Feminism: whats wrong with it?

[MindOverMatter2]

Philosophically speaking, what is wrong with feminism; and what does Christian theology have to say about it? Is their a coherent philosophy against it; that is to say logical.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

 

[Charlemagne_II]

It will be difficult to approach this topic in a sensible way without zeroing in on specific aspects of feminism one at a time. Would you like to name a particular tenet of feminism that you think is worth discussing?

There are well known feminists who advance the cause of lesbianism, gay marriage, and two-mommy families. This is a polarizing group that is able to offend even straight feminists.

Then there are feminist nuns inside the Church who clamor for female priests and bishops.

With respect to equal opportunity and equal pay with men for equal work, I don’t see a debate.

What are you angling to discuss?

 

[Ichthys4121517]

Feminism used to be a positive movement. Certainly, no moral person would disagree with the early feminists’ belief that women should be able to vote and be treated as men’s equals. However, the modern feminist movement has taken things too far. Read some of these quotes from modern feminists that border on misandry:

conservapedia.com/Feminism#Quotations

Modern feminism has twisted the ideal of males and females being equal, but different, into one of males and females being the same, which is obviously not true. It is not sexist in the slightest to say that, generally speaking, men are more skilled than women at manual labor, or that women are more skilled than men at homemaking. That’s not to say that every man’s place is strictly in the workforce or that every women’s place is strictly at home. It’s just an observable fact. Men are men, and women are women.

Modern feminism does not recognize this truth. They seek to destroy masculinity and femininity as separate but equal traits. Many of them wish to overthrow traditional marriage. They do not know the Catholic truth that men and women are creations of God that are distinct physically and spiritually.

They see their genders as something no more important to their personality than their hair color or height; gender is something that they want to separate completely from their being, when, scientifically and theologically, it is evident that this is not the case.

Also, contrary to what they would have you believe, “hardcore” feminists don’t want equality for men and women. They want femininity to be seen as superior; this is obvious from the myriad of television shows and movies that degrade masculinity as barbaric and stupid.

I’m not saying all feminists are lesbian misandrists who think men are idiots, but that seems to be the underlying belief of feminism, which is distinct from anti-sexism. Very much so.

 

[Bluegoat]

I agree with the pp who said the question needs to be more specific.

What I will say that there are several different streams of feminist thought, and it is very telling what aspects of feminism have flourished. And I do not think it is mostly because these are the areas that are the most true, or that are the most attractive to women. The aspects which have been supported by our society and our governments are the ones that are ultimately beneficial to business and consumer society. Women in the work-force - yes. Women on a reasonable maternity leave - in the US, no. (And one sees the attitude here on CAF often that things like maternity leave are luxeries and that “private business” should not have to think about them. They have bought into another version of the same twisted understanding of family as some feminists have.) We want women to make money to buy more cars and tvs, and make the GDP go up. Not be home with their babies, even if that is what they want in many cases.

One also might consider that the feminist movement had a lot of traction because it is hard to argue that in a just society women should be property, should not vote or have access to higher education, should not be able to choose careers or get paid fairly, or should be subject to abuse and double standards. It was common not that long ago for Catholic priests to tell women with husbands who demanded their “marital rights” that they could not leave, or refuse, or use birth control. It is no wonder that they didn’t look back when something else was offered to them.

 

[Dale_M]

It will be difficult to approach this topic in a sensible way without zeroing in on specific aspects of feminism one at a time. Would you like to name a particular tenet of feminism that you think is worth discussing?

Yes, focusing on an issue within feminism is probably best. Trying to discuss any -ism in broad terms really sets us straw man arguments and wildly different perceptions of what the topic is. Perhaps another useful narrowing of the topic would be to mention which particular thinker, politician or activist is being considered. The feminism of, say, Sarah Palin is not the feminism of, say, Mary Daly.

 

[edwest2]

The Feminism that has had the greatest impact on Western culuture has been the loud and antifamily feminism spoken of by Betty Friedan who called the family “a comfortable concentration camp.”

Where did the word Ms. come from? Thank Gloria Steinem, cofounder of Ms. magazine, a sort of Playboy for women.

