Is the Feminist movement dead or alive and well? Why do you think?
90029
Until a woman sits in the white house...and I don't mean under a desk with a cigar in her mouth...feminism shall go on! :)\nAnd even then...do you really expect us to ever stop bitching? Puh-lease...we're women.
803071
I'm a feminist and I'm not a man-hater. (I actually hate women more than I hate men, hahaha) \n\nAnd I don't think I'm aggressive - just hardworking, determined and not one to put up with sexist sh*t or bullying just because I'm female. I had too much of that in previous employment...
547540
No, Chivalry is dead because WOMEN do not reward it. Hence men do not spend the time to engage in it because they get nothing out of it in return. \n\nHow you think liberals killed it is really beyond rational belief as most liberals are categorized as being more sensentive to women and more likely to engage in Chivalry.
292887
First off, do you agree with women's suffrage ? I know I totally agree with women's suffrage.\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_suffrage
158489
The 20-somethings have abandoned classical feminism in droves.  They've seen what its done to their mothers - alone, unloved, unsupported, chronically depressed - and bailed.  Young girls today have largely abandoned the need to "prove" themselves as women, saying that they already are, by mere existance.\n\nPerhaps it was a mistake for the patriarchy to grant independence.  "Beware what you wish for, it might come true".  Perhaps it was a mistake for the patriarchy to abdicate from its responsibility.  \n\nDid I say grant?  Yes, you heard right.  Independence was not achieved by suffragettes, it wa achieved by technology. \n  Male-spawned technology produced fax machines and typewriters that enabled women to work and be independent.  It took the brawn factor out of labor enabling all genders to earn a wage.  Taking away technology would put us back 100 years ... in every sense.\n\nHow fragile life is, huh?
658927
Amongst the problems and logics included in feminism, is the neglect of Godly and natural structure and organization.\n\nFeminists undermind the foresight of Christ. Christ new what He was doing when he ordained the man as the provider, and the woman as the nurturer, and homemaker. His wisdom is confirmed by nature. By nature, a man's body is designed for labour, and a woman's is designed for child bearing and nourishment.\n\nWhen women attempt to both preserve their feminine nature, and mimic the men's masculine nature, it obviously causes confusion, competition, and great imbalance in the home, and society. It is a selfishness to have their own honour, and attempt to steal men's. It's also an arrogant attempt to correct both God and nature. As if God was wrong when he designed Adam and Eve. As if nature is wrong for giving the man the body for manual labour, and women the body for child bearing and nursing.
32748
Pornography is the best thing to happen to women since the fight for equality.  While millions of men have their pants down around their ankles, women are taking over the world.  The girls will be moving upward and onward, and the guys will never catch them – how can they?  They have their pants around their ankles.\n\nAnd the ironic thing about it all is that 30 years from now, after men have jerked their social status away, men will be not be demanding, but begging women for equality.  Do you suppose women will give it to them?
896579
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JUP9Jm9SqvY\nwatch^^^ It shows just how much women these days know.\nAlso the girl posting above me doesn't seem to know much about suffrage either.  There are intelliegent women and dumb men, but seriously....that video is so hilarious
817542
you want me to take seriously a website that says "beware the feminists, many are lesbians"??? How offensive.  Your fiction teacher is more a fem-nazi.  Being a feminist just means standing up for equal rights.  Chill.
211225
Though I hesitate to call myself feminist (mostly due to an internal debate over whether a man can truly be a feminist); I do try to uphold some of the beliefs of both the early suffragette movement, and the change in social mores in the 1960s and 1970s. That is, gender (and racial though that is a different topic) equality in matters of politics, socio-economics, and spiritaulity.\n\nAs for reconciling attitudes between my own beliefs and those of the patriarchal religions; quite frankly, I couldn't. Experience with my extended family gave me an extremely biased view of leadership dynamics. Due to my mother's family, I began to tie the presence of strong female influence, leadership and direction to long-term stability and strong ties within a family. This idea was reinforced over the course of three generations: my mother, my mother's mother, my maternal grandmother's mother and sisters, as well as my maternal grandfather's mother and sister all presented strong female role models and true partnerships with their husband. It is interesting to note that while a good number of my maternal great-aunts and great-uncles (sisters/brothers of grandparents) do affiliate with the (Roman Catholic or other Christian) church, the majority are FWEC Christians.\nMy father's family, on the other hand, had a strong paternal influence within the household; or rather, the influence of my paternal grandmother was purposefully muted due to prevailing influence and ideals of the Catholic Church during her childhood. Their family dynamic, in the past twenty years, has been punctuated by arguments, divorce, and what can only be described as very poor judgement.\n\nI never truly had to reconcile my own learned beliefs with those of the church for two main reasons: first, I was not raised in the church. I sought the church on my own around as a pre-teen and chose the Congregational Church specifically because of it's stand on female clergy (allowed).
