Feminism vs. Equality

Post Reply New Topic

In December of last year.

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postxf145966-0-15.html

Ikorack, your arguments are bordering on belief in some sort of feminist conspiracy theory. 'Feminists' do not vote as a block any more than 'Liberals' vote as a block. All that ties feminists together are a conglomeration of similar ideas, and some feminists (just like some liberals) hold some of those ideas as more important to others, some are more radical than others, and we don't get together in some big feminist convention each year to set the next year's feminist agenda which all feminists will be expected to toe the line of. There may be some feminist get-togethers, just like there are liberal get-togethers, but that's a far cry from the over-arching coordination that you are describing.

Also, from a couple of pages ago: the person that generally gets custody of the kids is the same as the person who is the primary care-giver of the kids. Since the mother is usually the one who gets called out of work to pick the kid up from school when he gets sick, who takes the kid to soccer practice, who buys the kid his school supplies and new clothes each year, and who generally spends the most time with the kid, the mother usually gets custody. In the rare cases where it was the dad who worked part time and built his schedule around the kid's schedule, he gets custody.

This is what I was talking about before, wrt. my brother: women still do most of the child care; men taking on more child care is a feminist issue, but one which benefits men as much or more than women.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/353626
http://workingmoms.about.com/od/working ... rRoles.htm

Feminists operate through the same political instruments. They may not vote in a completely homogeneous way but that does not exclude classifying them as a singular political entity. And if you need an analogy compare them to Democrats.



Sounds like an assumption to me, can you provide evidence for this or will you fall back on a common sense argument? Also even if the mother spends more time with the child(In the former relationship) how is that an argument against a shared parenting presumption? If a father is not supporting a wife anymore, can't arrangements be made for him to downgrade his housing and cut back his hours, should the woman get sole custody based on a status quo that she obviously objected to in some way?(Why would she be getting a divorce otherwise?) Also I say that she objected to in some way on the basis that the vast majority of divorces are initiated by women.

Basically what I am asking is, why should divorce be used to maintain a status quo that failed?(As well as asking for evidence of your claims about women and the care they provide in relation to the care men provide, also I would prefer the data came from sources not associated with feminist or women's organizations.)



The first link is a document 10 years old.
The second is from a womens group so I would like an objective confirmation of their claims, or a third party neutral source backing similar claims.

EDIT: I am looking at the second link some more, should probably ignore that last statement till I finish,
EDIT2: I would like to hear how you think men taking on more child care is a feminist issue, certainly it is a result of feminist philosophy but it is not an issue that has been taken up in any of the usual ways(That is people agree that the division of labor should not depend solely on gender, but this is not a result of activism but being raised in a society with feminist influences.), currently I don't see why division of labor shouldn't be worked out individually. Or are you saying that it is a feminist issue in regards to companies accepting what the couples decide on, as I don't see that being an issue.

I would be curious about what you think should be the solution for this 'motherhood penalty' that is the 'penalty' that is taken when a mother decides to become a primary care giver and later renters the work force, it is their choice after all, what is to be done about it? I would say that the decision on who becomes primary care giver should rest solely on who makes the most money/who has the highest potential earnings. I don't think a division of labor would work well if both parents were working the same or similar hours.(That is each taking part time jobs in their fields, it would cut into their overall earning potential wouldn't it, as well as increasing fatigue as both would be taking on a heavier workload.)

And my statement of them being left wing is based on a track record and research. Also they are pro-abortion as well. In fact most journalists are leftists.

And my statement of them being left wing is based on a track record and research. Also they are pro-abortion as well. In fact most journalists are leftists.

*big sigh*
Honey, the feminists don't hold national conventions, field candidates for national or state office, or even elect officers for their own society. There is no overarching 'feminist party platform.' You're sounding more like a conspiracy theorist, not less.

*another sigh*
http://www.wadv.org/custody.htm
(scroll down to 'custody decisions: factors to consider')
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m273187663023162/
http://ner.sagepub.com/content/195/1/103.abstract
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/regio ... orkfam.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/25/books ... e-dog.html

not directly related, but of interest regarding why women become feminists:
http://www.jstor.org/pss/353718


*snort*
(assumed that the wife wasn't working)
(described the marriage as 'the man supporting the woman')
(left the kids out altogether)

Sure, if a man wants to quit his job or cut back his hours in return for being the primary caretaker for the kid, while the mother keeps working full time, I'm sure that would be considered when the child's best interests were being examined.

