Four Ways Feminism Has Hurt Women

[debrand]

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=362649

This is from an article that Ladies Against Feminism linked to on World Net Daily

Yes, women have more opportunities to achieve career success; they are now members of most Jewish and Christian clergy; women's college sports teams are given huge amounts of money; and there are far more women in political positions of power. But the prices paid for these changes – four in particular – have been great, and they outweigh the gains for women, let alone for men and for society.

Okay, I'm waiting. What is wrong with women having the same chances as men?

The first was the feminist message to young women to have sex just like men do. There's no reason for young women to lead a different sexual life than men, they were told. Just as men can have sex with any woman solely for the sake of physical pleasure, women ought to be able to enjoy sex with any man just for the fun of it. The notion that the nature of a woman is to hope for at least the possibility of a long-term commitment from a man she sleeps with has been dismissed as sexist nonsense.

Feminism tells women that they can decide if they will or won't have sex withotu feeling shame for their choices. A woman can choose to remain a virgin until marriage, not have sex ever or sleep with every man she meets. The choices and results of her choice are her responsibility. No one is telling women that they can't be in a long term relationship. Besides, I'd like to know who heterosexual men of long ago were having sex with if not women? It isn't a new phenomena that people have sex outside of marriage. Now we don't shame those women who take power over their own sexuality.

I'm just going to list the other two reasons so that they can be discussed.

The second awful legacy of feminism has been the belief among women that they can and should postpone marriage until they develop their careers – and that only then should they seriously consider looking for a husband.

The third sad feminist legacy: So many women – and men – have bought into the notion that women should work outside the home that for the first time in American history, and perhaps world history, vast numbers of children are not primarily raised by their mothers or even by an extended family member. Instead they are raised for a significant part of their childhood by nannies and by workers at day care centers.

And the fourth awful legacy of feminism has been the de-masculinization of men. For all of higher civilization's recorded history, becoming a man was defined overwhelmingly as taking responsibility for a family. That notion – indeed the notion of masculinity itself – is regarded by feminism as the worst of sins: patriarchy.

[Effie]

Another Way Feminism Has Hurt Women:

Embittered women have found something else to complain about. :roll: The ebil feminism!!!!

[debrand]

Another Way Feminism Has Hurt Women:

Embittered women have found something else to complain about. :roll: The ebil feminism!!!!

Well, this was by a guy. LOL So, the women at LAF and some guys can bitch together about evil feminist. They make it sound as if someone is forcing them to be feminists or work outside the home.

[keen23]

The LAF hold such an elitist and uninformed world view that women never worked outside of the home until the current time. What about the Mill Girls of the Industrial Revolution? What about the countless maids, nannys, nursemaids, and other female house servants that have been employed over the ages? Hell, what about the thousands of female slaves that were ripped form their homeland and forced to work until they died?

Women have been working outside the home since time began. It's not a new concept.

They seriously need to get an education.

[keeperrox]

I looks like Dennis Prager needs to brush up on his history, both American and World. This time, he should read about groups other than the wealthy, ruling class.

[pixydust]

Why don't they understand? Feminism is about choice. Be a SAHM or a WOHM, marry or don't, be a virgin or sleep with 1,000 men (or women...whatever floats your boat) or anything in between. It's all about what works for you. HOW do these people not understand this?

[deelaem]

Sooo...feminism hurts women because it hurts men? I think that's what the point was, illustrated well when he got to this point:

And the fourth awful legacy of feminism has been the de-masculinization of men. For all of higher civilization's recorded history, becoming a man was defined overwhelmingly as taking responsibility for a family. That notion – indeed the notion of masculinity itself – is regarded by feminism as the worst of sins: patriarchy.

Poor wittle guy feels de-masculinized! That is so totally my problem, I must rush to fix this because I'm a woman! I wouldn't want this poor fella to have one minute of doubt about his manliness! But not to worry, he'll feel like a real man as soon as he has a woman of his own to totally oppress in the name of Jeebus!