The Women’s Liberation movement had one worthwhile goal: equal pay for equal work. But instead of being solution oriented in finding ways to solve real and perceived inequites between men and women, it took the Marxist class warfare approach. Women became the eternal victims and men, the eternal enemy. Abortion was a right. When, in fact, abortion was marketed in 1972 as a “use in case of emergency only.” They even called it “The most difficult decision a woman will ever have to make and is between her and her God.” Needless to say, God disappeared shortly after. And in cases of consensual sex? So did the man. The woman - only the woman - could decide life or death for the baby.

Gloria Steinem: “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” Women’s Studies? Women’s Literature? At one point, I thought the Women’s Libbers would deny a species relationship between men and women.

This has poisoned the well. Men and women are at odds. That is what’s wrong with it.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Bluegoat]

The Feminism that has had the greatest impact on Western culuture has been the loud and antifamily feminism spoken of by Betty Friedan who called the family “a comfortable concentration camp.”

Where did the word Ms. come from? Thank Gloria Steinem, cofounder of Ms. magazine, a sort of Playboy for women.

The Women’s Liberation movement had one worthwhile goal: equal pay for equal work. But instead of being solution oriented in finding ways to solve real and perceived inequites between men and women, it took the Marxist class warfare approach. Women became the eternal victims and men, the eternal enemy. Abortion was a right. When, in fact, abortion was marketed in 1972 as a “use in case of emergency only.” They even called it “The most difficult decision a woman will ever have to make and is between her and her God.” Needless to say, God disappeared shortly after. And in cases of consensual sex? So did the man. The woman - only the woman - could decide life or death for the baby.

Gloria Steinem: “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” Women’s Studies? Women’s Literature? At one point, I thought the Women’s Libbers would deny a species relationship between men and women.

This has poisoned the well. Men and women are at odds. That is what’s wrong with it.

Peace,
Ed

The well was poisoned earlier than that Ed. If relationships between men and women, and women and society had been really healthy, it is unlikely that this aspect of the feminist movement would have been so appealing to so many. Men and women have been at odds since well before the feminist movement began.

As a point of interest, there are actually “feminist” writers who deny that there is a biological difference between men and women - they argue that there is only one sex. Most people just think that is weird though. It doesn’t speak to people’s intelligence, and it also doesn’t speak to their experiences. That isn’t true with the Marxist flavoured feminism - something about it sounded really believable to a lot of women.

 

[larkin31]

There is nothing wrong with feminism.

 

[LogisticsBranch]

There is nothing wrong with feminism.

Hello larkin. Well, if you mean feminism to mean the following then I agree with you. Great women can do incrediable things. It was about the 15th anniversary of the Fourth United Nations Conference on Women in Beijing - Remarks At the Women In The World Summit, Remarks by Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State At the United Nations, New York, New York on March 12, 2010. Here are some excerpts from it:

*Earlier today, I was honored to speak at the UN in commemoration of this anniversary and to make an accounting of how far we’ve come and how far we have yet to go. In many countries, laws that permitted the unequal treatment of women have been replaced by laws that prohibit gender-based violence and discrimination. The challenge now is to ensure that they are enforced.

Growing numbers of women have been elected to public office, received in education, joined the workforce. And so the progress is undeniable, but it is insufficient, because for every place where women’s lives have improved, there are still too many where there has not been that progress, where women’s rights may exist on the books but not on the streets, where violence against women remains an epidemic, and the extremist voices calling for restrictions on women’s rights are growing louder. So we must raise our voices even more loudly.

So we meet today to have this extraordinary gathering, discuss about what more can be done, and how we can be those voices that are needed for so many who are silent. And we call on all people and all nations in recognizing not only that women’s rights are human rights, but that women’s progress is human progress.

And tonight, you’re going to meet some remarkable women – women who have lived lives of activism, sometimes by choice, sometimes by necessity, women who stand for so many other women and girls who will never know the names of any of us, but who, through the ripple effect of what we do, might have a chance to go to school or get healthcare or start a small business or vote. . .

