Feminisms effect on women

[edwest2]

Feminism was a secular response to legitimate problems between men and women. It put women into the “victim” or “potential victims” category, and men into the “eternal enemy” camp.

The male-female relationship was reduced to a power struggle that should never exist. Men and women are not forced to marry, and, apparently, NOW and Betty Friedan had the “solution” to the problem. But it was divisive and anti-family.

What is needed is understanding, reconciliation and a means of healing. But NOW needs victims. It needs and wants to be the middle man between men and women. It will tell you what to do and how to act. Strangely, Gloria Steinem went and married one of the “enemy.”

Don’t be manipulated by these people.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Naztakuan]

What a fine contribution to this thread.

Hey she sounded angry to me. Did she or did she not? Ya can’t claim NOT to be angry with all the uppercase plus !!! behind it. I don’t know what her deal is. But that mode of thinking comes from rabid perfectionism and a type-A personality. They don’t seem to grasp that people are not an island unto themselves because of how succesful they are themselves. Ergo this must apply to everyone right? The angry rude boss that the OP is referring to has nothing to do with whether she is a feminist or not. She will behave that way even if she were a hausfrau. I’ve had bosses like that too. But that’s why they are the boss and not you or I. Ruthlessness is what makes you the boss. I think Men are surprised when a woman behaves differently now that she is your boss. Men behave the same way. If you’re in power and you want to stay in that position. You can’t can’t be so nice.
A woman
youtube.com/watch?v=bfG4dwAOUxQ&feature=related

A man

youtube.com/watch?v=pMvvZtBuqrE

A woman
youtube.com/watch?v=Je7ztH6iNOk&feature=related

A man
youtube.com/watch?v=OmHetFp039I&feature=related

Sex has nothing to do with it. Feminism has very little to do with it. It has to do with your temperement. If you are overly perfectionistic it’s going to ruffle everyone’s feathers. Consequently people with that sort of temperament often end up as bosses. You could argue that women tend to pay more attention to smaller detail than men making them more perfectionistic than men ergo they may demand more from their employees than a male CEO would. But that’s just a supposition.

 

[neat62]

history.rochester.edu/class/sba/third.html

Susan’s first involvement in the world of reform was in the temperance movement. This was one of the first expressions of original feminism in the United States and it dealt with the abuses of women and children who suffered from alcoholic husbands. In 1849, Susan gave her first public speech for the Daughters of Temperance and then helped found the Woman’s State Temperance Society of New York, one of the first organizations of its time. In 1851 she went to Syracuse to attend a series of antislavery meetings. During this time Susan met Elizabeth Cady Stanton, became fast friends and joined Stanton and Amelia Bloomer in campaigns for women’s rights. In 1854, she devoted herself to the antislavery movement serving from 1856 to the outbreak of the civil war,1861. Here, she served as an agent for the American Anti-slavery Society. After, she collaborated with Stanton and published the New York liberal weekly, “The Revolution” (1868-70) which called for equal pay for women.

In 1872, Susan demanded that women be given the same civil and political rights that had been extended to black males under the 14th and 15th amendments. Thus, she led a group of women to the polls in Rochester to test the right of women to vote. She was arrested two weeks later and while awaiting trial, engaged in highly publicized lecture tours and in March 1873, she tried to vote again in city elections. After being tried and convicted of violating the voting laws, Susan succeeded in her refusal to pay the fine. From then on she campaigned endlessly for a federal woman suffrage amendment through the National Woman Suffrage Association (1869-90) and the National American Woman Suffrage Association (1890-1906) and by lecturing throughout the country.

Anthony, along with Stanton and Matilda Joslyn Gage published the History of Woman Suffrage 4 vol (1881-1902) In 1888 she organized the International Council of Women and in 1904 the International Woman Suffrage Alliance. Although Anthony did not live to see the consummation of her efforts to win the right to vote for women, the establishment of the 19th amendment is deeply owed to her efforts.

Lies? If she had so many rights, why bother to fight at all? Let’s see, to vote, to be able to own land, etc… It’s her and women like her you need to thank for your rights - because that’s how you got them.

Actually, no I don’t thank her…or those like her…because thanks to them today society is a mess.