Barf.

[emmiedahl]

Someone pointed out in another thread about this article that of the four reasons given, only one actually might hurt women. The rest hurt men. It should be called, "Why Do I Have to Give Up My Privilege? WAAAAAH"

[liltwinstar]

1. So, they're pissy that women are "having sex like men." I'm assuming that worldnetdaily is a conservative publication since LAF linked to it, so why aren't they up in arms over the way men have historically had sex? It takes two to tango, after all!! Further, the purity stuff in the Bible applies to both men and women. So if they want to villify women for behavior practiced by men, they need to villify the men too, and men need to start practicing the "purity" standards they impose on women.

(I actually think that sexual freedom for both/all genders is better, but if a man is going to be mad at women for behaving like him, maybe he should look in the mirror and take the log out of his own eye, just sayin')

2. What's so wrong with waiting to get married (for either gender, really)? Does it deprive men of a pool of eligible women? Only if those men only want young, naive wives, I suppose.

Also, at some points in history, it has been the MEN who postponed marriage, due to economic considerations. I heard a really interesting story on NPR that talked about marriage and family during the starving times in Ireland - often men had to wait until they were in their 40s and 50s before starting families, because that's when they could take on the responsibilty of a wife and children.

Bottom line, economics has always influenced when people marry. Moving on...

3. We all know that women have always worked - sometimes in the home for pay (doing laundry and ironing and mending and such) sometimes outside the home for pay (factories, waiting on wealthy families, teaching, nannying, etc). So, he has no historical basis for his argument here.

Further, children have always been raised by a variety of people -their parents, yes, but also their grandparents, aunties, nuns/priests, etc etc.

4. What does the "de-masculinazion of men" even mean? When my husband and I formed our family (which is currently just the two of us, but still), we took joint responsibility for that family. I work for the good of our family; he works for the good of our family. Would he feel like more of a man if I quit the job that brings in 50% of our income? No! He would be a total stress case.

Doesn't "becoming a man was defined overwhelmingly as taking responsibility for a family" basically just reduce a man to the value of the paycheck that he brings home? How dehumanizing is that????

Anyway, I would argue that feminism helps men. Now, men are not reduced to the value of their paychecks, and it's becomming more common to see dads wearing babies, changing diapers, doing the grocery shopping and in general being way more involved with their kids and spouses than Don Draper was able to be. And how is that a bad thing????

Plus, the idea that prior to 1960 (or however they mark the beginning of the Feminist Movement) all children were raised by their two biological parents in happy homes is a myth. Men have often had to travel long distances to find work. They died in wars. Women often died in childbirth. Orphans were given to monasteries to be raised by the Church. And on and on.

So, basically, Dennis Prager is full of crap.

[genericJname]

Wow, I guess I need to repent for being an evil de-masculating sole income provider for our family. I'm sure my husband is devastated that I am supporting him going back to school after he did the same for me. My poor son spends 6 whole hours a week miserable in a daycare with much cooler toys than we have.

[O Latin]

I think the whole "women wait until they establish careers to get married" think is just a bunch of hype. I know that's the general trend in the U.S. but I know TONS of people who are getting married while they're still in college. Most of them do wait until they're a little more "established" to have kids, but I think most people get married when they've found the right person and it's the right time for them. I've never known an actual person who says, "I really wanted to get married three years ago, but I didn't because I have to do XYZ before I get married."

[browngrl]

These are negatives? Seriously?

They all sound like positives to me. Even #4 - because who wants a man who is not comfortable and confident enough in his own self to be comfortable with a strong woman?

[CynicMom]

Here's an actual negative: when women have more choices you actually have to THINK about the choices and decide which one is right for you. Isn't there a book or something about how increasing choice can actually decrease your happiness because you then have buyers remorse? Something.

