Feminists? Any here?

[Crankin]

I am not going to start an argument here. Really.
But, out in the real world, there are 2 very nice, well adjusted young men in their 20's.
They are mine. They were in various kinds of day care starting at age 6 weeks for the youngest (OK, that was part time, with dad doing the rest for the first year) and four months.
If you really want my opinion, most people don't know how to be parents and *that* is the problem.

[Irulan]

ok ok, leaving the day care issue out of it...(I shouldn't have thrown that into the mix, sorry) There's plenty to say about feminism without that.

I do think that modern contemporary feminism ( and much of our culture) teaches "me first" for women, at the sacrifice of families and partnerships. My experience as a tail end boomer, (1960) is that the mind set of feminism is that the value of an individual's WOMAN's needs, even when in a family, is greater than the value of the other members of the families needs. The ostracizing of women who choose be a primary care giver/SAHM is not imaginary; it's very real. Maybe less so than in the 80's when I had mine, but I got a LOT of crap for it.
Maybe I'm stuck on the 60's and 70's version of bra burning feminism and separatism because that's what I experienced. I shed the label for myself early on so maybe I haven't kept up with the new iterations.

I do accept that women's roles were limited by society for a long time, and that a lot of opportunities have been created in contemporary times. But I don't buy the 50/50 thing at all, and I don't buy devaluing of men especially by some women's studies programs (putting flame suit on)

Maybe I sound bitter; I don't know. My values have moved way center from the liberal, feminist, extreme left wing household I was raised in. I've experienced personally families destroyed by women leaving not horrible situations, just because they "needed" to do something new or different that didn't include the children they bore and the family they should have committed to. Never mind the abandoned children left behind. I have experienced first hand the hate and disdain for men that some women have for men in the name of feminism, sisterhood and women's rights and it makes me really sad.

Maybe I'm stuck on the 60's and 70's version of bra burning feminism and separatism because that's what I experienced. I shed the label for myself early on so maybe I haven't kept up with the new iterations.

[malkin]

Bicycling is Revolutionary!

It goes 'round and 'round, doesn't it?

[brewer]

{{{comrade malkin}}}

[shootingstar]

As an aside, I'm interested in knowing brewer's identity since person has only 1 post.

The horrible reality is if a woman does choose to become a full-time housewife, mother at home and she is not in the paid work force for a long time, meaning 5-10 yrs., she might risk relevancy of her work-related skills prior to full-time at home. I'm sure several of us, know personally several mothers who suddenly were divorced and hence, had to find paid work. So keeping one foot in the paid workforce, is like a insurance mechanism if something goes awry with the primary breadwinner. ie. s/he might get laid off, become accidentally disabled, etc.

Some professions, particularily the professions involving legislated certification, testing and licensing requires that the person practices in their profession, at least part-time, to keep their knowledge and skill set up to date. So this internal professional pressure applies for men or women of that profession. Or their trained skill set prior to full-time-at-home parent phase, is tied deeply to technological changes, changes in legislation, diagnostic methods which some jobs are.

Hence, feminism provides the woman if she wishes, to develop more effective, long-term coping mechanisms that benefits her family and herself in the long-term.

Nowadays one would be hard-pressed to believe that any woman at some point in her life, could live her whole lifetime and not thought in some small way the choices that she wanted to make and explaining her reasons to others. The sad thing, do all men go through this? I doubt it. Some thankfully, have approached their options thoughtfully, ie. becoming a father or not becoming a father, impact of their job location on family, etc.

[Jewell]

Comrade Malkin, so glad to have you.

I've heard at length the separation period in feminism. I often think of a new movement as almost like a individual in and of itself, which is prone to have reactions and emotions. I think of the separation period as the reactionary period, the dawning of a new movement, a stage of enlightenment for many women. They reacted as any person would react. I liken it to finding out a loved one really doesn't have your true interests in mind, which I think was a feeling these women were truly feeling in their place in life.

The movement has grown and changed and continues to expand in many different ways.

I think focusing too much on ones frustrations with a movement can really do injustice for a movement that's given us women so much. Its so easy to focus on the negative sides of feminism, but we forget what we have in common, we forget whats is really at stake today.

