Are you feminist or sexist?
Many people wrongly associate feminism as man hating and the belief that women are better than men. Feminism is the fight for equality between the sexes, and if that's a belief you hold, you may find you were actually a feminist all along.
Personally I'm Neither Feminist, Nor Sexist.
BUT
If you sexist me, I feminist you!

mom333 state >>>
If women want complete equality then you should be treated as a man would. That includes hearing the word slut because that is equal to a man with the word dog. You cannot demand to be treated like a lady then get offended when a man sees you as a lady. Men a d women are different that's just the way nature intended. I personally wouldn't want to live in a world where i was expected to spit like a man and open doors for him or use the same toilet cubicle. A man is a man and a woman is a woman . That is just my opinion though.

mom333 stated >>>
feminism means the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of the equality of the sexes. that means complete equality. women get paid less because they/we are more likely to take days of to look after family, also mothers get paid less also because they have to take multiple days of to raise babies. im all for women getting treated with respect because I myself am a woman, but if I were an employer I would pay mothers less than the men because they are going to have to take time of and cost me money.

Geeze...not quite sure how the 'EQUALITY' for pay equated to standing at a urinal and spitting became the translation for what the 5 issues that the Feminist movement was about and has been but that's just really - really way off base!

Equal pay means exactly that; nothing more nothing less! There have been many instances where a highly qualified woman was hired to replace a male counter part and found out that her salary was lowered for no other reason then just her gender! If this happened to the male species of our human race --- well, I dare say that this wouldn't be tolerated and there'd be repercussions.

White collar jobs or blue collar jobs: if any one of any gender meets the qualifications for that position then they need to be paid accordingly - period.

Certainly there are job duties that not all body types are able to do: hence the reason that fire fighters have such rigid strength requirements for their jobs --- but there are women that pass those physical tests and many men that fail them...it's just part of the skill set.

Foul language and the use of ugly verbiage is a social issue and a personal choice; it most assuredly won't enhance getting ahead in any work place - especially with management but in a social setting among friends and what you call one another out of the work place is totally different then what one refers to a co-worker at the job! And yes, we've changed 'Polite Vocabulary' a lot in the past 40+ years; even my generation uses words now that we never would have thought to print growing up let alone mumble/mutter under our breath! LOL Getting our mouth washed out with soap for evening saying - 'CRAP' was lesson enough! LOL

really a woman without kids should get the equal pay if she don't take multiple days of like a mother, but that would be called discrimination. they just call it a pay gap now because every woman is affected.

You are correct about how the movement started. Like I said in my 1st post here that it seems to have gotten twisted and changed. Seems feminists these days want their cake and eat it too...plus take the man's cake. I think you are defending thr original movement (rightfully so) but others are referring to what it has warped into today

JMO

Part of the reason why we have the 'Family Medical Leave Act': fathers wanted to be able to stay home with sick/new babies as much as the mother was expected too! Shared parenting...so the 'sick days' just don't fall against one parents absentee check list and not the others --- doesn't always work out that way but for the most part it has improved shared responsibility 100% since the 80's IMHO

YellowRose stated >>>
You are correct about how the movement started. Like I said in my 1st post here that it seems to have gotten twisted and changed. Seems feminists these days want their cake and eat it too...plus take the man's cake. I think you are defending thr original movement (rightfully so) but others are referring to what it has warped into today JMO

Over on page#5 those 5 listed basic primary issues are still what the Feminist Movement has been & is about; certainly there are the fragmented/splinter groups that have gone 'hard-wired' off to support their own agenda and for some that's all the negative diatribes/rhetoric that they seem to hear {and it gets a lot of media press as well} but the original basis and foundation is still in place and the methods and functions still serve a purpose!
The evolution just seems to keep slipping when the message gets diluted and abused by misinterpretations and angry assumptions instead of factual knowledge and truth.