This negative does not mean the gain of feminism haven't been 100% worth it, just throwing that out there as an example of a legit negative.

[JenniferJuniper]

This should be entitled Four Ways Feminism Has Personally Pissed Me Off As A Man, because he hasn't listed anything whatsoever that has hurt women.

His lot would take away a woman's right to vote if they could.

[longskirtlotsakids]

This should be entitled Four Ways Feminism Has Personally Pissed Me Off As A Man, because he hasn't listed anything whatsoever that has hurt women.

YES! This. Exactly.

WHat he appears to have a beef with, in a nutshell, are skills that women need to be independent. Self-support? Education? All necessary if you are going to determine the path of your own life.

[Austin]

1. So, they're pissy that women are "having sex like men." I'm assuming that worldnetdaily is a conservative publication since LAF linked to it, so why aren't they up in arms over the way men have historically had sex?

WorldNet Daily is also known as Wing Nut Daily :D

[thoughtful]

These are negatives? Seriously?

They all sound like positives to me.

I keep wanting to do an Inigo Montoya:

"Sad? Awful? You keep using those words. I don't think they mean what you think they mean."

[Rosa]

Here's an actual negative: when women have more choices you actually have to THINK about the choices and decide which one is right for you. Isn't there a book or something about how increasing choice can actually decrease your happiness because you then have buyers remorse? Something.

This negative does not mean the gain of feminism haven't been 100% worth it, just throwing that out there as an example of a legit negative.

I think this one goes so far to explain half the women bloggers we read. It's totally legit.

[tehgoobster]

I think the whole "women wait until they establish careers to get married" think is just a bunch of hype. I know that's the general trend in the U.S. but I know TONS of people who are getting married while they're still in college. Most of them do wait until they're a little more "established" to have kids, but I think most people get married when they've found the right person and it's the right time for them. I've never known an actual person who says, "I really wanted to get married three years ago, but I didn't because I have to do XYZ before I get married."

Not only that, but people who get married later in life (especially if they also have college degrees) are less likely to get divorced. I've read that in several different studies. Of course, that's not to say that people who get married early or people without college degrees will get divorced, though.

[finleeport]

Well this is something I never heard of, Feminism hurt women! sounds very ironic. After all it was Feminism that made women even write on computers and have their own blogs. Don't ask me how I'm just certain and because I did read that during the early 19th century, women weren't allowed to ride on bicycles.

Anyway, I want to leave a notice; I'll be gone for the rest of the week, I'll be in Arizona taking a break. See you next week. I love you Guys, I love Free Jinger.

[Aurora]

Well this is something I never heard of, Feminism hurt women! sounds very ironic. After all it was Feminism that made women even write on computers and have their own blogs. Don't ask me how I'm just certain and because I did read that during the early 19th century, women weren't allowed to ride on bicycles.

Anyway, I want to leave a notice; I'll be gone for the rest of the week, I'll be in Arizona taking a break. See you next week. I love you Guys, I love Free Jinger.

Have a nice trip! We'll miss you! :)

[Patsy]

After all it was Feminism that made women even write on computers and have their own blogs.

I don't want to be 'that person', but I think women would be allowed to share opinions in some form of writing whether or not it was for the movements we've had. (Which obviously pre-dated computers ;)). I'd agree that feministic thought pushes for that stuff to be permitted in society, and a super-oppressive society wouldn't allow it, but the society(ies) we're talking about, and the feminist movements we're talking about, didn't not allow women to write little columns and novelettes and then the laws were changed because of feminist campaigns.

Again, though, would agree that it's feminist-type thought that says women should be in the public square, and therefore more feminism would lead to more women's voices (including in writing). It mightn't have been against the law for women to write in 1940s America, but a lot of 1700s/1800s women writers used pseudonyms because it just wasn't a womanly vocation.

