granted the right to vote or do not seem to know the difference between women suffrage and the modern feminist agenda which is only reflective of the far left.

 

[MariaG]

Good questions. I’m not pretending to have answers to my own questions. I’m just using a tidbit of psychology that I picked up somewhere and applying it to the situation. It could be a misapplication, or perhaps that little bit about boys losing interest as soon as girls are allowed to participate is false. But anecdotally it seems to be the case. I see lots of altar girls, not as many altar boys. The one parish I know that only allows boys I noticed the boys are also much older, young men rather.

As far as voting goes, these problems are better approached by looking at what is better for society as a whole.

Well it does not apply to our parish. Although Altar servers are allowed to be girls, and we do have girls who serve, the majority of servers at our Church are boys. And not just little boys. Most of them are teenage boys. The girls tend to serve until highschool age and then drop out. The boys keep going. The usual at our church is 3 boys ages 15-17. It is an awesome sight to see reverant teenage alter boys

Now, we are a church that has a high number of retired people. Way more than families. The retired men in the church are highly visible and highly active. Maybe they have been a huge role model for the boys in our church, to realize a “man” can love and serve God. It is awesome to hear the rosary recited in our church before Mass, all these deep male voices:thumbsup:

In my opinion, it would appear it has less to do with a female presence and more to do with a lack of male presence and male role model. At least that is what seems to be reflective at our church.

 

[Rach620]

As to the equal in power thing, it is good to have all people of both genders working towards a better world. Artificially restricting women in the areas of education and politics, for example, holds society back in countless ways.

We don’t need to believe that women and men are identical in every way and deserve to have equal amounts of power in order to ‘work towards a better world’. Instead, we need to find how a woman can be the best woman she can be, on her own terms, not on a man’s terms. I plan on being a wife and mother–in the eyes of the world which judges based on ‘power’ relationships, I’m choosing utter failure. But from a true feminist perspective, I’m not.

The answer is that no good can come of it.

I’ve dated feminist women and they are the most disrespectful lot ever. They have no respect for a man and they are Insecure, non-nurturing, disheartened, confused, and overly entitled.

In fact most will reject the churches teachings on papal infallibility, holy orders, premarital sex, and sadly in some cases the sanctity of life.

They go around thinking that their power over men comes from their sexuality. It is so sad.

I’m just glad I realized this while I’m still young. As a result, I no longer date women who are feminist. I focus on more traditional women from other countries. They are attractive and show respect for you.

What a bunch of stereotypes. No one here is denying that bad things have come about because of radicalized feminism–but your comment on only dating foreign women because they are ‘traditional,’ ‘attractive and show respect for you’ is kinda scary. Mail-order brides are not the answer to feminism. You don’t answer the extreme left with the extreme right of chauvinism and the denial of basic rights.

As a result of feminist women don’t know how to be a mother or a wife. They want a career and an education and each has to be aquired before they get married because they can’t trust their man. Sadly when their 30s arive they pick the first chump they can find and get married only to have it end in divorce.

From my perspective feminism has done more harm then good. Women are not victems and they shouldn’t be viewed as such.

“suffrage” = useless

Suffrage = the right to vote (not suffering, which I think is what you were thinking…)

I don’t think radical feminism grew out of viewing women as victims, but from a misguided opinion as to what the best social and political status for women is. Divorce, etc. has roots in radical feminism, but I don’t even think you can completely blame it alone. There’s a whole slew of cultural issues which run a whole lot deeper than the modern feminist movement.

And anyways–why can’t a woman be a wife and mother AND educated AND have a career? In some areas, yes, a sacrifice is necessary, and a mom can’t really have the high-powered business executive role in addition to motherhood…but fulfilling work outside of the home should not be off-limits.

 

[Abira]

I think this thread…benefits in one sense…from being a child of its time. As a woman I could not feel about this topic any differently becasue the society I grew up in has made me who I am…

I used to study British history and the number of laws relating to the conduct of women staggered me. I feel if we had the benefit of walking a mile in their shoes this thread would be a very different one.

We forget that women were often not allowed to go out unaccompanied for fear of being arrested (in the UK) or branded a streetwalker. I am proud that a Christian society has created a country heading towards equality (sometimes slowly!). There are many countries all over the word where women would love to have the freedoms and priviedges that we have now.

I do think the pendulum has maybe swung too far, but then there has to be a time of healing, and it will swing back before we find the right place as an equal society. Until then I think the greivances brought up earler pale into insignificance when we look back at where we’ve come from historically… not just looking back as far back into the distant future as 1970

S

 

[Abira]

or even looking back into the distant past lol… sorry for the typo…it’s late!

 

[JamesG]

What a bunch of stereotypes. No one here is denying that bad things have come about because of radicalized feminism–but your comment on only dating foreign women because they are ‘traditional,’ ‘attractive and show respect for you’ is kinda scary. Mail-order brides are not the answer to feminism. You don’t answer the extreme left with the extreme right of chauvinism and the denial of basic rights.