Immorality is rampant, men and women don’t know their roles, we have fewer children being born then ever, we have abortion, artificial contraception, we have those fighting for “rights” such as gay marriage, that don’t exist…based off of arguments they set forth.

I would MUCH rather go back to the days long before any feminist movement…I would prefer that women did not vote…as so many are not really interested and base their votes on frivolous things like “looks”. I would prefer that women respected their bodies enough to actually keep themselves chaste until marriage and then were pleased to learn they were going to have a child, instead of considering the child to be a “burden” because it will disrupt their careers! I would prefer to stand beside my husband, rather than try to “outperform” him…I would prefer to actually be able to practice my faith anywhere and anytime I please, rather than have to hide it from public view…today, thanks to Affirmative Action, as an employer or school administrator, I am forced to recognize one’s race and gender…where back before the Feminist movement I could base my decision on one’s character, skills, experience and knowledge…and on and on…

Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat

 

[neat62]

Feminism was a secular response to legitimate problems between men and women. It put women into the “victim” or “potential victims” category, and men into the “eternal enemy” camp.

The male-female relationship was reduced to a power struggle that should never exist. Men and women are not forced to marry, and, apparently, NOW and Betty Friedan had the “solution” to the problem. But it was divisive and anti-family.

What is needed is understanding, reconciliation and a means of healing. But NOW needs victims. It needs and wants to be the middle man between men and women. It will tell you what to do and how to act. Strangely, Gloria Steinem went and married one of the “enemy.”

Don’t be manipulated by these people.

God bless,
Ed

AMEN!

Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat

 

[Tick_Dawk]

Neat, you’re entitled to your opinion. The only reason I’m saying you’re arrogant and short sighted is because you’re saying Susan B. Anthony was wrong in wanting to vote, and that we should all want what you do. Feminism is about choice; if you don’t want to work, then don’t. However, the feminist movement has given you the choice as to whether or not you can advance and do as well as men in the work force.

Am I telling you you’re wrong? No,I just think you are. Believe what you want. However, this is the Catholic Answers Forum, where absolute truth rests in those who post here. I guess you’re entitled to your opinion, because your opinion is the truth–however, I’m pretty sure the Church tries to play the card that the Bible sees women as equal.

 

[Calliso]

Actually, no I don’t thank her…or those like her…because thanks to them today society is a mess.

Immorality is rampant, men and women don’t know their roles, we have fewer children being born then ever, we have abortion, artificial contraception, we have those fighting for “rights” such as gay marriage, that don’t exist…based off of arguments they set forth.

I would MUCH rather go back to the days long before any feminist movement…I would prefer that women did not vote…as so many are not really interested and base their votes on frivolous things like “looks”. I would prefer that women respected their bodies enough to actually keep themselves chaste until marriage and then were pleased to learn they were going to have a child, instead of considering the child to be a “burden” because it will disrupt their careers! I would prefer to stand beside my husband, rather than try to “outperform” him…I would prefer to actually be able to practice my faith anywhere and anytime I please, rather than have to hide it from public view…today, thanks to Affirmative Action, as an employer or school administrator, I am forced to recognize one’s race and gender…where back before the Feminist movement I could base my decision on one’s character, skills, experience and knowledge…and on and on…

Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat

I am curious just what roles are those? And why should EVERYONE be forced into them? That is what most feminists are about…not being forced or expected be in certain roles.

Also do you actually have any proof that so many women vote based off looks? Cause I have yet to meet a women that uses frivalious stuff to base her vote off of. Also premarital sex existed before feminism it always has. Before though it wasn;t really talked about swept under the rug would be the proper term here I think and if the girl got pregnant she would probably marry the guy. Which could lead to extremely unhappy marriages.

Also women weren;t more or less pleased to have a child now then they were back then. You donlt think there wasn;t plenty of women out there that thought I donlt want this baby, We can;t handle another child. So on and so forth? Are there women now that donlt want babies because it would disrupt their career? yes there is. However even back in the good old days there was still women that felt children or more children then they already had would be a burden.

Also most feminists are not about outperforming men either. It is about be allowed to perform at an equal level. It is about being treated like equals.

I do agree with you about affirmative action though that stuff is ****, but I question whether or not feminism actually is the main culprit in bringing that about I donlt think it is.

