Are you a feminist ifso what type?

[stilltrucking]

I been thinking about the time those evil women at litkicks booted me off the site for saying male feminism is bullshit feminism.

[judih]

feminism is equal rights for women. Equal to men. That is to say, in a situation where a man feels like patting my head and saying 'you're just a woman, therefore....x' - a woman in another part of the planet is doing the same to a man, and it sounds just as idiotic.

i'm not pro-idiocy. i'd prefer not to see chauvinism zooming along - presumption that one is better just because of their gender identification.

So i propose another option - intelligent humanism

[Artguy]

...the type that wants all women to burn their bras...

[stilltrucking]

Okay Kurt
I added another type

http://www.snopes.com/history/american/burnbra.asp

Speaking of burning underwear have you read this one

SUEKU #16 - Brush fire in the desert

desert brush ignites
landscape sports black lace undies
Spring sews new dresses

[Doreen Peri]

I'm a feminine feminist.

I'm also seriously considering writing under a male pseudonym so my writing will be taken more seriously.

We've come a long way in regards to equal rights and other feminist issues. Hell, it wasn't all that long ago, relatively speaking, that women couldn't even vote. Now they can even hold public office! OMG! And they can be entrepreneurs, own their own companies, be the CEO and everything. Plus, they get to wear pants. Pretty darn cool.

But the so-called traditional roles for men and women in a family haven't changed much. At least none of the men I've ever married or lived in sin with did laundry or vacuumed or even helped balance the budget. There are a few men I've known who DO enjoy cooking! YES! I love it when a man loves to cook. But they don't much like doing the dishes afterward. Who does?

All this to say that women still take care of most all of the domestic chores in many households (though I'm sure there are some where the male participates) and also hold outside jobs and careers often making a fraction of what a male makes in the very same position. In the US, anyway, I'm pretty sure the statistic is something like women's salaries are 70% of what men's salaries are for the exact same jobs. This is inSANE!

Add to that this.... the whole atmosphere of the room and conversation changes when a women enters the room. Maybe it's just me? Is it? But I feel the conversation changes, that women's voices aren't heard as serious voices nearly as often as male voices. Maybe I'm wrong. And certainly this isn't ALL the time. BUT....

In my opinion sexism is alive and well and living high on the hog.

Why is this? Do women lose their sex appeal because they're smart? Do they lose their sex appeal when they're considered equally as engaging in conversation as men? Would men rather consider a woman sexually and therefore can't possibly consider her as his equal?

Why do women get paid less for doing the same job?

We've come a long way, baby... but we have a LONG LONG way to go.

Here's somewhat of an exaggeration but not much...
A man walks into the doctor's office with a pain in his chest (this isn't a joke, btw). The doctor seriously considers he may be having a heart attack and addresses his complaint quite seriously, scheduling the appropriate tests, etc.

A woman walks into the doctor's office with a pain in her chest. (this also isn't a joke). The doctor asks her about her stress level, and writes her a script for valium.

Just saying, not only do women not make equal pay and not only are women's voices not considered as seriously as men's voices, but women are dismissed regularly in regards to important issues such as health complaints. Doctors treat women like complainers. (Generalized statement, I know... not ALL doctors, but many).

Oh there's way more. If I said don't get me started, it's too late. I already started.

Perfectly brilliant woman walks into a room. She also happens to be gorgeous. Immediately her intelligence is overlooked. How stupid is that? LOL!!!!

I'm into sisterhood. I LOVE women. My women friends are some of the brightest, most creative, most compassionate people on this planet. And I really feel embarrassed for the men who get all goo-goo eyed over them based on nothing of substance other than the fact that they're female.

Shall I go on? Nah. Wasting my time, sorry. I'm only an observer. And I'm a woman, too. So I'm a female observer.

I just truly believe we have a LONG way to go before women are considered equal and treated as such. Men still run this planet and guess what? They like it that way.

I feel sorry for those women whose voices aren't being heard.

There are many issues that fit into this topic but I'll just stop here because nobody's going to take me seriously anyway.

I DO believe in evolution and I have confidence that one day women will be not only treated as equal but will run the fricking planet, as it should be. After all, we're smarter than men. (joke.... it's the internet.. gotta tell people when to laugh, right?)

Your friend,
Doreen Peri

[diesel dyke]

Ten four doreen
I have not lost my sense of humor, sick as it is.

Of course I was joking about the evil women of litkicks.
But not about being deleted because of the post.
I am sure that there are issues that are women's issues that must be resolved by women. But for me the revolution is feminism. I guess I consider myself a proto-feminist l

I have read that Sylvia Plath was a proto-feminist. a failed feminist.
I am too.

Me and sylvia go way back, i spent twenty years on the road with her.

Yes

intelligent humanism

I can get my head around that.

[Arcadia]

s-t: yeah, I guess I´m also a feminist: I tend to be very sensitive towards injustice. And to don´t use bra in the middle of argentine streets??!!: you have to be a kamikaze or deeply enjoy studipity to do that if you are a woman!
you always mention your banned post in litkicks but I have no idea of what you are talking about: what did you say?

judih & doreen: great thoughts, I agree with you!

[still.trucking]

What I said was "male feminism is bullsh*t feminism" I guess I was speaking for myself.

You know the difference between a cowboy and a truck driver? A cowboy has the bullshit on the outside of his boots.