All the americanized women I’ve dated are brainwashed by feminism and they don’t respect all church teachings. I’ve tried my best, but sometimes you just have to focus on the good women in the world. If they are from other countries or other cultures that are not so messed up (more traditional and more faithfull) then so be it.

I think it is very degrading for you to call women from other cultures mail-order brides. Just because they don’t subscribe to feminism it doesn’t mean you should look down on them. I find these women to be very educated and very faithfull catholics. When I take them out on a date they are happy when I open the door for them. They are the types of women that pray to God and that you can pray with. I’m sorry but i can’t find that in canada or the US. The culture here has really made women very imature for marriage. (at least the ones that i’ve dated).

Let me ask you this. Do you as an americanized woman accept all church teachings?

 

[JamesG]

And anyways–why can’t a woman be a wife and mother AND educated AND have a career?

There is nothing wrong with being educated . In fact there are many traditional women who are very educated. My only point is that the man is the provider

 

[lak611]

All the americanized women I’ve dated are brainwashed by feminism and they don’t respect all church teachings. I’ve tried my best, but sometimes you just have to focus on the good women in the world. If they are from other countries or other cultures that are not so messed up (more traditional and more faithfull) then so be it.

I think it is very degrading for you to call women from other cultures mail-order brides. Just because they don’t subscribe to feminism it doesn’t mean you should look down on them. I find these women to be very educated and very faithfull catholics. When I take them out on a date they are happy when I open the door for them. They are the types of women that pray to God and that you can pray with. I’m sorry but i can’t find that in canada or the US. The culture here has really made women very imature for marriage. (at least the ones that i’ve dated).

Let me ask you this. Do you as an americanized woman accept all church teachings?

Are you an American? It is disrespectful to speak such ill of fellow Americans.

 

[JamesG]

Are you an American? It is disrespectful to speak such ill of fellow Americans.

no I am not. the same is true of people in canada or the uk. Basically any place that has brainwashed its women with feminism.

 

[lak611]

no I am not. the same is true of people in canada or the uk. Basically any place that has brainwashed its women with feminism.

Although you are Canadian, what you are saying is still stereotyping. It is unfair and could be considered offensive to stereotype based on nationality or race.

 

[Rach620]

All the americanized women I’ve dated are brainwashed by feminism and they don’t respect all church teachings. I’ve tried my best, but sometimes you just have to focus on the good women in the world. If they are from other countries or other cultures that are not so messed up (more traditional and more faithfull) then so be it.

I think it is very degrading for you to call women from other cultures mail-order brides. Just because they don’t subscribe to feminism it doesn’t mean you should look down on them. I find these women to be very educated and very faithfull catholics. When I take them out on a date they are happy when I open the door for them. They are the types of women that pray to God and that you can pray with. I’m sorry but i can’t find that in canada or the US. The culture here has really made women very imature for marriage. (at least the ones that i’ve dated).

I think it’s very degrading for you to make the categorical statement that all American women are unsuitable for marriage. Have you personally met with every last one of us? Sure, the culture here is toxic–but that doesn’t mean there aren’t pockets in the Western world who recognize that.

Anyways, I wasn’t calling all women from other countries ‘mail-order brides’. The tone you were taking (and I understand that this is an internet forum)–seeking out the ‘uncorrupted,’ ‘traditional’ woman who will ‘show respect’ to you–seemed condescending to me, especially since you are saying that you can only find that ‘kind’ of woman in a non-Western country. Those are all characteristics of modern mail-order brides, if I’m correct.

Believe me, I am no radical feminist. I am a young, deeply orthodox Catholic, American woman who embraces the dignity of women, and I understand that dignity entails certain social and political rights which we have long been denied by various cultures and governments.

Let me ask you this. Do you as an americanized woman accept all church teachings?

Yes. I am pro-life, study the theology of the body, understand the sacramentality of marriage, and fully believe in the unseparable procreative and unitive purposes of sex. Chastity is a virtue I seek to cultivate in my own life, and I hope to bring as many children as God desires into the world to raise them in the beauty of our Catholic faith.

As far as Church teaching on the dignity of women, I suggest you read Pope John Paul II’s apostolic letter *Mulieris Dignitatem.

There is nothing wrong with being educated . In fact there are many traditional women who are very educated. My only point is that the man is the provider

I still don’t get your point, then. Why can’t a woman also help to provide for her family?

 

[Hastrman]

I still don’t get your point, then. Why can’t a woman also help to provide for her family?

Well, in the traditional household, she does–the main division is that men go out, and women stay in. She might take care of the chickens while he takes care of the sheep, but the point is that she remains in the home.

Even in some Native American cultures, like the Navajo, where the property is owned by women, one still finds the basic distinction: men go out (to herd said sheep, usually), while women stay home and weave or make baskets.

In medieval Europe, women were frequently, almost routinely, members of craft-guilds like weavers, tailors, potters, and basketmakers–all of which can be done from the home. They exercised their guild membership either in person or by proxy, through their husbands and sons, but their homes were where they worked, even more than men (who also, of course, usually lived “over the shop”).