It definitely isn't a 'One Size Fits All Bandage'...that's for sure! I can remember friends getting pissed at me for allowing male co-workers the opportunity to open a door for me to walk through; --- Jesus, those women were just always looking for a reason to be mad about something!

mom333 stated >>>
really a woman without kids should get the equal pay if she don't take multiple days of like a mother, but that would be called discrimination. they just call it a pay gap.

mom333 stated >>>
its those women who have messed it up really, im thinking some men don't have a clue when it comes to women nowadays. i don't feel sorry for the pigs who think its ok to treat women bad but for those goodies out there it must be daunting now, especially for the ones who believe in the old ways where opening a door was commonplace. i don't care what anyone says when i walk past a building site and get the wolf whistles i start to strut lol. its not a confidence thing cus i know my behind is divine laugh its just nice to know im looking particularly good that day laugh

Equal pay and days absent from a job aren't not the same thing, Mom! Yes, it will have an impact on your job evaluation at review time...but the same could be said for those who smoke and those that don't! Smokers were screaming about wanting/needing more smoke breaks then those that didn't during an 8hr shift --- to bad; that wasn't going to happen! Breaks happened at 10am and again at 3pm and then the laws changed and they couldn't smoke in the building they had to go outside {yes, even in the winter}...OMG, they really howled about that! Nothing to be done, either smoke outside or quit smoking that was the LAW!

But lots of places don't pay for any sick time; if you are gone you just don't get paid - period. No work - No pay that's the way it is for lots of hourly jobs and only the salaried/management are awarded those benefits --- but that too has changed greatly in the past 20+ years. Lots of benefits have disappeared.

You 'rock it little woman'; gotta give them something to remember as you stroll down the street!

panamaJoe stated >>>
Just as a final note, I found an interesting video and a woman has very eloquently put things so much better in perspective than I ever could.

If you have some spare time... please take a look:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eqYEVYZgdo

The title of the video is "When female privilege backfires..." by Karen Straughan and goes much deeper into the discussion than my posts did.

It's a bit complex sometimes, and I had to rewind and listen again to what she said in order to understand exactly what she's trying to say, but it was worth it. Anyway, it's a very educational video and I highly recommend it.

Cheers!

According to Straughan'��s logic, this one vague story should be enough to prove that women are manipulative and powerful. Although I couldn’t find anything online to substantiate this story, I did find some information on the White Feather Movement. Surprisingly, it was not as one-sided as Straughan would like us to think. While some suffragettes like Emmeline Pankhurst were extremists and took part in shaming soldiers who did not enlist, many others did not. Emmeline'��s daughter, Sylvia Pankhurst, made a name for herself as a suffragette who campaigned wholeheartedly against the draft.

One of Straughan'��s most thorough examples is based on a 1910 New York Times article written by an anti-suffragette. It discusses the changing laws regarding property rights, alimony, and divorce. The article is essentially lamenting 'the loss of privileges the men had over the properties of their wives and children.'

Again, SOME of Straughan'��s points are valid. It appears that this particular court case was unfair, and left the husband financially responsible for his children despite the fact that his wife made more money. She cites various cases from the same time where men unfairly lost custody of their children. However, nearly every one of Straughan'��s valid examples is from the Victorian era. Why isn’t she talking about more recent laws?

Is it because the percentage of divorce cases that end up with equal custody granted to both parents has recently doubled?

Or is it because, according to Reuters, more than half of divorce lawyers in the country are seeing an increase in mothers paying child support?

Alton Abramowitz, president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, told Reuters why more women were being given more financial responsibility.

'��The glass ceiling has been pierced and more and more women have taken over the financial responsibilities and have been saddled with them as well,'�� said Abramowitz. '��It is a fact of the way our society has evolved over the last number of years.'

Straughan manipulates feminist history'�� and global history' ��throughout her speech. The glaring irony is that she claims feminism is rooted in lies, hypocrisy, and propaganda. She has a rigid opinion of an ever-changing movement. Honestly, I don'��t think she is a bigot, or a hateful person. She is clearly a woman with a hunger for social justice, which is why I find it strange that she also aligns with the LGBTQ movement. It seems she either has no idea what feminism is, or has a skewed perception of men'��s rights. Because true feminism—like every other movement promoting equality—is not about denying men equal rights.