*snort*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce
The main causes in 2004 were:

* Adultery; Extramarital sex; Infidelity - 27%
* Domestic violence - 17%
* Midlife crisis - 13%
* Addictions, e.g. alcoholism and gambling - 6%
* Workaholism - 6%

According to this survey, husbands engaged in extramarital affairs in 75% of cases; wives in 25%. In cases of family strain, wives' families were the primary source of strain in 78%, compared to 22% of husbands' families. Emotional and physical abuse were more evenly split, with wives affected in 60% and husbands in 40% of cases. In 70% of workaholism-related divorces it was husbands who were the cause, and in 30%, wives.


The custody decision is not 'used to maintain a status quo.' It is almost always mutually agreed upon (95% of divorces are uncontested, according to the article cited above), and it is done to maintain the best interests of the child.

Careful, you're starting to sound like Inuyasha. However, I have tried to accommodate that request.

I realized that the link was old, but given that feminism has been working on the subject for many decades, I believe it to still be relevant to the discussion.


I'm curious to hear what you think 'the usual ways' are, if not the spread of feminist philosophy and discussion. As far as I'm concerned, you answered your own question there. My brother realized for himself that he did not want to be like our father, and he had the ideas of feminist arguments and the examples of an increasing number of egalitarian men to go on when he decided what kind of father he wanted to be.

Well, my brother got (IIrc) about three weeks of paternity leave when his daughter was born. He certainly seemed to appreciate it.


for one thing, it would dramatically improve life for a lot of women if there were more flexibility in the work day: ie, come in half an hour early, leave half an hour early - or come late, leave late. It would help if there were more, better child care available. And it will continue to help if more men are like my brother, and don't expect their wives to do 90% of the child care (and all of the gross parts) by themselves.


I disagree; it should also be based on who will do a better job taking care of the kid. My brother is turning out to be an excellent father, and my sister-in-law is an excellent mother; if she were more like me and my brother were the same, it would probably be better for him to be the primary care giver even though he makes more.

Currently, it is not at all unusual for both parents to work full time. Many families cannot afford anything else. The question is who picks up the slack when they both head home after 8 or 9 hours of work. Should the split it? Should the wife always start making dinner while the husband chills on the couch with the remote? Should the husband always give the kid its bath while the wife works on her tan?

*ignores the first 10 pages*

I just want to say that the feminist movement was originally about giving women the ability to choose what sort of life they wanted to lead. We've achieved this already. Women can now vote, get a job/career, and we don't *have to* bear children.

With this in mind and ONLY this definition, I would call myself a feminist.

Ironic, considering I'm a stay at home mother and submissive housewife, no?

It's interesting that the existing imbalance in divorce and custody issues is being used as an argument against feminism. This imbalance exists as a result of oppression of women and the deep seated belief that women are better suited to being tied to the kitchen sink looking after the kids.

To see the effects of feminism on this issue you should be looking at countries where feminism has the upper hand in these issues. Take Sweden, one of the most feminist countries on the planet. Custody is normally split 50/50. The children spend alternate weeks with each parent. Neither parent pays any money to the other.

I'm referring to people and groups deliberately advocating that what they see as injustices be addressed.

I'm a radical feminist and my ultimate dream is to be a stay at home mom
married to an older, wiser man.

That's just a fantasy, though.

I still don't know what groups or injustices you're referring to. I'm not trying to be difficult either, I don't resort to generalizations.

Well after taking some time to read some of the posts I'd like to say thank you to everyone who got the discussion this far. I haven't really done much participating of the discussions because frankly I'm still unsure if where I stand on many of these issues. I am eighteen years old and while I don't believe age should be an excuse to not be informed (unless you're under thirteen); I do believe that especially now that I'm a legal adult I need to start concentrating more on where I stand politically and ethically. Not that I didn't have an idea of where I was before; but I knew I needed a wider range of ideals to explore my options.
Everyone was very helpful; even the views that I was unsure of or flat out disagreed with because they were informative none the less. I'm going to take more time now to read these things.