53497
From 1960 to the Present\n\nThe revival of feminism in the sixties is often dated from the appearance of Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique. This 1963 best-seller found a receptive audience among middle- and upper-class women whose experiences Friedan captured. Although her book was important for its challenge to the ideology of domesticity, other factors also contributed to the reemergence of feminism. Unprecedented numbers of married women were being drawn into the job market--albeit on unequal terms--as the service sector of the economy expanded and consumerism fueled the desire of many families for a second income. Both the growing numbers of women graduating from college and the availability of the birth-control pill (which accelerated the already noticeable decline in the birthrate) further encouraged women's entry into the work force. By the early sixties the contradiction between the realities of paid work and higher education, on the one hand, and the still pervasive domestic ideology, on the other, could no longer be reconciled. Equally important in sparking feminist consciousness were the oppositional movements of the sixties, particularly the black freedom movement, which was a source of inspiration and a model for social change for second-wave feminists.\n\nThe new feminism emerged from two groups of educated, middle-class, predominantly white women. The National Organization for Women (now) consisted mainly of politically moderate professionals; those who stressed women's liberation were younger, more radical women and typically veterans of the black freedom movement and the New Left. For the former, John F. Kennedy's establishment of the President's Commission on the Status of Women (pcsw) in 1961 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibited employment discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, and national origin, were important catalysts for change. The pcsw, with Eleanor Roosevelt as chair, was charged with the task of documenting the position of American women in the economy, legal system, and the family. Its 1964 report uncovered such pervasive sex discrimination that many commissioners were shocked. Most states also convened commissions that similarly documented widespread sex discrimination. It was at the third national meeting of the state commissions in 1966 that now was born. Angered by the failure of the newly created Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (eeoc) to enforce the anti-sex discrimination provision of Title VII, twenty-eight women (including Friedan) formed the organization to pressure the government into challenging sex discrimination.\n\nLike the naacp after which it was modeled, now adopted a legalistic and assimilationist approach to achieving women's equality. Rather than challenging their subordination in domestic life, the feminists of now committed themselves to fighting for women's integration into public life. Early debates in now concerned the group's advocacy of abortion rights and the Equal Rights Amendment (era). Indeed, when now accorded top priority to the era in its 1968 Bill of Rights, women from the United Auto Workers (out of whose offices the first now mailings had been sent) were pressured to resign from now because of their union's opposition to the amendment. From the moment the era was first discussed by feminists in 1920, it had caused enormous divisiveness; many feared that its passage, by invalidating legislation protective of women, would lead to worsening work conditions for them. This time around, however, opposition to the era from progressive and feminist quarters evaporated quickly when it became clear that the courts and the eeoc were already interpreting Title VII as invalidating protective legislation. Indeed, the women of the United Auto Workers rejoined now two years later when their union endorsed the amendment.\n\nOver the years now's membership became more heterogeneous and it
195611
I think it is sad that these women feel that's their only option.  I think it is sad that they feel so cheapened that they'll use it to do anything with.  Now, women who feel empowered to use their sexuality any which way is great and I say Amen to that.  But women who use their sexuality from a place of powerlessness are something else entirely, and for the most part (there are always exceptions, to everything) I don't blame them but society.\n\nFR
663920
What a total crock. Where are you finding these women? Do you choose the same type? Wake up!!
1143253
I've even seen feminists walk side by side with women in Burka to gain more rights ???\n\nThis world is in chaos... Those who fight for freedom and liberties sleep with those who wish to take them away from others by their Theocratic ideologies.
825149
Well, I'm a middle-aged woman, luckily without PMS anymore.....and I've got the impression there are far too few middle-aged women on here.\n\nIt seems to me most of the people on here are teens and twens, to use some expression we middle aged women use.\n\nAnd I guess most of us are here for the same reason : to ask and answer questions! (I can assure you, I have no alterior motive, LOL)\n\nMay I ask why you asked this question to begin with??\nGot a problem with middle aged women, or only with those who have PMS??? (you DO know what PMS means, right??)
360028
While I find your rag comment to be highly offensive, I must admit that even as a woman, I'd have to say I've been wondering what's up myself. Seems a lot of women these days are so huffy, including me. PMS left me a week ago and I'm still a raging lunatic for no reason. It's probably due to some stress at work. Perhaps men need to earn more so we can chill at home, but that sounds anti-women's movement. Oh well, I'd rather be a Relaxed Housewife than a Raging Lunatic workaholic.
752014
at some point when all the jobs are gone, yes, currently no, as the powerful have all the resourses, and too many people beleive their b.s. so they follow blindly. Currently however people haven't wised up enough to unite and become a force to be reckoned with