[Soldier of the One]

*Sigh* Fine, I'll rise to the bait:

Yes, women have more opportunities to achieve career success; they are now members of most Jewish and Christian clergy; women's college sports teams are given huge amounts of money; and there are far more women in political positions of power. But the prices paid for these changes – four in particular – have been great, and they outweigh the gains for women, let alone for men and for society.

Well, empowering 50% of the population to take their rightful share on the stage of human history is a pretty big thing. And that's how this discussion should be framed. It's about percentages, people. 50% of human beings. Not women. Not females. Just human beings.

The first was the feminist message to young women to have sex just like men do. There's no reason for young women to lead a different sexual life than men, they were told. Just as men can have sex with any woman solely for the sake of physical pleasure, women ought to be able to enjoy sex with any man just for the fun of it. The notion that the nature of a woman is to hope for at least the possibility of a long-term commitment from a man she sleeps with has been dismissed as sexist nonsense.

Really? Because my feminist mother encouraged me to be educated, save and respectful about my choices. If anything, the 'laddish'/'gangsta' culture (choose your culturally-relevant descriptor) encourages young women to be (unsafely) promiscuous. It is feminism that teaches girls the existence of the word 'no' as a teenager. It is feminism that gives girls that all-important self-worth and self-respect as a human and sexual being. It is feminism that informed girls about safe sex. And feminism that gives girls the confidence to enter into romantic relationships as a consenting and equal adults. It is feminism that steeled girls' hearts to resist the grave social and sexual pressures young girls and young women (and older women!) are subjected to.

The second awful legacy of feminism has been the belief among women that they can and should postpone marriage until they develop their careers – and that only then should they seriously consider looking for a husband.

Rubbish. Feminism encourages women to engage in emotionally authentic and egalitarian relationships: the best basis, IMHO, for marriage or any long-term relationship. I, for one, am happily married and a devoted wife - and pursuing my career. I did not put marriage off for the sake of my career.

The third sad feminist legacy: So many women – and men – have bought into the notion that women should work outside the home that for the first time in American history, and perhaps world history, vast numbers of children are not primarily raised by their mothers or even by an extended family member. Instead they are raised for a significant part of their childhood by nannies and by workers at day care centers.

Nonsense yet again - although other posters have said it better than I have. This petite bourgeois fantasy that 'women didn't work outside of the home' is rubbish. In fact, socially progressive movements - be they feminism or the labor movement - have led to men AND women working *less* out of the home through introduction of the 40 hour workweek and such. That those things are being undercut by rampant capitalism, is another discussion. Women have always worked outside of the home. And even if they worked inside of the home, they may have worked much longer and heavier hours than modern homekeepers do - thanks to technology and (increased) shared household duties between partners.

And the fourth awful legacy of feminism has been the de-masculinization of men. For all of higher civilization's recorded history, becoming a man was defined overwhelmingly as taking responsibility for a family. That notion – indeed the notion of masculinity itself – is regarded by feminism as the worst of sins: patriarchy.

[Rosa]

Patsy, we think of feminism as starting in the US in the 1840s, but there were women's rights currents inside the general Enlightenment - Wollstonecraft was in the 1790s, and there were women's education, political & scientific clubs in France, Germany & Britain in the 1770s-1800. Before the suffrage movement, there was a generation or two of agitation for women's education, publishing, and professional work.

It's hard to say how our society would have evolved without feminism, because there have always been feminist currents inside other movements.

[docmom]

The second awful legacy of feminism has been the belief among women that they can and should postpone marriage until they develop their careers – and that only then should they seriously consider looking for a husband.

I just don't understand why this is a bad thing- even if it were true (I've yet to see the feminist manifesto that says you have to postpone marriage). I married at 32 which I guess is late according to this guy's standards (but still possibly earlier than Sarah Maxwell- snark), and had my children in my late 30's and early 40's. By that time I was financially secure, was sure of myself and my choices and had much more patience and time for my family than I would have had in my late teens/early 20's. All of these are good things for my family and for me!