 

[Naztakuan]

Feminism was a secular response to legitimate problems between men and women. It put women into the “victim” or “potential victims” category, and men into the “eternal enemy” camp.

The male-female relationship was reduced to a power struggle that should never exist. Men and women are not forced to marry, and, apparently, NOW and Betty Friedan had the “solution” to the problem. But it was divisive and anti-family.

What is needed is understanding, reconciliation and a means of healing. But NOW needs victims. It needs and wants to be the middle man between men and women. It will tell you what to do and how to act. Strangely, Gloria Steinem went and married one of the “enemy.”

Don’t be manipulated by these people.

God bless,
Ed

I think many mpdern feminist women and girls don’t even care about what Steinem or Freidan said. And quite frankly, I don’t care if they hate men or whatever. I’m not worried about that. I’m worried about fair treatment and equal pay. My right to vote and own property. Marriage is only a prison if you feel like you can’t get out of it voluntarily. Obviously, if you don’t want to get married you shouldn’t have to. I don’t but by no means does that mean that other women shouldn’t. In fact there was this strange man giving out these manuscripts he wrote. It centered around racism and oppression of black men then he went on to explain a solution. He believed that a perfect world had not God, No marriage, no currency. Basically in his world no nuclear family should exist. This man voluntarily lived a life of poverty because he was so against the concept of wage slavery. He would rather be homeless and penniless. Of course I never actually met the man but one of my coworkers had recieved one. This was one of those wierd guys who writes crazy manifestos like the wierd guy who walks around with the anti-catholic sign on his body. People just think they’re crazy. I’ve only met one woman who actually followed the NOW model that you are referring to. She was in a relationship but she was not going to get married because to her marriage was only if you planned on having kids, up until that point cohabitation is the way to go.

BTW you keep referenicing Sex in th City like you’ve actually watched the show. You don’t mention the character who is married or the fact that the main character is a hopeless romantic that WANTS to get married. The whole story centers around these girls trying to find love but looking in all the wrong places. Only one character is a raging nympho and her escapades stop when she contracts cancer and all her hair falls out. Only then she realizes that her boyfriend will stick by her regardless of sex, she starts to be open to commitment. Sex in the City is not the L word which is actually more about just sex.I’m not saying I like show, but Sex and the city is not an accurate depiction of American life or most women. The show itself is classist depiction just like Desperate housewives is classist.
HBO is neither real nor realistic. It’s drama.

 

[Naztakuan]

Actually, no I don’t thank her…or those like her…because thanks to them today society is a mess.

Immorality is rampant, men and women don’t know their roles, we have fewer children being born then ever, we have abortion, artificial contraception, we have those fighting for “rights” such as gay marriage, that don’t exist…based off of arguments they set forth.

I would MUCH rather go back to the days long before any feminist movement…I would prefer that women did not vote…as so many are not really interested and base their votes on frivolous things like “looks”. I would prefer that women respected their bodies enough to actually keep themselves chaste until marriage and then were pleased to learn they were going to have a child, instead of considering the child to be a “burden” because it will disrupt their careers! I would prefer to stand beside my husband, rather than try to “outperform” him…I would prefer to actually be able to practice my faith anywhere and anytime I please, rather than have to hide it from public view…today, thanks to Affirmative Action, as an employer or school administrator, I am forced to recognize one’s race and gender…where back before the Feminist movement I could base my decision on one’s character, skills, experience and knowledge…and on and on…

Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat

That’s probably the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

 

[Tracyms1974]

Hello, everybody.

  I am a former feminist.  I used to think that feminism was a great thing, and hey, maybe at one time it was, because as others have mentioned, women can now vote, go on maternity leave, and work.  However, I think that the movement has gone too far.  They CERTAINLY should have stopped at Roe vs. Wade.  That's all the feminists' fault, sorry to say.  Perhaps you could compare feminism to Martin Luther's 95 theses (statements, whatever.).  Yes, the Church had problems, but was that the best way to go about making changes?  Yes, women not voting is ridiculous!  Let's change it.  Women not even having a choice whether or not they want to work is not fair.  Let's change it.  Women don't want to carry babies if it's not convenient for them.  Hate it for ya!  (<<< What we SHOULD have said as a society!)  Find a nice family who can't have kids, and there you go.  Even the whole working thing backfired some.  We have become a nation that has become so accustomed to a two-income family that the woman is again put in a place where she has little-to-no choice.  She now has to work even if she wants to stay home with the kids.  (My situation, BTW.)  