I can personally attest to the power and example of these women. I know each of them. And I am anxious for you to meet them. You will meet Inez. She and I have worked together since my time as First Lady. She has been an activist on behalf of women’s rights, labor, and peace. And her efforts to promote human rights and social justice remain an inspiration to me.

You will meet Marina, who has established shelters and provided counseling to countless women who pioneered the fight against human trafficking in Russia and who has carried on that work against formidable odds.

You will meet Mu, who’s been a leader in the struggle against trafficking and on behalf of democracy. And she won a seat in the National Assembly in Cambodia two years ago.

You will meet Anabella, who I met first on a visit to Guatemala, when she was a leader in the congress there. She lifted herself out of poverty, overcame staggering obstacles to fight against corruption, and has championed the rights of women and the indigent.

And you will get to know more about Farida. When the Taliban fell, she and other women from Afghanistan came out of the shadows and began speaking out. And she has carried the message about what has happened and happening to women from Afghanistan, around the world, including to Capitol Hill.

And you will hear the story of Mukhtar, who became a legend and an inspiration as she struggled to educate boys and girls in Pakistan. She is a symbol of how one can transcend the worst brutality and work to benefit humanity.

And Hafsat, who, after the tragic deaths of her parents, transformed her life and the lives of others by working to strengthen civil society and promoting democracy in Nigeria. . . .*
state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/03/138334.htm

 

[Mamanurse]

In my opinion, their is nothing wrong with the idea of Feminism if its to help women voice their opinions with a vote, for women to be considered equal for a work position that they are equally qualified for.

The problems with feminism are the push for abortion, birth control and promiscuity without being judged. The other issue that some PP’s have mentioned is the equality of the draft during war. If women want to push for an equal draft, then who will be left to raise our children? SOMEONE needs to be the one to stay at home and raise our children…of course those who push for feminism in the work force have pushed for daycare as well. So I guess if we make all daycare providers exempt from being drafted, then we should be just fine…

Feminism started out as something good, but now its just a way for liberal women to push their agenda and demean the beauty of motherhood and the gift of being a woman. I for one, love the differences of men and women, I appreciate the efforts of the women of the past to give me opportunity to vote and have a job if I choose, but other than that…what good has come from this movement in America?

 

[LogisticsBranch]

In my opinion, their is nothing wrong with the idea of Feminism if its to help women voice their opinions with a vote, for women to be considered equal for a work position that they are equally qualified for.

The word Feminism has a lot of meanings by what you have written below and what I have provided in my previous message.

The problems with feminism are the push for abortion, birth control and promiscuity without being judged. The other issue that some PP’s have mentioned is the equality of the draft during war. If women want to push for an equal draft, then who will be left to raise our children? SOMEONE needs to be the one to stay at home and raise our children…of course those who push for feminism in the work force have pushed for daycare as well. So I guess if we make all daycare providers exempt from being drafted, then we should be just fine… Feminism started out as something good, but now its just a way for liberal women to push their agenda and demean the beauty of motherhood and the gift of being a woman. I for one, love the differences of men and women, I appreciate the efforts of the women of the past to give me opportunity to vote and have a job if I choose, but other than that…what good has come from this movement in America? /

I wasn’t aware feminism was as you state, “…the push for abortion, birth control and promiscuity without being judged…” I’m not in the military nor have I ever been but my sister-in-law was a Wave. (Women Accepted for Volunteer Military Services (WAVES)
mnhs.org/library/tips/history_topics/133women_military.htm). Her oldest child was born while she was a WAVE. She had four children that are doing just great. Also, you may consider there are widows that need to work to support their children. I too, as a woman, like the differences found between men and women. Men in general like to watch sports on the television and do repairs around the house. Of course there are many other differences between a man and a woman.

 

[edwest2]

If you look at the history of the National Organization for Women, you’ll see abortion as a top issue.

now.org/

It certainly doesn’t speak for all women. And NOW has a “no position” position on prostitution. Why isn’t NOW protesting at strip clubs where women are being “treated like sex objects?” In the 1970s, NOW told us about male chauvenist pigs who looked at women as only a collection of body parts.

Unfortunately, NOW has built up a “power base” but its message is a distorted one.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Mamanurse]

The word Feminism has a lot of meanings by what you have written below and what I have provided in my previous message.