If a woman can perform her trade from the home, then more power to her. But considering this basic home/outside division of labor is found throughout Europe, Asia, and North America, I’d say there might be some kind of truth reflected in it. Women should stay home with their children if at all possible; and the economy should try to find a system where that *is *possible.

 

[Rach620]

If a woman can perform her trade from the home, then more power to her. But considering this basic home/outside division of labor is found throughout Europe, Asia, and North America, I’d say there might be some kind of truth reflected in it. Women should stay home with their children if at all possible; and the economy should try to find a system where that *is *possible.

I agree that businesses should try to make motherhood and work possible for women today–but I don’t agree that the work must necessarily be from inside the home. Mothers should be able to raise their children at home if they so desire, but if they also want to do fulfilling work (I’m not talking about basketweaving or its modern counterpart here), the work world should accomodate that. The expectation that women, in seeking equality with men, will sacrifice everything which makes them uniquely feminine–including their vocation to motherhood–is a severely flawed one.

 

[lak611]

I agree that businesses should try to make motherhood and work possible for women today–but I don’t agree that the work must necessarily be from inside the home. Mothers should be able to raise their children at home if they so desire, but if they also want to do fulfilling work (I’m not talking about basketweaving or its modern counterpart here), the work world should accomodate that. The expectation that women, in seeking equality with men, will sacrifice everything which makes them uniquely feminine–including their vocation to motherhood–is a severely flawed one.

It also depends on the occupation. For example, although there are male nurses, they a few and far between. There is a shortage of nurses anyway right now. If no women worked in the nursing profession, patients would never receive adequate care because the few men in the profession would not be enough to handle the load.

 

[blessedtoo]

Don’t confuse the radical far left feminism of the 1970’s with the historical movement that gave women a voice in politics.

It’s a tragedy that the radical feminists co-opted the noble premise of equal **human **rights that Susan B. Anthony championed and twisted it into the unrecognizable beast of today. Unfortunately, most women are really unaware of how dramatically that original message was altered by the influences of the counter-culture and drug culture that emerged in the late 50’s and 60’s. And women today have a very difficult time separating the noble cause of suffrage and equal rights under the law from the entitlements and “new found” rights the radicals believe women should receive.

I believe the feminist movement has caused a lot of harm… To me, the biggest problem is how they don’t acknowledge that motherhood is the highest calling for a woman. They don’t appreciate women who stay at home to raise their children (but then, the rest of society, generally speaking, doesn’t either)…

And this is why the term “Women’s Movement” is an oxymoron. The feminists are not interested in representing the rights of ALL women: only women who agree with their radical agendas. Try debating a feminist on the issue of stay-at-home mom’s, or, God forbid, abortion. Suddenly they are not all that concerned with your right to discern what is best for you. Feminists believe that any woman who deviates from the radical script is a traitor. You can read this in Linda Hirschman’s most recent screed Get To Work:
amazon.com/Get-Work-Manifesto-Women-World/dp/0670038121/sr=1-1/qid=1170736379/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-5522025-3055128?ie=UTF8&s=books

Until then I think the greivances brought up earler pale into insignificance when we look back at where we’ve come from historically… not just looking back as far back into the distant future as 1970

Do you consider abortion on demand being the law of the land a “grievance”? The unthinkable damage done to society (and our Church) by the militant feminist movement is irreversible. And if so much harm can occur in just a scant 30 years, it speaks even more profoundly to how powerful and imbedded this message is in our national psyche.

Something that is forgotten by the majority of modern feminists who followed Sanger and her radical philosophies instead of Susan B. Anthony (who was strongly anti-abortion while Sanger vigorously promoted it).

Sanger, while a big proponent of eugenics, NEVER supported abortion. Even she called it “barbaric.” Abortion has no roots in the historical suffrage or early feminist movement. It is a completely modern development.

 

[Hastrman]

I agree that businesses should try to make motherhood and work possible for women today–but I don’t agree that the work must necessarily be from inside the home. Mothers should be able to raise their children at home if they so desire, but if they also want to do fulfilling work (I’m not talking about basketweaving or its modern counterpart here), the work world should accomodate that. The expectation that women, in seeking equality with men, will sacrifice everything which makes them uniquely feminine–including their vocation to motherhood–is a severely flawed one.

I wasn’t saying they would, but frankly, since when should women condescend to be equal to men? Our society doesn’t know what equality means, or it would know all humans have always had and can’t lose the only equality that matters. What is necessary is, as in all things, recognition of truth–including the truth of equality. But equal does not mean same.

(I’m not talking about basketweaving or its modern counterpart here)

Oh, of course, because basketweaving’s not fulfilling. Tell that to the Apaches, lady.

I have an unholy suspicion you still can’t clear your mind of the idea that tending a home is not “fulfilling” work–like any other work in the universe matters a damn in comparison.

May I recommend G. K. Chesterton’s “What’s Wrong With the World,” the section titled, “The Mistake About Woman.”