Monday, August 29, 2011

What Feminism is to me.

OK, this is one of my getting rare “Hard hat” posts. It is prompted by James at Nourishing Obscurity

He is constantly posting about Feminism recently, and he seems to have such a jaundiced way of seeing it. Really negative. He seems to see it as some sort of variation on socialism and really destructive.

Well I think he is wrong. I think he is conflating two different things. Socialism and Feminism. It seems to me he has a very different definition of Feminism to mine.

It does make me wonder.. Is it him misinterpreting it, or do I misunderstand it? Feel free to comment anyone who reads this.

To me Feminism is about giving women a "level playing field" not stacking the odds against. It is about listening to what is said and if it makes sense not about who is saying it.

It is about the ultimate trump card not being that men are stronger, or a woman's opinion being discounted just because she is a woman.

It is about getting the same money for having the same ability, qualifications, experience and seniority and doing the same job. It is about being equal before the law.

In a way it is not just for women either. It has to be about men too, that both men and women get an even deal with neither being badly done by.

When it is all said and done men and women generically need each other. They each have strengths and weaknesses that balance each other out in partnership. We are all people. Human beings.

To me it is absolutely not about "Quotas" and ticking boxes, quotas. I just see that as destructive to all. It poisons, causes resentment and undermines the position of any group who's "box is ticked". It fosters an unreasonable feelings of entitlement.

It is not about Women being in charge or being dominant (tho whatever floats your boat in private ^_^). It is not about turnabout being fair play, two wrongs don't make a right, or even cancel each other out. They just make a sense of injustice and two wrongs. It is not about women trying to be men, or dispensing with them.

To me the heart of it is about Equality of opportunity, equality before the law, freedom from coercion. Basically freedom and liberty.

I figure things like "box ticking" are basically wrong, coercive and make everything that a person achieves tarnished and suspect. It takes away from the individual. It is about the Government saying how we can, or can not, live and that it not really the government’s business to do. It should not be about asking the Government to pretty please give us what should be ours anyway, being a supplicant or a client. That is just what we wanted to be free from.

Now Some people latch on to the fact that some people who call themselves feminists are also socialists, or propose coercive solutions that basically involve force at some level. That some of them do seem to see nothing wrong in "Turnabout is fair play"
To me this is missing the point, people are more than one thing at once. They might be Christian, but they can still be to the left or right, they could be a sportsman too, or a couch potato, and be a commuter, a music lover, a Star Trek, a member of the Women’s institute, whatever. The thing is you should not go mixing all Trekkies up with all sportsmen.

And the thing about Feminism is that no one can absolutely argue it is no longer needed. You might say, “well you got the vote didn't you? You are allowed to own property. It is not legal for your husband to beat you these days…” in the west.

I say sure. But that is here and now… and mostly.

And yes, whenever things change everyone gets a bit unsure of how things are, especially if they keep changing. People feel unsure how to behave and that makes them uncomfortable. The rules of being polite and what is expected change a bit. People make mistakes.

Maybe sometimes in some ways it has gone too far the other way, in others not far enough. But! That is just here and now.

The thing is some places in the world things are not that way. In Saudi Arabia women don't have the right to drive a vehicle. In Birmingham in the UK there are Sharia Courts sitting, not as part of the British legal system yet.

But the Arch Bishop of Canterbury himself sees that as inevitable.

Sharia law is actually Islamic religious law. where is there separation of church and state in that?

As far as I can see Sharia law is pretty cruel and has an anti female bias built into the very heart of it. It says it is ok to beat a women if they disobey their husband. (Quran 4:34) I also read somewhere a woman's word only counts half as much as a man's.

If I looked I expect I could find more, stuff like women being stoned to death for being unfaithful and guys being able to divorce their wife just by telling her three times he divorces her. You can bet a woman can't do the same.

So if you ask me if there is still a need to watch out for women's rights, then I would say, absolutely. It is not a done deal, written in stone, share prices can go down as well as up.