*Moving on from me*

Interesting guy on youtube; his name is Paul Elum(spelled wrong) he goes by TheHappyMisogynist on youtube and he works as a "voice for men". If anyone can get past the name of his channel check him out, you anyone feels pissed off by some of the things he says please try to discuss it civily with him and not completey troll him. There are some topics of his I agree on; but there is one where I frankly believe he goes too far and claims that women were never opressed.

xxxThePeachxxx is another person on youtube that has discussed feminist issues; mainly the pornagraphy industry, abortion, and prostitution. She discusses more than just those topics; but they outside of feminism and goes more into religion for the most part (she is an atheist).

Another more known young lady of youtube is a Sex Positive Activist and informer known as Lacigreen; I highly recommend her. Mainly she has discussed the more social issues for women and men's sexuality.

You remarked that real equality takes a long time to be realized.

I replied that it's kinda helped by people deliberately working to move society toward that end.

I'm not referring to anything specific.


And yeah, I have no use for people who proudly refer to themselves as haters of women,
nor people who appeal to political misnomers such as "pro sex" which is a code word for "pro-porn" and "pro-prostitution".

How is this a conspiracy theory, they very clearly are able to move in force for activism, why would that not extend to voting?




The only suitable link I see is the first and last, you do not link an entire website to support one point. The first makes a statement about why women(well it doesn't say women but it only uses traits from the traditional gender role for women) would be granted primary custody based on what services they provided during marriage, but this is not what I asked, I asked for evidence backing your claims that most women do these things still.(The traits used for evaluating primary custody is itself foolish, it does indeed assume(or at least is based on) that the man and woman will be taking the same roles they had in marriage, which obviously didn't work out) I do not see feminists pushing for change in this law, why?

But none of your links provide the evidence I asked for, the last comes closest but 50 couples interviewed personally is not objective evidence, nor is it credible by a large study group. Also that article is 22(or so) years old. And would not describe the current division of labor practiced by couples even if it wasn't flawed as it is.
ng?



Sorry the only reason I could accept for the woman spending a significant amount of more time with their child is a traditional division of labor(and considering the only reason custody laws still support women more than men is because of a traditional view, my argument holds up.), this slipped into my argument my apologies. You still by the way need to address my argument.



You are mistaking my argument for something else, that argument is for shared parenting not a primary custody arrangement with the man as primary caregiver. Why would the court assume that the status quo is meant to be maintained, just because she was a 'primary caregiver' during the marriage has no baring on whether or not the man is capable of taking on an equal share after the marriage, nor whether such a route should be considered.



The link(that is the citation for that information) is dead find another source. If you can find a suitable link that makes similar claims I will address them.



The information you are referring to has no source, find one otherwise I cannot address your argument in any meaningful way.



Nothing wrong from a request from an independent organization. Wikipedia does not fit this(for future reference) every activist organization under the sun constantly attempts to plant their own slants on articles.(I believe the term is 'astro-turfing') And it should not be used with the discussion concerns major political groups. But this is moot because you quote information from one source.






10 years is too long of a time period to address current trends, especially when said trends have been shown to be progressing at a fast pace. Are you going to find replacements?



The usual ways being activism(media, laws) feminism has never addressed the increasing role of fathers in work that might be considered traditionally womens, and they have not been lobbying to update laws to a more fair state, that is to say they have not been lobbying for shared parenting laws. Which makes me question how you can make this out to be a feminist issue when no feminist movement has addressed the changes feminism has had in regards to males. As you said your brother realized himself what kind of man he wanted to be, so while his changes can(potentially) be attributed to feminist influence on society it is not because of any activism seeking to reward or encourage active participation of males in the caregiver role
.


Yes, I do not think businesses will have trouble adjusting to shared parenting policies or views.



You still have not proven that last claim. Your response however doesn't address my question, I was referring to the 'motherhood penalty' that is gained by a few years absence from the workforce(for child care, in a primary caregiver role), or did you not address it because you think it is a moot point? Flexible hours can already be negotiated, why did you bring that up though, I am not sure?



I suppose it shouldn't rest solely on earning, but I shouldn't be making arguments for primary custody, I don't understand it completely(I understand it's intents, but I do not understand why it would persist in a feminist society)



Most couples today would say split it, this isn't really a contentious issue, the only sources you have that would suggest it is are outdated(one being nonobjective even if it was redone in current times.). That statement assumes of course that the sources you have are the ones provided.

Also I have not seen many women in my age group who can cook(that would be two, neither of them as well as me), so that statement amuses me somewhat. But that could just be because we are young.

EDIT: ignore the random 'ng?' a pasting issue with my [quote] tags.

QFT.
This illustrates the point that I'm trying to make.