With rhetoric like this, they wonder, why, oh why, do people still hate feminism.
And the future looks bright.
Women outnumber men in most university faculties and, reports BusinessWeek, are better suited to the knowledge economy, "which rewards supposedly female traits such as sensitivity, intuition, and a willingness to collaborate. "
This while traditionally male jobs, in construction and manufacturing, are disappearing.
Could this explain the backlash women felt this year when, for example, media commentators resorted to misogyny when discussing Clinton and Palin? Are they and their legions of keep-the-little-woman-down fans actually afraid of girls gone wild with power?
Let's examine closely this statement.
Men are losing jobs.
So that compels commentators to make misogynistic comments about Clinton and Palin.
Huh?
What the hell is the connection?
Do they seriously believe that the commentators in the MSM have the loss of blue-collar jobs in the back of their minds, as they sit comfortably in their news studios in liberal New York and Toronto as they pontificate about these women in politics?
As if!
Are they and their legions of keep-the-little-woman-down fans actually afraid of girls gone wild with power?
That's another aspect of feminism that is really rather irksome. False motives are attributed to the people who say things feminist disagree with.
If you say something misogynistic about Clinton or Palin, it absolutely must be because you do not want women in charge.
It can't be a simple case of: you don't like Clinton or Palin. Or that you're just repeating what others have said.
It has to be part of a larger conspiracy to keep women down.
It has nothing to do with anti-Clinton people or anti-Palin people saying whatever it takes to take down their opponents.
Boohoo, women are weaklings who can't solve their own problems or fight back. They need feminism to fight for them.
But, for the rest of the year, the pro-forced-pregnancy faction, which prefers to be called pro-life although it cares not about the life of the female baby incubator, fought against choice.
Ha, forced pregnancy. Like there are a bunch of people forcing pregnancy onto women.
Women are the victims, by God! That they know that sex causes pregnancy is irrelevant. Neither should they accept the reality of their biology. They are not responsible for their plight! If they're pregnant, it's because someone forced them to be. They didn't choose that! They just chose the action that leads to pregnancy, that's all! Should they be responsible for the foreseeable consequences of their actions? Heavens, no!
They should have a special status to ignore biological realities in the name of their empowerment. And if you disagree, you're a misogynist! You can never disagree with a feminist and not be a closet woman-hater.
Because feminism has the monopoly of the truth about women.
This means emergency contraception could be denied to rape and incest victims if a druggist is pro-forced-pregnancy.
Is anyone else reminded of the feminist discourse of the 1970's, along the lines of men are chauvinist pigs/men are oppressors?
Who is for women being forced to be pregnant?
And again, women are the victims. And anyone else's concerns, including those of the religions, and the unborn child-- well, they don't matter. Only feminist concerns matter, and if you don't like it, well tough luck!
Anything to keep women hostages to biology, which is where God reportedly decreed they should be.
Yeah, accepting reality is being "hostage" to it. Next thing you know, she'll be claiming that we're "hostage" to the weather because we can't stop snowstorms. Boohoo!
This would not be so annoying if it weren't for the mentally colonized women
Ah yes, if anyone disagrees with feminism, they must be "colonized". They can't possibly be thinking for themselves. They are so intellectually enfeebled because they have not been reached by feminism yet.
who have benefited from feminism while rejecting the label.
And you know, I resent people who have benefitted from Christianity and reject its label. Christianity was the first to posit the equal nature of men and women. If men and women are considered equal today, it's due in large part to Christian ethics. All feminists then should adopt Christianity.
That's the feminist logic for you.
) They say unbelievably stupid things such as – and I quote – "I believe in equality for everyone, not just women. Also, I believe in equal rights, not one group getting more than others."
She quotes, but doesn't attribute the quote. Nice. It's from Sara Landriault from Choice for Childcare, whose blog placed second in the best feminist blog category of the Canadian Blog Awards.
And yet, in rejecting that quote, she rejects what the vast majority of people in this country believe. The content may differ, but the sentiment is about right-- people do not believe in a special status for women (and especially feminists)-- neither as victims nor as dictators of public behaviour.
Statements like that betray not only ignorance, but also the women who fought for our hard-won rights to speak out and make ignorant statements.
As if feminists gave us free speech.
It wasn't so long ago that women, like children, were supposed to be seen and not heard.
Or maybe feminists weren't. But they tend to conflate "feminist" with "women" when it's convenient.
So here we are, at the end of 2008, and "feminism" is still not only misunderstood and deliberately misinterpreted, it's still an f-word.
So when you disagree, it's "deliberately misinterpreted". Got that? If feminists don't like what you say, it's automatically because you don't understand it.
Zerb and feminists like her and completely blind to the rhetoric that alienates people about feminism.
And of course, what I just said will be dismissed and so-con, ideological-driven commentary. The easiest way to not to have to confront any argument is to blame it on religion.
Count on me in 2009 to keep flipping the misogynists the bird.
That's feminist PR for you.
They just don't get it.