I don’t think it is safe to take your eye off the ball, or before you know it.. well you had better hope that the guy who basically owns you and who you never had a choice about belonging to is not too mean.

Thomas Jefferson once said "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." I think he was right. But that is only half the price. You have to be willing to defend and protect it, with force if you absolutely have to.

10 comments:

CherryPie said...

Your views on Feminism, pretty much reflect my thoughts on it too.

Moggsy said...

Well, I gess that's at least two of us then ^_^

James Higham said...

None of the views posted at my place, Moggsy and Cherie, were mine.

They all came from women, the youtubes were by a woman and the comments reported were by women.

I was the messenger bringing what women are saying on feminism to a wider audience, including men.

To quote Christie O again:

So what is feminism anyway because there seems to be a great confusion. What it was and what it is are two different things and then what it is being sold as … feminism is now merely a tool of the liberal [read socialist] agenda … it’s just been relabelled and sold as something else. I’ve said it before – political correctness is cultural marxism. You should read The Naked Communist, by Cleon Skousen.

One of their goals is to destroy the family because [it is] the foundation of a good society and one of [the methods] is to get behind the feminist movement because it had been very successful at creating discontent.


Phyllis Schlafly:

Women's liberationists operate as Typhoid Marys carrying a germ called lost identity. They try to persuade wives that they have missed something in life because they are known by their husband's name and play second fiddle to his career....As a homewrecker , women's liberation is far in the lead over "the other man," "the other woman," or "incompatibility."

Women are waking up to this abomination although I see some are still clinging on grimly to the dinosaur destructiveness of it. It's like a drug habit which is hard to kick.

CherryPie said...

It doesn't matter who said them (male or female, left or right). Moggsy and I don't agree with them and neither do the vast majority of people I know.

The people you mention are talking about extremes, not the average person and therein lies the problem and confusion.

Moggsy said...

What CherryPie said.

James, All that "being the messenger"? You are choosing what messages to carry and what ones to drop. So you are not just an impartial messenger and you do have a responsibility for what you quote, as surely it is making a point for you.

You make that clear enough in your own words “Women are waking up to this abomination…”

I can’t say.. “oh that was Jefferson talking” if I quote him, because I am quoting him to distil what I am saying, probably because he said it first and better.

You may even have a point about some people who are out on the fringe there are bitter and twisted women, just like there are bitter and twisted men, but they are way out in left field like CherryPie said.

They don’t have a feminist agenda, they have an extremist political agenda with a feminist overlay so as to hide what they are about, or maybe they do really care about it, but are coming at it from a controlling political leaning.

This post was me laying out how I see feminism and why I think it is relevant now.

Most people I talk with about it agree that this is how it should be, not just women. Maybe it is a small part of a bigger idea, because for me it seems that way of thinking can be applied to most anything.

Standing up for yourself, for a reasonable even chance and standing up for the same for others.

If we are not most all willing to stand up for each other most all the time then sooner or later we find we have no chances, no freedom and need someone’s permission.

You can quote me on that ^_^

jmb said...

Well said Miss Moggs, both in the original post with which you can count me in on as at least a third in agreement, as well as your reply to the esteemed commenter, Mr James Higham.

But then we all know his often stated opinions on this particular topic and they are entrenched in stone, regardless of any valid argument you present to the contrary. He is addicted to his "drug of choice".

Don't waste your breathe or rather your words.

jams o donnell said...

What you say all sounds pretty reasonable to me Moggs

Moggsy said...

Jams, Thank you & TY for commenting.

JMB, TY, I do hope that what I say will at least make anyone think about it if they listen.

But a third.. I guess that means you disagree with more of what I said than you fully agreed with? ^_^

jmb said...

Oh dear, I have to be more careful with my words Miss Moggs. I meant I was at least the third person who agreed with the sentiments expressed in the post: you, Cherie and myself.

I thought you knew me better than that, well you do of course, so I am sure you were confused. Hugs.

Moggsy said...

JMB ^_^ ^_^