For Example:

• How many women and girls suffer from anorexia and bulimia because they don't fit into the mainstream media's beauty idea?
• How many welfare mom's get stereotyped over and over again for being bad mothers when the fathers receive little if any repercussions?
• Why do we still disallow gay marriage in most of the country?
• Why is viagra covered under insurance, but birth control is not?
• Why are women continually objectified in all forms of media? We've started to think little of it because now more and more men are being objectified as well, but just because the objectification is becoming more uniform doesn't mean its still not wrong

I am leaving out a lot of racial discrimination, but as a white women I am privileged and do not know the issues many black women must face.

Someone mentioned earlier that man are oppressed as well. I do not disagree one bit. I believe that being in the consumerist society is greatly oppressive to men, no doubt about it. I'm of the belief that capitalism is at the core of the issue, but the oppression of women developed as an expression of the oppression men felt in such a society. The oppression of women is an expression of hurt, of pain that men felt. Women in turn were devalued to be little more than possession. Today of course we've come long way. Women are valued more, but we're still socialized to think its ok to objectify women, to believe women are less than men. Continuing this can be damaging to men, and that's something we often don't address.

[Mr. Bloom]

OK Jewell, I'm curious: What is the male equivalent of "feminism"? That is, what is to men, like feminism is to women? I'll also be curious as to your views on how that concept of the "male equivalency" coexists with what I believe your definition of feminism is...without one being subordinate to the other.

I'm of the belief that capitalism is at the core of the issue,

I couldn't DISagree more. Don't confuse consumerism or social injustice with capitalism. A capitalist saves without flaunting...and social justice allows capitalism to thrive. Your attribution to capitalism is very misguided in my humble opinion.

Keep in mind, your views are not just a function of your observations of society, but also the perspective that you possess in making those observations. There are others who have a different perspective who shouldn't feel minimized because they see it differently than you do.

For example:

...ever realize on Seinfeld how George always went out with gorgeous women

you see, I always saw George as the negative point of that...he expected physical attributes of others that he could never attain or possess himself...and was satified with nothing less. Kinda sad...since Hitler did the same thing in defining an ideal appearance that was the opposite of his own physical characteristics.

[Crankin]

I am sorry you feel that way, Smurf. I am not bashing you, your religion, race, or sexuality. In fact, I don't even know you. So, I am not sure where your comments came from, except that it sounds like some narrow minded people have not been nice to you.
Being White, Christian, and heterosexual are positions of power and majority in this country. Most people do not give a thought about how this gives you privileges. We just don't think about it.

[Jewell]

OK Jewell, I'm curious: What is the male equivalent of "feminism"? That is, what is to men, like feminism is to women? I'll also be curious as to your views on how that concept of the "male equivalency" coexists with what I believe your definition of feminism is...without one being subordinate to the other.

The male equivalent of feminism? This could become a very interesting in-depth discussion if you truly wish to understand how men can support women in the feminist plight. Though, I'm not sure that is what your really asking. Sounds like your fishing for something else. Men can be feminists, I know men who call themselves feminists, but I also know men who rather call themselves pro-feminist. Their reasoning can be quite in-depth, and its not something I think I can full address here.

I couldn't DISagree more. Don't confuse consumerism or social injustice with capitalism. A capitalist saves without flaunting...and social justice allows capitalism to thrive. Your attribution to capitalism is very misguided in my humble opinion.

I suppose I shouldn't have mentioned capitalism. Its so difficult for us rich westerns to understand the negative side of capitalism. Many of us are rewarded by it so much so we can't imagine how its functioning allows social injustice to fester throughout the world. Its a charged topic, I shouldn't have mentioned it. Misguided, no, mindful, yes.

Keep in mind, your views are not just a function of your observations of society, but also the perspective that you possess in making those observations. There are others who have a different perspective who shouldn't feel minimized because they see it differently than you do.

For example:

you see, I always saw George as the negative point of that...he expected physical attributes of others that he could never attain or possess himself...and was satified with nothing less. Kinda sad...since Hitler did the same thing in defining an ideal appearance that was the opposite of his own physical characteristics.

George is an example I gave to describe the horrible beauty standards that are expected of women tv compared to men. Regardless of what kind of character you think George is, look at any show on tv and you will see amazing disparity between beauty standards of men and women.

Its so interesting how the very mention of women's rights brings up so much hostility...

[Tuckervill]

There are ways to remain viable for employment and still not be in the workforce. I have gained many valuable skills as a stay-at-home mom that I might not have been given the opportunity to acquire if I had had a 9-to-5er for the last 15 years.