  As far as the whole rude/angry thing goes, I think that these women have the idea that EVERY man is interested in controlling women and "keeping them down."  Not true.  Just like every white person (esp. in the South) is not a racist, and every Asian is good at Math.  It is best to get to know people as individuals, and if you don't know them then it's exactly that very case - you don't know them, no matter the race, gender, or religion.

  I have to go, my daughter is calling me.  Grrr.

Tracy

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Spirit it sounds like you have some anger issues on the subject. Steinem is about as unbiblical and wicked as you can get. Mind you she is for abortion.

You bet I’m angry that some men still don’t get it. As far as I know Gloria Steinem never tried to be “biblical” She is not wicked and you have no basis for claiming it. The fact that one aspect of the women’s movement is about women’s reproductive rights is no basis for defining an entire movement.

How can a movement that pressured 60 Million unborn children to be slaughtered be any good? This shows how much feminists truely hate humanity deep down in their souls. Enough hate to even advocate the killing of their own unborn children. And if they have no respect for the unborn how do you expect for them to have respect for others? Wicked is and wicked does.

Your rhetoric is nonsensical. Promoting women’s reproductive rights has nothing to do with hating humanity. Such is plainly absurd.

Oh how I agree. This is why I don’t like feminism. Because it effects the minds of so many young women and it turns them into hard, uncaring, stuck up jerks. Look at the divorce rate in society and the abortion rate. The sewage that comes from the feminism movement is alarming. Recently I was at the grocery store and I saw a woman bossing her husband around his he was a puppy dog. It was the most unnautral sad thing I had seen in months. “What an ungodly woman” I thought, considering that the gospel says that the wife should respect her husband the same way she should respect Christ himself. Where is the mutual respect between husband and wife anymore? Its nearly nonexistant in todays world and has turned into a “Sex and the City” type respect between woman and man that is deplorable.

Finally, we get to the real point. You just don’t like uppity women and want them obedient as yuou believe they are supposed to be. Equal but different right? Hogwash. Do you hve the same reaction when a man bosses his wife around before you?

 

[Darrian]

I think its a why we need to bring God back in schools. Because this is what secular society spits out. Cold, hard, uncaring, secular people who would stab their mothers in the back if they were offered enough. This “secular” mindset creates problems later in life for people who are honest and good and unfortunatly have to deal with such people in life.

I am so confused. Ever since the controversy of whether God should be put into schools or not started to pop up everywhere, I’ve never seen anyone point out feminism as a reason. On that, good job, it was entertaining.

On a more serious note. No. Leave God out of public non-church owned schools. Though many people have faith, school is about teaching fact.

Although I do agree with you that feminism does seem to be getting out of hand. Women have gotten their right to vote, have jobs alongside men, etc. etc. and that’s wonderful!! I couldn’t imagine living in a place without that. But now it seems that groups of feminists are popping up just to hate men for random reasons…

 

[Kaninchen]

Even the whole working thing backfired some. We have become a nation that has become so accustomed to a two-income family that the woman is again put in a place where she has little-to-no choice. She now has to work even if she wants to stay home with the kids. (My situation, BTW.)

Perhaps you should check out the history of work amongst farming and working class women - both before and after the industrial revolution.

What changed was the nature of work in this stage of capitalism at a time where women were liberated from domestic drudgery by domestic goods and a level of security of control over family size - the rapid growth of the tertiary/service sector, the disappearance of so many ‘male’ jobs in secondary/manufacturing industries (together with the disappearance of so many ‘jobs for life’) meant that the old model became more and more irrelevant over whole sectors of society - feminism was more about the ‘terms and conditions’ of work rather than the necessity for it.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Today’s women don’t want equality…they want superiority!

Speak for yourself

Once upon a time a woman was proud to call herself a mom and loving wife and men exhibited character and courage, going out each day to their jobs, working hard to care and provide for their families.

Can you tell us exactly when this was? I’ll make it a bit easier…what decade or even century?

