oh! youre a feminist? how cute!

[bluecuracao]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

So ladies, get involved in the process of running this country....you are the majority, remember. Grind down, or replace, the politicians until they give you the schools, parks, social programs, or whatever you want. Just never make the mistake, that the boys and their tanks and planes are just big over priced play toys. Defending what you've got, is very serious business and paramount to the utopia you want.

Get real, you're never gonna have it all. But rather than grouse about it, why not see how much you can get by getting involved. You may be surprised.

Hmm, a little condescending and assumptive...but I still love you.

Do not fear, Bruce. Many women of influence are on the same page with you on the subject of a balanced society--plus we also have plenty of ladies whose agendas fall on either side of the balance. Many women want the toys, too. And it's not just women who strive for utopia.

That's what feminism is about--that women are regular human beings, regardless of intelligence or position.

That has always bothered me... women gripe, but don't vote & don't run.
No room to gripe.

[bluecuracao]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

That has always bothered me... women gripe, but don't vote & don't run.
No room to gripe.

Women do vote--campaigns recognize this, and focus many campaign materials specifically on 'women's issues' (whether conservative or liberal). And they run, and win--for example, the number of women in Congress keeps going up with each term.

And c'mon, everybody gripes.

[DanaC]

In the UK, some parties operate all women shortlists, for the simple reason that the local party branches statistically are more likely to choose a male candidate, even where strong female candidates are trying to get selected. The party branches tend to operate (often) along 'traditional' lines, they follow procedures and do things in ways, that they have done for decades, sometimes over a century. The result is that such party branches are ..... less than female friendly. The male members tend to dominate the local party because the female members are usually less interested in shouting and outright hostility in political discussions. Loooooot of dick waving gets done in party political meetings. That's not to say the gals don't engage in the fight too, but the men seem to be better at that side of the game (in my experience). The result is that women often go along to political meetings and get put off before they have a chance to get into it and start joining in. Also in my experience, the female members, whilst enjoying the political discussions, are a little more results oriented: having had the discussion they really get frustrated when it doesn't then go anywhere. Men get frustrated too, but I think the whole not being able to really influence anything at a national party level, puts women off faster than men.

There are other factors which affect women's involvement in politics and parties, those are just a sample. The net result is that political parties have membership which more male than female. For a woman to stand, she first needs to get selected, unless she goes independant and that is a serious disadvantage in most areas of the country. Getting a woman selected in a predominantly male party is so difficult, that even with the current shortlisting practices, at our current rate it would take another 200 years for women to catch men up in parliament, and another 400 years for women to catch up in the conservative benches.

[Shawnee123]

Um, I haven't missed a vote in 10 years...even the little itty bitty local ones. As far as running for office anyone who knows me will tell you I'm not a suitable candidate. I can barely "sell myself" in a job interview. It takes an aptitude that I don't possess. I can support the candidates, that is true, and I do (though I admit I could do more.)

[Phil]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

What is in us that makes us want to conquer, own, and control? As we evolve, will we ever lose the primal urges of our ancestors?

The Swiss seem to have managed it.

the Swiss banks do own everything.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by bluecuracao

Hmm, a little condescending and assumptive...but I still love you.

Do not fear, Bruce. Many women of influence are on the same page with you on the subject of a balanced society--plus we also have plenty of ladies whose agendas fall on either side of the balance. Many women want the toys, too. And it's not just women who strive for utopia.

That's what feminism is about--that women are regular human beings, regardless of intelligence or position.

Condescending, not at all, just showing how history dictates that strength is necessary.
Assumptive? Maybe... there's no sure way for me to know what someone else is thinking. I can only go by what they communicate.

When men get together for a beer, I never hear one say, wishfully, why do we have to fight, why can't we all get along?
But, I do hear women taking pot shots about how if they were in power instead of men, there wouldn't be any wars and all that defense money could be spent on social improvements.
Now these are both gross generalizations, but both statements are the distilled impression I have, gleaned from 60 years of observation.

