|
Feminism (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Aquarian |
| quote: | | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN not if the the answer to female subordination can be found in the reason for their oppression. of course the reason is important. to understand the problem is half the task in providing a suitable alternative. |
But to get to the reason, you have to understand the method, and that's the point I was getting at. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
Unfortunately in the feminist blind struggle to be equal, they have nearly destroyed the family in the process.
Staying at home and raising children is such an undesirable task it should be left to a daycare to handle. So women can truely be equal. |
|
|
| Aquarian |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
Unfortunately in the feminist blind struggle to be equal, they have nearly destroyed the family in the process. |
That's acceptable damage in my opinion. The family structure will recover. It just needs time to find itself a new model and get rid of the old "father knows best" moto. Families suffered because, like I mentioned in my first post, the changes might have happened too fast, and society hasn't had the time to adapt to them. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by nchs09
so our arguments are that bad? enlighten me... plz |
on the whole, its a bunch of generalisations without a deeper grasp of all the different facets of feminist history, theory or influence (much of which is contradictory). there isnt one united feminism that has evolved, there are several; with competing goals & attitudes. so i dont believe it is simply an argument that can be reduced to whether feminism has been "bad" or "good".
my advice would be to pick one of the major sections of feminism (id suggest the moderate-to-slightly-radical liberal feminists) & focus on their contribution to the feminist movement since the 60s in the western democracies. at least then the massive scope of your research is cut down a bit. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
But to get to the reason, you have to understand the method, and that's the point I was getting at. |
the reason comes before the method tho? |
|
|
| nchs09 |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
on the whole, its a bunch of generalisations without a deeper grasp of all the different facets of feminist history, theory or influence (much of which is contradictory). there isnt one united feminism that has evolved, there are several; with competing goals & attitudes. so i dont believe it is simply an argument that can be reduced to whether feminism has been "bad" or "good".
my advice would be to pick one of the major sections of feminism (id suggest the moderate-to-slightly-radical liberal feminists) & focus on their contribution to the feminist movement since the 60s in the western democracies. at least then the massive scope of your research is cut down a bit. |
its an internet forum... as i said i was speaking moestly about the radical thinkers of this group. and yet the feminism that is known in the public eye.. is the one of extreme thoughts.
of course u cant generalize it.. yet a 2 page report.. was not my intent. |
|
|
| nchs09 |
| quote: | Originally posted by nchs09
its an internet forum... as i said i was speaking moestly about the radical thinkers of this group. and yet the feminism that is known in the public eye.. is the one of extreme thoughts.
of course u cant generalize it.. yet a 2 page report.. was not my intent. |
and i assumend the extremist was what she was talking about in general.. not the ones who have nothing to be argued about with...... but just support them. |
|
|
| Aquarian |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
the reason comes before the method tho? |
Of course, what I'm saying is you need to find one before finding the other. You can point to a bunch of causes and emit theories but at some point you have to understand how the cause generates it's effect. (this discussion is getting too abstract) ;) |
|
|
| stevieboy32808 |
When you guys say women are just as equal as men, do you mean equal in everything or just certain attributes?
If you mean equal in everything men do then the answer is pretty easy and that is no. To point out one example, both sexes are different biologically.
If you mean equal in certain aspects, then the answer is yes for those specific situations. You can do your own research as to what situations I'm referring to. |
|
|
| Aquarian |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
When you guys say women are just as equal as men, do you mean equal in everything or just certain attributes?
If you mean equal in everything men do then the answer is pretty easy and that is no. To point out one example, both sexes are different biologically.
If you mean equal in certain aspects, then the answer is yes for those specific situations. You can do your own research as to what situations I'm referring to. |
I'm reffering to equality in potential, and that is a generalization for the sake of argument. |
|
|
| Aquarian |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
As in brain potential, physical potential, or what? |
What I mean is that for example, obviousely men will never give birth, but that is completely irrelevant to this discussion. So, equality in terms of psychology and not physiology (and that includes hormones). |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
Of course, what I'm saying is you need to find one before finding the other. You can point to a bunch of causes and emit theories but at some point you have to understand how the cause generates it's effect. (this discussion is getting too abstract) ;) |
so we agree then :)
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
What I mean is that for example, obviousely men will never give birth, but that is completely irrelevant to this discussion. |
actually, i would argue women's biology within the context of childbirth & rearing is fundamentally important to this discussion. having children is one of women's most obvious disadvantages (given how western capitalism has evolved). |
|
|
|
|