Today, however, we see the complete feminization of men. Men are “in touch” with their feelings and half the time can’t decide what it is they are feeling at all. While women have become more and more like men, asserting themselves and proud to do so, in all aspects of life, except for one, motherhood!

When you marry, if you ever do, you might find out why it’s important for men to be open and able to discuss their feelings. So you prefer women to behave and obedient? I hear they have a cult for that. It was just raided in Texas. The women seem the spitting image of what yuou want. I’m sure they will be happy to have you join.

Women somehow have been made to feel that they need to seek “superiority” over man, instead of understanding that men and women are different, simply because we were created that way.

Any proof of this or is this just a feeling you hve? i have no desire to be superior over anyone actually. We were created with different body parts, there is some small suggestion that our brains are wired a bit differently making us approach common issues in slightly different ways. That’s about all scientifically speaking.

Today’s men are afraid of commitment and women don’t want it.

Statistics belie this belief of yours. At different points in time most men and women have periods where they are not seeking long term relationships, but most all do in the end. It is a natural human desire. Men have always been a bit more inclined to non-monogamy, but statistics show that married men live longer and are happier. The same is true for women. That is a result of commitment, not the reason for it.

Men don’t know whether to hold open the door or allow the woman to hold it open for them. We have sent them so many mixed messages over the past 40 years, who can blame them? We tell them we want them to treat us with respect and love, but at the same time, we demand they treat us as if we were just “one of the guys.”

That’s pretty dated. I knew a few women like that when back in the 70’s and 80’s but it was pretty much gone by the 90’s. By then, most just realized that if someone needed a door opened for them, you did it,man or woman. I guess I should not like to watch football with my husband. He probably resents my intrusion. Duh.

Women expect be treated as equals and to hold high places in business, politics and even the military, but at the same time, they expect “special treatment” through programs like Affirmative Action simply because they are “women” and after all, they have “emotions.”

Affirmative action programs are designed to rectify old wrongs and bring everyone to a level playing field. I assume you also are against those programs for African americans as well? Emotions have zip to do with this and I’m shocked you as a female would say such a gender biased statement. I am actually rather thinking your only claiming to be a female now.

Is it any wonder that men are so confused today? They don’t know if they want to marry us women or if they should stick with their own gender, because women have been telling them for so long that we are “just like them” in every way.

So the women’s movement is now somehow the reason for male homosexuality? ROFL…Have any proof of that?
{QUOTE]
Women want to go out and have sex without regard to consequence only to cry when they find themselves pregnant or with an STD that some “evil” male did this to me. As if they had no choice in the matter at all. They think nothing of murdering their own through abortion and then want to be thought of as compassionate, tolerant and loving women.

You are sad now. What women are blaming me for their pregnancies? Why would a man be evil? If indeed you are a woman, your opinion of men is sadly negative.

They want to be regarded as intellectuals but then tell us that they are incapable of making rational decisions or controlling themselves when it comes to their sexual desires.

If indeed you are a female, you certainly hate the fact that you are. I am terribly sorry for you. What a horrifying life you must have. My deepest sympathies

 

[Calliso]

You bet I’m angry that some men still don’t get it. As far as I know Gloria Steinem never tried to be “biblical” She is not wicked and you have no basis for claiming it. The fact that one aspect of the women’s movement is about women’s reproductive rights is no basis for defining an entire movement.

Your rhetoric is nonsensical. Promoting women’s reproductive rights has nothing to do with hating humanity. Such is plainly absurd.

Finally, we get to the real point. You just don’t like uppity women and want them obedient as yuou believe they are supposed to be. Equal but different right? Hogwash. Do you hve the same reaction when a man bosses his wife around before you?

Thanks for asking this question I was tempted to ask her/him it too! And the equal but different argument in my experience is all too often used by people who donlt believe men and women are equal. However they use such phrasing to kinda dress things up if you know what I mean.

 

[Enoch]

I once heard a psychiatrist giving a talk and he said that whenever he has a patient who claims to be a feminist, he will bring up the subject of her father.
He said that in almost every instance in his 25+ yeas of practice she will give him one of two responses. Either she will describe her father as an overbearing tyrant, or as an “absent father” who was never involved or protective. Of course, there are exceptions, but he certainly noticed a lot of consistencies.