Feminism = equality, doesn't it?
Flirting and sexual tension aside, I've been for that since it appeared in the sixties. OK, I was aware of the sweet old ladies going to jail so you could vote. And growing up in the 40s and 50s, I saw a lot of cruel patriarchs. But in the 1964 my wife worked for an Insurance Company in Boston that required women to wear nylons and not smoke in, or near, the building.... when men smoked at their desks. That ain't right. So when the movement came to the forefront, it was awfully hard for a reasonable and rational human being to argue with the premise. It's right, it's fair, it's just.

That said, in practice it's not so easy. Equal pay, equal opportunity, equal consideration are pretty straight forward. But, I keep running into women that have a different take on the details. Some want equal treatment but want to keep certain privileges, whereas some will punch you for attempting to open a door for them.

If a woman says she is in favor of X and I say I disagree, I favor Y. Then she says why is it you men never understand, never get it? Well, wtf. Why did I bother considering X? Why am I genetically defective because I don't agree?
You see, I'm having trouble determining where feminism draws the line on what the constitutes the difference between opinion and sexist opinion.
If I don't say I disagree because your a woman, why should you make that assumption?

Back to the subject. Women are the majority, if the country is moving in the wrong direction, it's your fault. Oww, unfair? Because women are not all the same and fall on both sides of any debate? Well, the same goes for men, so I don't want to hear, you men, blah, blah, blah.

[Sundae]

I made a complaint to Channel 4 about a month ago. We have 5 "terrestrial" channels in the UK - channels everyone receives on their TV automatically rather than requiring cable or satellite capability. Channel 4 is probably the most intelligent and liberal of the independent (non-BBC) channels and I watch Channel 4 News every night for what I believe to be the least biased TV news.

In a report about Israeli politics, Vice President Tzipi Livni's description included the fact that she was a wife and mother of two. None of the male politicians in the report had their marital status or fatherhood mentioned. It really irritated me, hence the complaint - things don't change unless people raise their voices.

I was reminded of it today while reading a Jeffrey Deaver book. As part of a character's backstory it mentioned that she had decided to go back to college in order to get an additional qualification. It stated that she found it hard, juggling her studies with being a wife and a mother... I know it's fiction (and not even very good fiction) but it made me wonder how many authors would state that a man going back to college found it hard to juggle his studies with being a husband and father...?

And finally - a friend of mine with a 1 year old daughter is looking at going back to work. The first interview she went to, approx 75% of the interview revolved around her status as a mother and the childcare arrangements she had made/ was intending to make. While I accept her absence from the workplace signalled a traditional family set-up, we both agreed that her husband would not have been asked the same questions, even if he had taken the same time off. In fact, although she is Muslim, she did her MA in Houston, where her parents now live and has a higher earning potential than her husband. They are currently considering the idea that her husband will work part time in order to handle childcare.

This is why I still consider myself a feminist - I see there is something wrong and I will protest at what I see is an appropriate level.
Not everyone who is interested in equality wants to go into politics.

[Phil]

good for you SG. and i'll still get the door for you.
people dont complain enough... about anything.

Originally Posted by bluecuracao

Women do vote--campaigns recognize this, and focus many campaign materials specifically on 'women's issues' (whether conservative or liberal). And they run, and win--for example, the number of women in Congress keeps going up with each term.

And c'mon, everybody gripes.

Women vote in far fewer numbers than males. They are the majority, if they voted they would run this nation... but they don't want to.
Fine, gripe, but if you don't vote you've got no reason to.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by SundaeGirl

And finally - a friend of mine with a 1 year old daughter is looking at going back to work. The first interview she went to, approx 75% of the interview revolved around her status as a mother and the childcare arrangements she had made/ was intending to make.

But what kind of maternity leave are employers in the UK expected to pay? I know in some places in Europe it's as much as three years! IMHO, they have a legitimate right to try and balance the likelihood of her having more children. If women in any given country fight to legislate more than 2-3 months of paid maternity leave (which husbands cannot receive in their place,) they have to realistically expect that this will influence their ability to be hired.