We have come a long way from the suffragettes. And if Straughan and other MRAs want to define feminism by the actions of women who have been dead for over a century, so be it. Men have committed some of the worst atrocities in history. I don'��t hold it against their gender. And I'��m still a feminist.

Towards the end of her speech, Straughan mentions the '��1 is 2 Many' campaign against sexual assault with disdain.

'The power that women have, that women have always had,'�� Straughan said, '��Is the power to convince Barack Obama, Joe Biden, David Beckham '�� all of these male celebrities, that one woman assaulted is too many.'

Out of context, this statement might sound empowering. However, in the video, it'��s clear from her body language and tone that this is not the case. She looks and sounds outraged at the fact that these men could possibly be supporting such a cause.

Why would anyone'let alone a woman, but anyone'��be upset that men are supporting a campaign against violence? Because society still has a long way to go when it comes to taking male victims seriously? It'��s bizarre that anyone interested in equality would take the stance of, “If I can'��t have it my way, no one can.'�� This does not further male equality, it makes them look stubborn and insane.

My goal while watching and analyzing Straughan'��s speech was to try and understand the MRA movement from a woman’s perspective. Though she was eloquent at times, the message was as scattered and incoherent as Elliot Rodger'��s manifesto. She ended the speech talking about how she'��s called Honey Badger because of that YouTube video about the honey badger that '��doesn'��t give a ****.'�� Like the honey badger, Straughan says, she does not give a **** about her critics.

Yet what is the men'��s rights movement, if throughout an entire 35-minute speech, Karen Straughan spoke only about feminism? She failed to mention any specific principles. She might not give a **** what some feminist site has to say, and that'��s fine.

But her lack of substance leaves me with no better understanding of her '��movement'�� except that it is based solely on a hatred of feminism.

The men'��s rights movement kind of reminds me of when white people cry reversed racism, or express outrage that there is not a '��White History Month.'

Men have been the dominant sex for centuries when it comes to having rights and power over women. The history of human life on this planet has been a men'��s rights movement. What do men need so desperately to defend? What basic human rights are being taken away? The conference has not shed light on any grave injustices for men. Instead, it has been a cesspool for bitter individuals who want to find something to blame for their problems'��why their divorce didn'��t go as planned, or why they didn'��t get that promotion. Feminists are as good of a scapegoat as any.

Men'��s rights activists are concerned because their gender is losing power and control. Feminism began because we did not have any. And today, it is about so much more than a right to vote. It is about being able to walk down the street in peace. It is about not having to put up with sexual advances from our boss just to keep our job. In some countries, it is still legal for men to beat their wives. Yet men’s rights activists are upset about having to pay alimony?

Although Louis CK is not a feminist (although maybe he is, I don'��t know) one of his jokes really captures this sentiment. He's talking about the courage women must have to go out on dates with men.

'��How do women still go out with guys, when you consider that there is no greater threat to women than men? Globally and historically, we'��re the number one cause of injury and mayhem to women.'

He goes on to say about men, '��You know what our number one threat is? Heart disease.'��

There is no point in trying to explain to an MRA that their logic is flawed. They don't give a ****. Luckily, as Straughan pointed out, the rest of the world does.
http://theflounce.com/anti-feminist-karen-straughan-give-****/

devildog123 stated >>>
very good idea.. God forbid one day goes by without you kicking men in the b***s

PanamaJoe stated >>>
It's a bit complex sometimes, and I had to rewind and listen again to what she said in order to understand exactly what she's trying to say, but it was worth it. {b]Anyway, it's a very educational video and I highly recommend it.

Cheers!

Karen's --- QUOTE:
Men have been the dominant sex for centuries when it comes to having rights and power over women. The history of human life on this planet has been a men'��s rights movement.

PanamaJoe stated >>> The above statement is a LIE. But you will never admit that either to yourself or anyone else. You CAN'T. It is the crux of your faith which is probably why Karen's video is such a threat to you. She exposes the fact that woman have actually had a privileged existence, and that just does not mesh with your victimhood.