Feminism

[bèlla]

I think that we (society) is still figuring it out. I don't think that you want to discard this particular catalyst for change ... until we've made all of the necessary changes for women to have equity in our society.

Figuring it out at whose expense? There are obvious issues taking place that require correction. How do you lessen the impact if possible?

 

[bèlla]

I can't see any cons, unless you think the status quo is good enough.

Are you suggesting you can’t think of any cons of this movement? I don’t know how things stand in Australia (although your countryman suggested there were issues that mirror ours). But in the U.S. there are serious problems. And I’m hearing push back from secular and Christian men and women.

Now, if you're asking, can feminism be improved, either in its discourse or its activism, I'd have to say, sure, and I'd love to have a discussion on that.

What would you change or improve?

 

[Larniavc]

It doesn't matter. The traditional social order is long gone.

And the traditional social order before that is also gone. The current order is more fair than any before.

 

[Nithavela]

Nay, just the opposite. Women have to prove that they are as productive as men (pregnancy drastically reduces a woman's productivity).

Okay, I'll give you that one. When women are pregnant, they are not producing anything of value.

 

[bèlla]

I think lots of men think they are entitled to this invitation without having to do much of anything to improve their attractiveness, both physically and in terms of character. (Hmm. Maybe this belongs in that other thread.)

Women aren’t paragons of virtue. I was in a supposed etiquette group on Facebook and the ladies openly disclosed how they target men. It was akin to a female PUA and I had to leave. Their “improvements” were for the benefit of snagging a wealthy suitor.

My experience with feminists has been all around great, although I probably choose for company feminists who are very open to expressing their femininity... while also participating fully in all arenas of life.

You have probably chosen well-rounded people whose presence is beneficial. That doesn’t dismiss the reality of hate or unhealthy approaches. You had the wisdom not to befriend them. There’s good and bad in all groups.

 

[Larniavc]

good job, but it's not my job to provide evidence for someone else's claim.

as I already explained with the WWE example, outside of underpaying people for their value, contracts are going to be negotiated based on ones value to the company. how do we know that these women were generating the same amount of revenue as the men to justify paying them more the same? the article doesn't go into this.

do these women get the same or higher ratings for their shows or appearances on TV as the men do?

it only says that men and women work at BBC and don't get paid the same. are they in the same positions and doing the same work on the same level of productivity for the company?

Correct. My apologies for assuming your request was disingenuous.

In many instances in the BBC case the two presenters were sat in the same couch.

 

[bèlla]

I believe men are scared silly about losing control. We understand that when oppressors lose the ability to oppress others, they become susceptible to being oppressed themselves.

Are they wrong to be “scared silly?” Or have we given them a reason to be concerned? Do you feel its acceptable for them to be oppressed?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

And the traditional social order before that is also gone. The current order is more fair than any before.

I meant the true social order; men at work, mom at home.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

When women are pregnant, they are not producing anything of value.

That's a whole different subject.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

In many instances in the BBC case the two presenters were sat in the same couch.

and now you gotta figure out if more people were watching when a certain person was on that couch than another and if they are being paid accordingly.

if it's truly all the same as far as ratings for everyone on the couch, then you have a case.

 

[bèlla]

Interesting distinction.

From my outsiders (non-Christian) perspective, we've got Jesus in the Bible instigating basically a spiritual revolution. And then we've got Paul bringing it somewhat 'back to earth' and compatibilizing Jesus revolution with the pervading cultural ethos, which was rather patriarchal.

Do you think they’re incompatible or two sides of the same coin and we’re missing the point?

 

[Nithavela]

That's a whole different subject.

Is it? Why bring it up, then?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Is it? Why bring it up, then?

You brought it up.

 

[bèlla]

But neither set of priorities is ever "winning" against the other, because they counterbalance. The male's goals keeps the female's in check, and vice-versa. If you remove one, the other runs rampant. It would be like taking "rock" out of the paper-rock-scissors game; scissors would just always win or tie.

That was an excellent example which demonstrates God’s design for each. I don’t think you can have a healthy society without both in operation.

When we try to suppress one in deference to the other problems arise. Its unnatural. We need each other and maybe that’s the truth few can face.

 

[durangodawood]

Women aren’t paragons of virtue. I was in a supposed etiquette group on Facebook and the ladies openly disclosed how they target men. It was akin to a female PUA and I had to leave. Their “improvements” were for the benefit of snagging a wealthy suitor.

You have probably chosen well-rounded people whose presence is beneficial. That doesn’t dismiss the reality of hate or unhealthy approaches. You had the wisdom not to befriend them. There’s good and bad in all groups.

Oh I certainly do not pull men off the pedestal only to replace them with women.

Just pointing out how many men refuse to be accountable for their own situation and blame "feminism" instead.... as if feminism is the main reason why women arent flocking to them.

 

[Nithavela]

You brought it up.

Something must be wrong with my browser, it shows you mentioning pregnancy first.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

Something must be wrong with my browser, it shows you mentioning pregnancy first.

he may have been making the point that maternity leave would have women taking off from work for very long periods of time.

you mentioned(sarcastically...I hope) that children aren't of value.

 

[zephcom]

Another question might be, do women really produce as much doing the same job as a man. That women are as productive as men is questionable and should be proven before it is the basis for equal pay.

One reason that men generally outperform women in the workplace is that we are naturally competitive, either with others or ourselves.

One would think us men would get tired from constantly patting ourselves on the back.

 

[bèlla]

While it was new it challenged the male bias against women and the unequal, unfair pay practises.
This was needed.
But it has gone on to promote sexual permisivnes, divorce and contempt for men.
Strangly many women have recognised that thesel have not brought them happiness.

Yes, that’s true. I’ve heard it firsthand. For me, liberation doesn’t mean men are odious or a stumbling block to success. It means I’m presented with greater options which contribute to my growth and our livelihood.

It didn’t free me for my desire for him. Need of him. Or the recognition of his numerous contributions. If anything, it made me more cognizant of the challenges he faced earning a wage and the hardships I didn’t encounter while at home.

I’ve had the opportunity to live out both extremes. I worked in a male dominated field and I’ve been home full-time for over a decade. While I appreciate what I gained in the workforce, I wouldn’t trade it for what I have.

 

[Rubiks]

I meant the true social order; men at work, mom at home.

That's an odd social order considering the New Testament highly values celibacy.