I wasn’t aware feminism was as you state, “…the push for abortion, birth control and promiscuity without being judged…” I’m not in the military nor have I ever been but my sister-in-law was a Wave. (Women Accepted for Volunteer Military Services (WAVES)
mnhs.org/library/tips/history_topics/133women_military.htm). Her oldest child was born while she was a WAVE. She had four children that are doing just great. Also, you may consider there are widows that need to work to support their children. I too, as a woman, like the differences found between men and women. Men in general like to watch sports on the television and do repairs around the house. Of course there are many other differences between a man and a woman.

I don’t mean to be rude, but how could you not know that feminism was about abortion, birth control and sex? Feminism was all about “women can do anything they want” movement. In order for women to feel like men and to be treated equally like men, they also needed to be able to have sex like men. Birth control allowed them to achieve that. Abortion allowed them, like some men, not live with the consequences of having premarital sex. (I am not trying to dis men here, but lets face it, back in the day men could be promiscuous without any repercussions.)

And about the WAVE thing…I am not quite sure what that is. I went to the link, but didn’t have time to read through the whole thing. I was just commenting on what the previous posters were talking about…and IF an equal draft were to ever happen, who would be responsible for the young? I am not saying that I don’t give due credit to the women that have served or are currently serving, because I do. But a draft wouldn’t, I don’t think, entail drafting men or women to serve as clerks and typists as stated in your link…I always thought a draft was for combat purposes…IDK

 

[Hastrman]

Most politically active feminism, as well as academic feminism, is fundamentally a Marxist class-war narrative. Mostly thanks to Simone Beauvoir.

This leads to people being reactionary and saying that anything feminists hate must be good, much like Ayn Rand did with Communism.

Here in the world of rational people, it is obvious that you don’t have to be a male chauvinist to think feminism, as the movement currently exists, is erroneous—just as you don’t have to be in favor of using Pinkerton’s to machinegun strikers to decry Communism’s abuses. False dichotomies are for idiots (Rand’s penchant for them is especially egregious, since she claimed to be an Aristotelian—Aristotle was the most famous proponent of the “Golden Mean”).

 

[larkin31]

Hello larkin. Well, if you mean feminism to mean the following then I agree with you. Great women can do incrediable things. It was about the 15th anniversary of the Fourth United Nations Conference on Women in Beijing - Remarks At the Women In The World Summit, Remarks by Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State At the United Nations, New York, New York on March 12, 2010. Here are some excerpts from it:

*Earlier today, I was honored to speak at the UN in commemoration of this anniversary and to make an accounting of how far we’ve come and how far we have yet to go. In many countries, laws that permitted the unequal treatment of women have been replaced by laws that prohibit gender-based violence and discrimination. The challenge now is to ensure that they are enforced.

Growing numbers of women have been elected to public office, received in education, joined the workforce. And so the progress is undeniable, but it is insufficient, because for every place where women’s lives have improved, there are still too many where there has not been that progress, where women’s rights may exist on the books but not on the streets, where violence against women remains an epidemic, and the extremist voices calling for restrictions on women’s rights are growing louder. So we must raise our voices even more loudly.

So we meet today to have this extraordinary gathering, discuss about what more can be done, and how we can be those voices that are needed for so many who are silent. And we call on all people and all nations in recognizing not only that women’s rights are human rights, but that women’s progress is human progress.

And tonight, you’re going to meet some remarkable women – women who have lived lives of activism, sometimes by choice, sometimes by necessity, women who stand for so many other women and girls who will never know the names of any of us, but who, through the ripple effect of what we do, might have a chance to go to school or get healthcare or start a small business or vote. . .

I can personally attest to the power and example of these women. I know each of them. And I am anxious for you to meet them. You will meet Inez. She and I have worked together since my time as First Lady. She has been an activist on behalf of women’s rights, labor, and peace. And her efforts to promote human rights and social justice remain an inspiration to me.

You will meet Marina, who has established shelters and provided counseling to countless women who pioneered the fight against human trafficking in Russia and who has carried on that work against formidable odds.