I just heard the other day that the unpaid work I do as a family manager is worth about $122,000 a year in today's economy.

Last week I went in on business to see an acquaintance who knows me from my volunteer work. I told her I was thinking about going into her field when I am free to do so in a few years. She handed me her card and said, "Come work for me!" She was serious. She knows how hard I work at my volunteer endeavors. She knows how hard it is to do what I do as a volunteer and still take care of my family.

I don't think the work I do at home is undervalued by the whole of society. I think certain segments of our society disdain it (feminists? eh, maybe. The word alone rankles me.) I also know there are certain segments of our society who hold it in high esteem (mostly religious communities). Fortunately, I don't get my self-worth from what some segments of society think of what I do. I get it from doing the right thing for me and my family.

I remember when there were commercials on TV about "displaced homemakers", advertising classes that would teach them marketable skills (typing pool?) so they could work after being dumped by their husbands and being "just" a homemaker for so long. Maybe the word they actually used was "housewives"...I can't recall. Anyway, if there are still women around who would be left in the lurch by a man who leaves them with no income and no way to make one, then that is a unimaginative woman who has not been paying attention the last 30 years. ::shrug:::

Karen

[shootingstar]

There are ways to remain viable for employment and still not be in the workforce. I have gained many valuable skills as a stay-at-home mom that I might not have been given the opportunity to acquire if I had had a 9-to-5er for the last 15 years.

I just heard the other day that the unpaid work I do as a family manager is worth about $122,000 a year in today's economy.

Last week I went in on business to see an acquaintance who knows me from my volunteer work. I told her I was thinking about going into her field when I am free to do so in a few years. She handed me her card and said, "Come work for me!" She was serious. She knows how hard I work at my volunteer endeavors. She knows how hard it is to do what I do as a volunteer and still take care of my family.

I don't think the work I do at home is undervalued by the whole of society. I think certain segments of our society disdain it (feminists? eh, maybe. The word alone rankles me.) I also know there are certain segments of our society who hold it in high esteem (mostly religious communities). Fortunately, I don't get my self-worth from what some segments of society think of what I do. I get it from doing the right thing for me and my family.

Karen

I agree that's all sorts of unpaid work that can be transferrable for other types of jobs. Some jobs just won't allow it if the women stays out of her profession for several years without practicing it. It's not impossible, but she might have to take a sideways career change if she can't convince prospective employers of her choice.

I have several sisters --one is family physician. She will work for the rest of life..because she has a baby of 1 yrs. old. Her hubby is a cook and I believe can only work part-time. So that he looks after baby. Clearly in her profession she has to keep her foot in paid work as a physician. Doctor-sister actually can work part-time..because doctors get paid well and she saved money before she even met her hubby. Will she give up such working privileges? Hell no, besides, she has no choice. A drive 100 kms. 1 way to get to work at her hospital.

Another sister is a llcensed hospital pharmacist with 3 children under 11 yrs. old. She is involved on patient care teams, in clinical drug trials and is a preceptor for pharmacy university students. Her drug therapy knowledge must be kept active and and alive by practicing it. Yes, her children are in daycare..they stick to the same one for past 10 yrs.

And contrast to a 3rd sister, who was a licensed hospital pharmacist who decided to be a stay at home mom full time. (She did have her own yoga centre for 2 yrs. Long story behind this one but she was actually successful..but chose not to continue.) She couldn't do community/retail pharmacist work because of various ethical issues /situations that she saw. So she left the profession, which is not unusual in terms of just leaving something one doesn't believe in/can't change certain institutional /systemic things.

[sfa]

I remember when there were commercials on TV about "displaced homemakers", advertising classes that would teach them marketable skills (typing pool?) so they could work after being dumped by their husbands and being "just" a homemaker for so long. Maybe the word they actually used was "housewives"...I can't recall. Anyway, if there are still women around who would be left in the lurch by a man who leaves them with no income and no way to make one, then that is a unimaginative woman who has not been paying attention the last 30 years. ::shrug:::