[kerosene]

SG, what is your family court system over there? If it is anything like ours, it is horribly skewed in favor of mothers, criminalizing fathers from the outset. There are a few exceptions to this, but they are rare. I've seen it damage more than one father-child relationship. I agree with you. It appears that many parts of society have ignored that our lifestyles have moved beyond the 1950's.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

That said, in practice it's not so easy. Equal pay, equal opportunity, equal consideration are pretty straight forward. But, I keep running into women that have a different take on the details. Some want equal treatment but want to keep certain privileges, whereas some will punch you for attempting to open a door for them.

If a woman says she is in favor of X and I say I disagree, I favor Y. Then she says why is it you men never understand, never get it? Well, wtf. Why did I bother considering X? Why am I genetically defective because I don't agree?
You see, I'm having trouble determining where feminism draws the line on what the constitutes the difference between opinion and sexist opinion.
If I don't say I disagree because your a woman, why should you make that assumption?

I agree the lines are blurred and everything is taken personally now days. I still think there is work to be done on salary parity. Other than that I stopped holding the door for any woman other than my wife, elderly people, or people who looked like they needed help. You want things to be equal, let them be equal, both ways. I have never had a woman hold a door for me other than my mother when I was like 6 years old. No special treatment for people because they are female, minority, gay, or any other reason.

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

But what kind of maternity leave are employers in the UK expected to pay? I know in some places in Europe it's as much as three years! IMHO, they have a legitimate right to try and balance the likelihood of her having more children. If women in any given country fight to legislate more than 2-3 months of paid maternity leave (which husbands cannot receive in their place,) they have to realistically expect that this will influence their ability to be hired.

Originally Posted by case

SG, what is your family court system over there? If it is anything like ours, it is horribly skewed in favor of mothers, criminalizing fathers from the outset. There are a few exceptions to this, but they are rare. I've seen it damage more than one father-child relationship. I agree with you. It appears that many parts of society have ignored that our lifestyles have moved beyond the 1950's.

Both very good points, and things I hadn't considered.

In the UK a woman gets up to 39 weeks maternity pay, whereas a father only gets two weeks and has to meet more conditions in order to receive paid leave (up to five weeks unpaid from what I can tell - it's complicated). But that aside, it still seems a shame to me that hardworking, qualified, responsible women with good references are judged by their commitments to their family whereas men aren't. It seems only a woman has to prove she won't take time off when her kids all get chicken pox at the same time, no-one would even ask the father.

And yes, the family court system is horribly skewed in favour of mothers over here. It's quite heartbreaking that money comes out of my pay packet every month to support children whose fathers came and went, and yet some men who want to be responsible fathers involved in their children's lives are made to jump through hoops of flame in order to do so. A protest group called Fathers for Justice over here have raised the profile of fathers who want access rights to their children - it's a no brainer really. Do we want fathers to support their kids? Yes. Do we want children growing up with parental influence from both parents? Yes. Shall we make things are little less gender biased in the courts... erm, we'll get back to you.

I'm against sexism in general. I accept there will always be cases of separate but equal because men and women are not the same, but I reserve the right to speak out when I think it's unfair.

Oh and I open the door for anyone coming through behind me and step back to allow anyone coming through who is closer to the door than I am. Regardless of gender.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by SundaeGirl

In the UK a woman gets up to 39 weeks maternity pay, whereas a father only gets two weeks and has to meet more conditions in order to receive paid leave (up to five weeks unpaid from what I can tell - it's complicated).

By comparison, it's 6 weeks paid leave here in the US, 8 weeks if it's a C-section. Some companies offer paternity leave, some don't. Usually it's 1-2 weeks. On the other hand, anyone can have up to a year of unpaid leave through the Family Medical Leave Act--and that counts for any medical or care issue with you or a family member, not just a newborn baby.