Is feminism sexist? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Jon
- Start date
Steve R.
Retired
- Local time
- Today, 01:03
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2006
- Messages
- 4,684
Yes, feminism is sexist. To repeat what I wrote on Men's Rights: "There has been a fundamental logical problem with the feminist movement. If women have rights, then men have rights also. So if some women claim that men, in some cases, are misogynistic, they neglect that in many cases they are being misandristic."
Grumble. Accidentally lost my Pulitzer Prize winning expose. Now to recreate.
There is an unintended consequence to the feminist movement on society. That is the possible erosion of the (nuclear) family structure.
In the past, women did not have the same professional opportunities as men. Now, women are exceeding men at entering many professional jobs and achieving greater educational levels. Those attainments should be commended. Regretfully, the avid feminists refuse to accept those new realities and still whine that women are being subjugated.
But there has been an underground "concern" with women being in the workforce, where children are involved. That is the possible erosion of the (nuclear) family structure. This is an issue that should be studied by an unbiased group to verify if the suspected erosion of the (nuclear) family structure is actually an unintended consequence of women entering the workforce.
PS: A long while back, I read an article, (I won't claim that it was scientific) that asserted that women entering the workforce held men's wages down (more people competing for the same job) so that it became difficult for the male to be the only source of income for the family. Hence, the need both the male and female to work.
Grumble. Accidentally lost my Pulitzer Prize winning expose. Now to recreate.
There is an unintended consequence to the feminist movement on society. That is the possible erosion of the (nuclear) family structure.
In the past, women did not have the same professional opportunities as men. Now, women are exceeding men at entering many professional jobs and achieving greater educational levels. Those attainments should be commended. Regretfully, the avid feminists refuse to accept those new realities and still whine that women are being subjugated.
But there has been an underground "concern" with women being in the workforce, where children are involved. That is the possible erosion of the (nuclear) family structure. This is an issue that should be studied by an unbiased group to verify if the suspected erosion of the (nuclear) family structure is actually an unintended consequence of women entering the workforce.
PS: A long while back, I read an article, (I won't claim that it was scientific) that asserted that women entering the workforce held men's wages down (more people competing for the same job) so that it became difficult for the male to be the only source of income for the family. Hence, the need both the male and female to work.
Last edited:
- Local time
- Today, 00:03
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 27,179
Let's see, a group capable of a study of this depth would be comprised of ... men and women who grew up in a culture of subtle or not-so-subtle misogyny. Whether you call it "paternalistic" or "the good-old-boy network" it is there. So... how do we find a group that is unbiased from the population we've got? Steve R., I'm not trying to belittle your post, but from a practical experimental viewpoint, I don't know how to conduct the test because I don't know how to remove bias from the participants. I actually agree with you that such a study has value - but I don't see a way to conduct it that isn't inherently flawed.
Regarding your second article, about how women in the workforce hold down men's wages...
This is a normal side-effect of competition in ANY capitalist economy. Where competition leads to the best possible price for something, whether it be a TV or a labor contract. If the problem was that men were overpaid due to low supply + high demand for their skills, then one could argue that economic forces would drive women into the work force as a natural reaction to an imbalance in the supply/demand ratio. Just before the corona outbreak, we were at a red-hot economy where wages were improving. Why? Low supply of qualified workers + high demand. Which is why I think if the Republicans and Democrats would stay away from each other's throats for a while, they might see the merits in changing SOMETHING about the current immigration system in response to economic need.