You will meet Mu, who’s been a leader in the struggle against trafficking and on behalf of democracy. And she won a seat in the National Assembly in Cambodia two years ago.

You will meet Anabella, who I met first on a visit to Guatemala, when she was a leader in the congress there. She lifted herself out of poverty, overcame staggering obstacles to fight against corruption, and has championed the rights of women and the indigent.

And you will get to know more about Farida. When the Taliban fell, she and other women from Afghanistan came out of the shadows and began speaking out. And she has carried the message about what has happened and happening to women from Afghanistan, around the world, including to Capitol Hill.

And you will hear the story of Mukhtar, who became a legend and an inspiration as she struggled to educate boys and girls in Pakistan. She is a symbol of how one can transcend the worst brutality and work to benefit humanity.

And Hafsat, who, after the tragic deaths of her parents, transformed her life and the lives of others by working to strengthen civil society and promoting democracy in Nigeria. . . .*
state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/03/138334.htm

This is a great start. Thank you for sharing.

 

[LogisticsBranch]

Replying to Mamanurse response about feminism. Kind readers can review my dialogues with Mamanurse and larkin31 on the previous page. Regarding “FEMINISM”, I have stood behind what HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI spoke to participatants in the International Conference on the theme: “LIFE, FAMILY AND DEVELOPMENT: THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE PROMOTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS” that was on March 20-21 2009. Here is an excerpt what he said:
*
I am pleased to extend cordial greetings to you and to all those taking part in the International Conference on the theme “Life, Family and Development: the Role of Women in the Promotion of Human Rights”. This event, sponsored by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, with the cooperation of the World Women’s Alliance for Life and Family, the World Union of Catholic Women’s Organizations and other associations, is an exemplary response to my predecessor Pope John Paul II’s call for a “new feminism” with the power to transform culture, imbuing it with a decisive respect for life (cf. Evangelium Vitae, 98-99).

Every day we learn of further ways in which life is compromised, particularly in its most vulnerable stages. While justice demands that these be decried as a violation of human rights, they must also evoke a positive and proactive response. The recognition and appreciation of God’s plan for women in the transmission of life and the nurturing of children is a constructive step in this direction. Beyond this, and given the distinctive influence of women in society, they must be encouraged to embrace the opportunity to uphold the dignity of life through their involvement in education and their participation in political and civic life. Indeed, because they have been gifted by the Creator with a unique “capacity for the other”, women have a crucial part to play in the promotion of human rights, for without their voice the social fabric of society would be weakened (cf. Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 13).
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/pont-messages/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_mes_20090320_martino-donne_en.html
*

 

[Mamanurse]

Replying to Mamanurse response about feminism. Kind readers can review my dialogues with Mamanurse and larkin31 on the previous page. Regarding “FEMINISM”, I have stood behind what HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI spoke to participatants in the International Conference on the theme: “LIFE, FAMILY AND DEVELOPMENT: THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE PROMOTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS” that was on March 20-21 2009. Here is an excerpt what he said:
*
I am pleased to extend cordial greetings to you and to all those taking part in the International Conference on the theme “Life, Family and Development: the Role of Women in the Promotion of Human Rights”. This event, sponsored by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, with the cooperation of the World Women’s Alliance for Life and Family, the World Union of Catholic Women’s Organizations and other associations, is an exemplary response to my predecessor Pope John Paul II’s call for a “new feminism” *with the power to transform culture, imbuing it with a decisive respect for life (cf. Evangelium Vitae, 98-99).

Every day we learn of further ways in which life is compromised, particularly in its most vulnerable stages. While justice demands that these be decried as a violation of human rights, they must also evoke a positive and proactive response. The recognition and appreciation of God’s plan for women in the transmission of life and the nurturing of children is a constructive step in this direction. Beyond this, and given the distinctive influence of women in society, they must be encouraged to embrace the opportunity to uphold the dignity of life through their involvement in education and their participation in political and civic life. Indeed, because they have been gifted by the Creator with a unique “capacity for the other”, women have a crucial part to play in the promotion of human rights, for without their voice the social fabric of society would be weakened (cf. Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 13).
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/pont-messages/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_mes_20090320_martino-donne_en.html

I think we are talking about two completely different views of feminism. I wholeheartedly agree with what the Pope is calling for, I was under the impression that the original poster was looking for what is wrong with feminism from a liberal point of view. When I think of feminism, I am thinking of what drove the pro-choice movement…obviously there is so many different views and ideals when it comes to that word.

