Failure of Feminism

  1. Krano
    Krano
  2. Sixiang
    Sixiang
    I've always found that guy to be annoying. He's part of that camp of self-righteous atheists that refuses to make any sound arguments and ruins our image. But anyways, I think he is on to something, but isn't really saying that new or amazing. I too struggled with this when I was first getting into feminism. I wondered the same thing because I knew that plenty of males had been trapped into prostitution and made practical sex-slaves and do suffer from domestic violence. But radical feminism already addresses those issues. Every thing I've heard from a radical feminist on the matter is that yes, males do get exploited and objectified just like women do. But women have had it far worse historically. And the whole institutions that women are forced into are in favor of the males and oppressive of the females.

    And a major problem with all of his arguments is that he is trapped in first-world logic. He only talks about things that are relevant to the U.S. Women in most of the world are immensely oppressed, exploited, and objectified. The U.S. women's rights movement of the mid-18th and early 19th centuries achieved many successes. Women in the U.S. were given some legal rights and a bit more freedom, although the Christian nature of U.S. culture often subjected them into the oppressive institution of marriage and "housewifery." However, when the radical feminist movement began to make headway in the late 60's and 70's, they were abruptly halted by misogynistic, Christian-fundamentalist, right-wing politics. The "Reagan revolution" of the 80's and the re-emergence of Christian conservatism in U.S. politics put the ERA and the presence of radical feminists on the political scene on hold and in the dark.

    And there is one thing that he mentioned that is just not okay at all. He said that men's aren't treated fairly in the matter of "reproductive rights" i.e. abortion. That's because men shouldn't have any sort of say in whether or not a woman they impregnate wants an abortion or not. That's a decision for the woman to make. Of course, she can consult her significant other, but she makes the final decision. He shouldn't be given some sort of abortion veto that overrides her decision (unless she's insane, in which case you shouldn't be having unprotected sex in the first place).
  3. Monkey Riding Dragon
    Monkey Riding Dragon
    I am indeed amazed by Mr. Amazing Atheist. In the linked video, he makes a number of astonishing proclamations. Let's look at a few:

    [The idea that patriarchy exists and prevails in the world] is integral, this is key, this is the cornerstone of all feminist theory, and it's completely bogus. It's wrong. It's demonstrably wrong.
    And the way that feminists argue with something like what I'm saying is they show our history, and they show that for the majority of history men had all the power. Yeah. But men were also expected to do all the work.
    According to the United Nations, overall, women do 66 percent of the world's work and for it receive 10 percent of its income and but 1 percent of its property. But no, there's definitely nothing patriarchal about such a condition. What was I thinking? Women are all just a bunch of lazy mooches who've only experienced inequality because we refuse to do any work.

    In reality of course, women do plenty of work. Way more than men, in fact. Women just don't get paid for the vast majority of the work they do (at least when you look at the overall shape of world). Why don't they get paid most of the time? Because the work they do is held in lower esteem than "men's work". It's considered less valuable. And, accordingly, women themselves are considered less valuable. Fortunately, in the declining current First World, the exodus of the manufacturing base to more Third World countries (largely the product of completed development) is having the effect of devaluing "men's work" and elevating "women's work" in stature. In contemporary America, women still mostly do the same things they've done for tens of thousands of years: child care, house work, communications-oriented work, etc. ...with the difference that now they're actually getting paid most of the time. It might indeed be slowly flipping the gender relations of society. You can see, for example, that, statistically speaking, in most of the major metropolitan areas of the U.S., women's incomes are already higher than men's. The major metropolitan areas tend to lead the national trend. One other result is that there are now more girls being born than boys in many First World countries because they're believed to be the sex with an economic future. But the overall worldwide picture is still quite clear: women are doing the vast majority of the world's work and receiving almost none of its wealth in compensation. That is patriarchy. And America too is still essentially patriarchal. You can tell by the fact that American women still receive only 77% the incomes of American men and by the sex distribution at the top of the social ladder: only 10 of the 100 richest Americans are female.

    Feminists are right about one thing: gender roles are the problem.
    Nope, they're not really. Not essentially. Ancient matriarchal societies broadly featured the same core gender roles that are so stereotypical. The essential thing was, and is, the esteem in which the work women do was and is held. I'm kind of in the Red Stockings camp of feminist thinking, accordingly. I don't believe that abolishing traditional gender roles is really the key to abolishing patriarchy. It's not essentially women who need to change, it's men. Society needs to learn to value women as they are rather than on the precondition that they go into "men's work", have sex on men's terms, etc.

    I could go on but don't really feel there's a compelling reason to. This guy clearly has no idea what he's talking about.
  4. individualist
    I am indeed amazed by Mr. Amazing Atheist. In the linked video, he makes a number of astonishing proclamations. Let's look at a few:

    According to the United Nations, overall, women do 66 percent of the world's work and for it receive 10 percent of its income and but 1 percent of its property. But no, there's definitely nothing patriarchal about such a condition. What was I thinking? Women are all just a bunch of lazy mooches who've only experienced inequality because we refuse to do any work.

    In reality of course, women do plenty of work. Way more than men, in fact. Women just don't get paid for the vast majority of the work they do (at least when you look at the overall shape of world). Why don't they get paid most of the time? Because the work they do is held in lower esteem than "men's work". It's considered less valuable. And, accordingly, women themselves are considered less valuable. Fortunately, in the declining current First World, the exodus of the manufacturing base to more Third World countries (largely the product of completed development) is having the effect of devaluing "men's work" and elevating "women's work" in stature. In contemporary America, women still mostly do the same things they've done for tens of thousands of years: child care, house work, communications-oriented work, etc. ...with the difference that now they're actually getting paid most of the time. It might indeed be slowly flipping the gender relations of society. You can see, for example, that, statistically speaking, in most of the major metropolitan areas of the U.S., women's incomes are already higher than men's. The major metropolitan areas tend to lead the national trend. One other result is that there are now more girls being born than boys in many First World countries because they're believed to be the sex with an economic future. But the overall worldwide picture is still quite clear: women are doing the vast majority of the world's work and receiving almost none of its wealth in compensation. That is patriarchy. And America too is still essentially patriarchal. You can tell by the fact that American women still receive only 77% the incomes of American men and by the sex distribution at the top of the social ladder: only 10 of the 100 richest Americans are female.

    Nope, they're not really. Not essentially. Ancient matriarchal societies broadly featured the same core gender roles that are so stereotypical. The essential thing was, and is, the esteem in which the work women do was and is held. I'm kind of in the Red Stockings camp of feminist thinking, accordingly. I don't believe that abolishing traditional gender roles is really the key to abolishing patriarchy. It's not essentially women who need to change, it's men. Society needs to learn to value women as they are rather than on the precondition that they go into "men's work", have sex on men's terms, etc.

    I could go on but don't really feel there's a compelling reason to. This guy clearly has no idea what he's talking about.
    So you dont support gender equality? You support restrictions and expectations bases on gender?