He was trying to make a point about how important a roll fathers have in their daughter’s lives. We need to make sure we are strong, loving, and protective men, but know where to draw the line and not become an abusive tyrant. It was some good advice.

Feminism can often be a reaction to bad fathering.

 

[Dale_M]

Feminism can often be a reaction to bad fathering.

Perhaps it may be, in some individuals. But I suspect the psychiatrist was simply indulging his own pre-conceptions. It would be helpful to know more about this psychiatrist.

 

[Enoch]

Perhaps it may be, in some individuals. But I suspect the psychiatrist was simply indulging his own pre-conceptions. It would be helpful to know more about this psychiatrist.

I don’t know, he was just giving his professional opinion. Although, he is a well known psychiatrist who has written many books and is also a Christian marriage counselor.

Overall, I think he’s pretty legit and will certainly give his opinion credibility over someone who hasn’t done any of this.

I have heard him say some things I don’t agree with, but that had mostly to do with Christian doctrine because he is rather evangelical.

BTW… His name is Gary Rosberg.

 

[Filius99993]

The feminist movement should have stopped at the point when it started supporting infanticide. But it kept on rolling.

 

[Dynomite]

I’m surprised and disappointed by many of the sweeping generalizations in this thread. It seems I had naively assumed that the majority of people have come to understand and accept that men and women are different, but equals. Based on the rude stereotypes of feminists and women in general, I can see this is not true.

I have to consider how much of me is shaped by feminist theory:

I don’t want to be treated like a man - I want to be respected for being exactly woman. I don’t need to be and I should never be compared to a man to gauge my abilities or intellect. I am pro-life and along with large organizations of pro-life feminists believe that abortion is frequently a tool for submission. I don’t want my natural fertility to be controlled or curbed for anyone else’s convenience - there are feminists who are against the pill as they view that it weakens the woman’s position in a sexual relationship. I don’t have to stay home 24 hours a day to be a good mother or wife and my husband doesn’t have to stay home 24 hours a day to be a good husband or father. Equal, but different.

I’m particularly staunch about my position on pornography and the sex industry. My opinion grew first from reading feminist work and not from religious influence. No real feminist supports pornography - the subjugation of women for profit where women are objectified for the satisfaction of men? Please! It’s offensive to women. The loudest outcry against the recent PETA ads featuring nude women or women dressed provocatively for advertising, comes from feminists. Women who say something like that is “empowering” will often admit that their sexuality is often the only thing they have control of. They don’t believe they can control other aspects of their lives.

It is my understanding of the feminism I embrace that the goal is not to seek revenge against the male sex or to seek power, but to reach a place where sex is a non-issue - roles still exist but only those that are determined by nature (ie. men can’t physically birth or breastfeed, but they sure can help cook and clean.) We’d find a place where making a joke about the “little woman” needing to be coddled isn’t funny simply because no one would believe it could ever true.

 

[neat62]

Neat, you’re entitled to your opinion. The only reason I’m saying you’re arrogant and short sighted is because you’re saying Susan B. Anthony was wrong in wanting to vote, and that we should all want what you do. Feminism is about choice; if you don’t want to work, then don’t. However, the feminist movement has given you the choice as to whether or not you can advance and do as well as men in the work force.

Am I telling you you’re wrong? No,I just think you are. Believe what you want. However, this is the Catholic Answers Forum, where absolute truth rests in those who post here. I guess you’re entitled to your opinion, because your opinion is the truth–however, I’m pretty sure the Church tries to play the card that the Bible sees women as equal.

Actually, you did tell me I was wrong…go back and re-read your post to me. You told me that simply because I don’t agree with the Feminist movement that I am arrogant.

While in my post, I responded to the fact that Susan B. Anthony didn’t need the feminist movement to become successful…as she was already a head mistress at a well recognized institute of higher learning, BEFORE she took part in any “women’s rights” movement.

So it is my belief…that to be successful you don’t require special treatment…you only need to be ambitious, determined and personally responsible!

However, the feminists of today…and yesterday…would have you believe that women were simply “useless” prior to the movement…when in fact, they were actually pillars of society and worked side by side with their husbands…they were a heck of a lot more “equal” then…then they are today!

Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat