Yet somehow require legislation...

Yeah, men are better at everything. We rule! :rolleyes: :p

Spanky: Let's start a club right now. The He-man Woman-haters. I'll be president.
Alfalfa: And I'll be second president, and you can be third president.
Buckwheat: Thanks.
Spanky: Alright, get up and do exactly what I do. Put your hand on your heart, and raise your other hand. We, the He-man Woman-haters club...
Alfalfa and Buckwheat: We, the he-man woman-haters club...
Spanky: ...promise not to fall for this Valentine's business...
Alfalfa and Buckwheat: ...promise not to fall for this Valentine's business...
Spanky: ...because girls are the bunk.
Alfalfa and Buckwheat: ...because girls are the bunk.

I do consider myself a feminist. I also like it when a man opens a door or pulls out a chair. I do not see chivalry and feminism as mutually exclusive. The opening of doors and the pulling out of chair is is not an indication that men have traditionally seen women as weak and frail and in need of looking after and protecting. The roots of that tradition are in courtly love, whereby a man would swear himself a servant to the woman, the object of his desire. The term for this type of behaviour was gentilesse.

I dated a woman who loaded luggage at Orlando airport. This was when I was still in pretty good shape. We worked-out together, she benched the same 250 as I.
She, sometimes, let me pay for all the date and always let me open doors for her (not the car door, unless we were on a date), unless she was in a hurry. She was a beautiful lady and not "butch" at all. Just physical. Though it is the norm, women can do whatever a man can do.
However, I dislike the whole man-hating feminism as well just as much as I dislike objectifying women on a personal level.

The problem with feminism.....as with any movement, is that it was and is made up of people. One person's feminism may not match another's. As with any movement, there was a particularly extreme wing, which also happened to be the most vocal and therefore defined the movement for those who observed from outside.

I am glad we had that extreme wing, shouting and marching, even though I disagree with many of their views. It was necessary; the quiet approach which had prevailed for most of history was taking an awfully long time to have any effect. I would not have the freedoms I now have, had they been quiet and conciliatory.

Another thing to bear in mind, when considering the main feminist movement, is the anger and frustration felt by many of the people involved. To be denied equality is an unpleasant thing. To be treated as less able, capable, worthwhile and important than another person merely because of an accident of birth is unpleasant. When people become angry and frustrated and sensitized to the unfairness that governs so much of their lives and range of opportunities; when someone discovers that their natural talents, desires, ambitions and proclivities, are not catered to by their proscribed place in society, and then track back a thousand years and find the roots of that unfairness spread through every part of their society and history, it can result in a rather extreme reaction.

Interestingly, many of the same accusations which were levelled at the feminists of the 70s were also levelled at the suffragettes who fought for the vote in Britain. They were accused of being man haters, lesbians, women who were unnatural in that they wanted to take male roles etc etc.Even now, at a political meeting recently, when a speaker read extracts from a book she'd written about some local suffragettes, there were people arguing that they had gone too far and should not have resorted to the tactics they used.

Are women in Britain paid closer to men than they are in the US?

Depends on the industry or sector. Many sectors have extreme disparity. Even with some industries getting a handle on it, there is a massive disparity in the kinds of jobs women do and men do, and the wages commanded by the jobs women do more of, are lower than those commanded by the jobs men tend to do.

i wonder how much of the suppression of women over the years is down to the catholic church?

Some. But in fairness to the Catholic Church (and believe me that's not something you'll hear from me very often) they are far from unique in their approach to womens' roles.

yeah sorry, i was being typically Western. ;)

500 or a 1000 years ago every thing was male dominated. Please don't try to lay this on the Catholic church. This planet was originally dominated by the physically strong species and the only way to survive was to be faster , stronger and better. Now that those rules no longer apply - the situation must and has changed. There can be no real equality though. We are after all different.

Care to explain that?

Hmm, I think thats a loaded question. I'll try to rephrase this way - men and women are different - physically, biologically, physiologcally - we are opposites of the same species.

Please do not take my comment to mean that women or men are superior to the other. I was being somewhat fecisious. I believe that women and men - red, white, green or blue - should be paid for the function which they perform - period. Gender should have no basis on the amount someone makes.

so you agree that a woman shouldnt be allowed to become a priest? how about a female pope? or even a black female pope? Herr Ratzinger would have a heart attck ... with any luck.

*grins*