Of course, the real issue for me at least, is what is the feminist creed? Who has the right to define it? If it's so diversified, then what view of it comes out on top?
If there's no clear definition, then we can't talk about it constructivly.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now, why did I think, "Do you know that you're hugging people?" would be a yes-no kind of question? Especially on Hatrack. Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
They're like any other group who's only standard of admission is that you declare you're one of them. Can you tell me exactly what platform can be agreed on, word for word, by every single Democrat in the United States? Can all Democrats be defined by Al Sharpton just because he runs as one? Pick your own Republican version, I'm not picky.
I admit freely that a large part of the public perceives feminism as man-hating. I can't let that stop me from trying to change that perception or from using my own feminist beliefs in ways I feel would better society.
Everyone knows that Democrats hate fiscal responsibility and want the world handed to them on a plate. Everyone knows that Republicans are heartless money grubbing fat cats. Everyone knows that Catholic priests are all child abusers. Everyone knows that small town people are dimwitted and backward. Everyone knows...
See, the reason I've gone on to this extent isn't because there isn't any truth in your words, but because you blithely assigned them to all feminists like it was a natural fact.
[ February 25, 2004, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
I disagree there, Chris. Republican attitudes are defined by what their leaders do. It all elected Republican officials started trying to pass legislature that required people to eat fruit daily, then that would be part of being a Republican. And if you where a Republican, then I could assume that you are pro-fruit eating.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ever listened to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)? Here's his latest comments on Mr. Bush's budget. But wait, aren't they both Republicans? Some Republicans have come out against Mr. Bush's spending, his economic policies, his environtal policies and his war, but no one has suggested that they can't be Republicans anymore. I don't mean to pick on them, quite a few Democrats slammed Clinton for his policies when he was in office.
If all Democrats or all Republicans followed the same platforms, we wouldn't need primaries. What would be the difference? Just pick one that looks good in a suit and move on. A party platform is more vague than you'd think, consisting of basic beliefs but allowing for wide ranges of application. So does feminism.
[ February 25, 2004, 06:00 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Chris, I was actually going to bring up Applebaum's column in this thread today. She makes an excellent point -- I think strong women need to move past being controlled by sexual incidents in their pasts and stand up for themselves.
What can be difficult for sexually abused/assaulted women in general (not Naomi specifically) is that it is very difficult to win a legal challenge without explicitly displaying yourself as the victim. Often, rape cases are exactly that -- an argument over who, exactly, is the victim, which is why past sexual history often plays such a huge factor in rape cases (regardless of the legality of such information). The Kobe Bryant case is a good example of this: the prosecution is attempting to win the case not by proving that the incident did not occur, but that the woman was not, in fact, a victim, because she was sleeping around.
I think that unfortunately, some women are forced to victimize themselves to bring about justice.
[ February 25, 2004, 07:00 PM: Message edited by: Kasie H ]
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:What can be difficult for sexually abused/assaulted women in general (not Naomi specifically) is that it is very difficult to win a legal challenge without explicitly displaying yourself as the victim.
I would say that this is true for victims of sexual assault in general, not just women.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Funny how much of what was previously thought to be hard wired behavior by men toward women has stopped now that it carries a hefty fine.
I don't buy the hard wired nonsense for a second. That's no excuse for failing to grant someone respect, dignity, and the opportunity to succeed.
Posts: 5509 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