Karen

I work at a community college and we have lots of programs for "displaced homemakers" and every year they are full and have waiting lists. They are for programs in health care, business, child care, hospitality, and pretty much any program that offers job training and a career ladder to allow someone to get into the workforce and be able to support her family. The stories from these women are heartwrenching. Most never had any education after high school and little, if any, experience working before getting married and having children. Most are young--women who had children at 17 and 18 and 19 years old and are now 22 or 23 or 25 and divorced and unable to support themselves or their children. Many, many, many of them were in abusive relationships where suggesting that getting an education or a job would have been met with violence. Maybe they didn't pay attention, or were in denial, or were so abused that they couldn't think, or maybe they thought, just as most people thing, that the worst would never happen to them. Unimaginative? Sure. But it's a pretty common affliction (also seen in workers who are shocked when they lose their jobs and haven't updated their resumes in 15 years and in recent college grads who are convinced that they will be the one to beat the odds and find a great job in this economy).

The programs themselves are no different than the programs for the general population, but the "displaced homemaker" programs have more supports--scholarships, child care support, mentoring, interview skills, professional skills, etc.

Sarah

[Irulan]

I don't label myself a feminist because I think what it has become is a joke and insult to amazing women who actually broke ground for us. It seems now that calling yourself a feminist is an excuse to be a flippant b***h while expecting others to tolerate it. There seems to be an attitude that if one man pays you less, all men are to blame. A lot of two wrongs still not adding up to a right.

Thanks Smurf for hitting the nail on the head for me.

• How many women and girls suffer from anorexia and bulimia because they don't fit into the mainstream media's beauty idea?

Plenty of men suffer from it too, they just don't get the press that women do. What about the pressure to have great abs? Men who get 'roided out for pressure to get all muscular? Men have as much pressure these days as women do.

[*]How many welfare mom's get stereotyped over and over again for being bad mothers when the fathers receive little if any repercussions?[/LIST]

You haven't hear Bill Cosby rant about absent fathers lately?

[*]Why do we still disallow gay marriage in most of the country?[/LIST]

What does gay marriage have to do with feminism?

[*]Why is viagra covered under insurance, but birth control is not?[/LIST]

This is a broad brush statement that may or may not be true, depending on your coverage.

[*]Why are women continually objectified in all forms of media? We've started to think little of it because now more and more men are being objectified as well, but just because the objectification is becoming more uniform doesn't mean its still not wrong[/LIST]

to paraphrase...

Why are PEOPLE continually objectified in all forms of media?

[Tuckervill]

I work at a community college and we have lots of programs for "displaced homemakers" and every year they are full and have waiting lists. They are for programs in health care, business, child care, hospitality, and pretty much any program that offers job training and a career ladder to allow someone to get into the workforce and be able to support her family. The stories from these women are heartwrenching. Most never had any education after high school and little, if any, experience working before getting married and having children. Most are young--women who had children at 17 and 18 and 19 years old and are now 22 or 23 or 25 and divorced and unable to support themselves or their children. Many, many, many of them were in abusive relationships where suggesting that getting an education or a job would have been met with violence. Maybe they didn't pay attention, or were in denial, or were so abused that they couldn't think, or maybe they thought, just as most people thing, that the worst would never happen to them. Unimaginative? Sure. But it's a pretty common affliction (also seen in workers who are shocked when they lose their jobs and haven't updated their resumes in 15 years and in recent college grads who are convinced that they will be the one to beat the odds and find a great job in this economy).

The programs themselves are no different than the programs for the general population, but the "displaced homemaker" programs have more supports--scholarships, child care support, mentoring, interview skills, professional skills, etc.

Sarah

Those commercials were targeted towards, and portrayed, older women with older children.

Does your program actually use that term, "displaced homemaker"? I would find that creepy. Our local CC has programs for people who need those things, but they're not targeted at any particular segment or situation. They're available for whomever needs them.

Karen

[ilima]

So keeping one foot in the paid workforce, is like a insurance mechanism if something goes awry with the primary breadwinner. ie. s/he might get laid off, become accidentally disabled, etc.

Insurance policy. That, I think, is why I would never pull myself out of the workforce entirely for very long. Husbands die and that million dollar policy doesn't go far when you have a mortgage to pay off and young ones to put through college.

If other people (whether it's mom or dad) want to do it, that's fine. It's something I probably wouldn't do, though.

Even more frightening to me than becoming a SAHM (i.e., jumping in without a life jacket/insurance policy) would be to become (or be married to) a workaholic that only has fleeting interactions with the kids & spouse.