New Edom wrote:Mattopilos wrote:
Glad this is agreed upon.
Describes liberal feminism in a nutshell. That is kinda the goal of liberal feminism - to aim for their goals purely through reform and word of law.
Depends on the interpretation on the 'Include men" idea: are we talking "Men should fight for feminism too!" (Which I agree with but has kinda been a message the whole time", or are we talking of some kind of pitying of men but including them in reforms for equality that seems like an afterthought? Because that annoys me as well. Very few things that could work with, like working on rape and domestic violence victims, given how big a problem that is for all genders.
Well of course - you need more than just women aiming for equality, that is a given. To ignore that men had some part in it would be pretty stupid. I mean, obviously when they are arguing that it was the system affected by men that required the fighting for equal rights in the first place, they aren't wrong, per say, but to argue that men didn't have a role in actually aiming for equality for women is another, far less less logical, claim to make.
Huffington Post Article This article, and the essay it referred to, both annoyed me.
Feminism for everybody: in this article, typically no real gratitude and also a patronizing demand that men be good to women and nothing about how women should be good to men.
The impression I get is that this is a kind of propaganda that is rewriting history and actually in my opinion unnecessarily creating conflict.
> Obama
> Feminist
Wut
And the second article has the tone of men helping reach equality that I hate.