 

[LogisticsBranch]

I think we are talking about two completely different views of feminism. I wholeheartedly agree with what the Pope is calling for, I was under the impression that the original poster was looking for what is wrong with feminism from a liberal point of view. When I think of feminism, I am thinking of what drove the pro-choice movement…obviously there is so many different views and ideals when it comes to that word.

Hi Mamnurse. I’ll select this one comment of yours from the previous page though I still encourage kind readers to reread the previous page. This is what you said:

Feminism was all about “women can do anything they want” movement.

No it isn’t. As a woman who is straight, my point was strickly that I acknowledge and accept only one view of feminism as noted in my previous message (#33). I’m not interested in any other forms of feminism though I realize other people might be. Perhaps the reason is that I’m busy on other stuff though I wanted to contribute something worthy enough to those who might be interested. No harm done by doing that.

 

[larkin31]

I don’t mean to be rude, but how could you not know that feminism was about abortion, birth control and sex?

It has, at times, and in part, been about these. But not even about these equally, and certainly not back through history.

Feminism was all about “women can do anything they want” movement

This is a false claim. I consider this a deliberate misrepresentation.

In order for women to feel like men and to be treated equally like men, they also needed to be able to have sex like men

This is an oversimplification.

Birth control allowed them to achieve that. Abortion allowed them, like some men, not live with the consequences of having premarital sex

In part, but only a small percentage at the peak of the “feminist” movement.

(I am not trying to dis men here, but lets face it, back in the day men could be promiscuous without any repercussions.)

There were and have always been “repercussions.”

A woman’s control over her own sexuality and reproductive life is a central component of increased freedom in the life of women. Yes. Very very true. These other generalizations about being and feeling like men are false exaggerations and misrepresentations. It is freedom and control that feminism is after: both central tenets of American life.

 

[In_Spiration]

Philosophically speaking, what is wrong with feminism; and what does Christian theology have to say about it? Is their a coherent philosophy against it; that is to say logical.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

Briefly, some philosophical problems with feminism are:

• It is typically based in a Rationalist notion of man. That is, it assumes the fundamental identity of every person with only his “mind”, as a separate and independent substance itself. This is ultimately their reason for denying the importance of biological reality.
• It often denies the importance or reality of essence, usually implying that all diversity and behavior is the mere product of environment/cultural institutions (evil patriarchy), and often reducing to Nominalist denial of all universals.
• It implies the primacy of matter over form, at least analogically speaking, since form runs metaphorically parallel with the masculine and matter (like ‘mater’ and Mother Earth) with the feminine. Man is to woman as form is to matter, both understood as mutually complementary aspects of a third thing (two in one flesh, offspring, substance). However, at least in the abstract, form is to be conceived as more independent of matter, insofar as it can retain its individuality in the intellect (whereas matter may only be conceived in general when separated from a form).
• Characteristic of Rationalist ideologies, its essential goal and motivation is to conquer Nature, not conform to it in peace. In that sense, it’s related to the Industrial Revolution’s misleading promise to help man be the primary inventor and manipulator of his natural constitution, finally having the means to remake Creation “as it ought to be”, or, free from external constraint.
• Its practice is arguably rooted in a political strategy for disorienting (Western) civilization by attacking its most basic unit, the family, and leading to its ultimate collapse into more primitive, eventually hunter-gatherer, conditions (since you might legitimately call civilization, in general, just the result of man’s colossal attempts at impressing and winning over woman, w/his innovatively analytic and systematic “male” brain functioning like a peacock’s feathers as a result of Darwinian sexual selection). Postmoderns regard this as the desirable “end of history” that will cure the disease of self-awareness as we return to our blissful animal condition (or something, I think).
• It’s utterly and irredeemably stupid and annoying. (I’m a little tired.)
• Etc. ad infinitum…

Just brainstorming.