I got no complaints about litkicks, just happy memories of good times. It is not their fault that I am so autistic.

[Doreen Peri]

James.... You sound like you'll make a young lady very happy one day. I'm all for that! Teamwork! Gardening, cooking (I love both!), whatever needs to be done. Sharing responsibilities. Doing them together. Sounds like you also have a lot of respect for women on many different levels. I'd apply for the "my next gal" gig if you weren't 20 years younger than me. You're not into cougars are ya?

[stilltrucking]

James I changed the options from one to three so you could pick more than one type. I am trying to remember what I was thinking when I posted this poll. What brought it to mind?

I was surfing around the archives on litkicks and something brought it to mind. I was joking but I am serious too.

I believe the feminist revolution is the most important to human destiny since the Neolithic Revolution.

Yes still a long way to go.

I pretty much given up on trying to figure out feminism. I read articles like this one and don't have a clue?

The Willing Domesticity of Sylvia Plath: A Rebuttal of the "Feminist" Label

http://sapphireblue.com/writing/plath.html

[Lightning Rod]

Anybody that doesn't take the war between the sexes seriously will remain a helpless puppet of the feminazis. It's a matter of life and death, a power struggle so primal and biological and knitted into our genes that to deny or ignore it only guarantees submission and defeat. Lust for power is the root of all sexual and romantic urges. We are all mad for it whether we want to admit it or not.

This is why the notion of 'equality of the sexes' is so antithetical to love and romance, which depend on a glorious imbalance of power. Have you ever wondered why we have no 'masculinist' movement? In fact I can't think of a non-derrogatory English term for male-supremicism. 'Macho' sounds pretty good but that's Spanish. What we men need is a good, politically correct word to refer to those of us who understand the natural superiority of females but know that it is nevertheless fitting that males should by cunning or device, be in control.

Any male or female worth his/her salt thinks that they are a member of the oppressed sex. This is because sexual roles are themselves oppressive. And in the end everybody wants power regardless of sex. The gender thing is a canard, a red herring, a distraction.

If you take any two humans and put them in a room, they will eventually have a relationship of some sort. And in this relationship, one will be dominant. This is just animal fact. Some people are stronger, more forceful, smarter or hungrier than others. To try and break this down on the basis of gender misses many more fundamental factors. It's the same in gay and straight relationships, one will dominate.

This whole universe depends on a natural struggle between opposite forces. The moment the universe reaches equilibrium, it becomes static and dies. Love and the universe both depend on local and momentary warfare between the positive and the negative, the male and female, the yin and yang.

It makes me sick when I see men use the subterfuge of 'sensitivity' to get in some woman's pants. It's such a tired cliche to profess a belief in the equality of the sexes and to prattle on about how marriage should be an equal partnership and 'oh honey, ain't I enlightened cuz I can fill the dishwasher?' All of this is just another level of the power game. The best relationships work not because they are examples of equality, they work because the strengths and weaknesses of two people, working in a completely asymmetrical way, can achieve magic synergy.

[Doreen Peri]

If you take any two humans and put them in a room, they will eventually have a relationship of some sort. And in this relationship, one will be dominant. This is just animal fact. Some people are stronger, more forceful, smarter or hungrier than others. To try and break this down on the basis of gender misses many more fundamental factors. It's the same in gay and straight relationships, one will dominate.

Rubbish.

It's those who try to dominate that screw it up for everyone else who wants to and CAN have equal relationships.

Relationships can never be based on dominance.

That's complete nonsense.

And it's also where abusiveness and control come into the picture because when one person considers his or herself dominate, all respect and equality flies out the window.

Shame shame shame.

[Lightning Rod]

I didn't say that relationships are or should be based on dominance. I'm saying that inequality is simply a fact. Relationships usually work better when the balance of power is swinging fairly close to the center but it's never equal.

That's why I've been unlucky at love, I'm willing to give 110% and what do they want? 50-50. How boring

(and I'll thank you not to tsk me, doreen).

[Doreen Peri]

I'm saying that inequality is simply a fact.

I didn't say tsk. I said shame. It's a real shame, in my opinion, that you think that this is the case. It's simply not true. Equality in relationships is the primary focus for all successful relationships. Inequality and dominance ruins relationships. It is not a fact that inequality should even be considered as acceptable. It's certainly not acceptable to me.

It's quite possible many people think like that. They assume inequality. They assume one person will be dominant. They accept this as fact.

That's a major reason why half of all relationships break up. One person tries to, or worse yet DOES... dominate the other person and doesn't treat the other person as an equal. This is a shame.

The other half break up over money. And vacuuming.

Power is an ugly beast. When one person tries to or accomplishes having power over another person, there is no relationship. There is only control. Control and power are not only ugly, they're viral and poisonous.

[Lightning Rod]

spoken like a true victim, Doreen

relationships work best when the power struggle ends in a truce or when the partners share dominance in most things, when the power swings back and forth. But the power struggle is still there even if we suppress it to the level of a game of scrabble.

I say 'spoken like a true victim' because your statements all reflect that you don't appreciate being dominated. Nobody does. And you refer to 'relationships based on dominance' as if dominance were the powerful or aggressive force, which it may or may not be. Relationships are about both dominance and submission. If you think one of these is more powerful than the other, you should study the matter more thoroughly.