"Perhaps the pendulum has (in some areas) swung too far. Tough."

Grim you may not be feminist but that attitude is shown by enough feminists to contribute to an anti-feminist backlash.

Those who want equal opportunity will be very wary of anything that creates yet another set of discriminatory norms.

R0bert

Grim, currently American drug companies are exporting medications for the treatment of mental illness around the globe, part of the marketing stragedy is to change a cultures perception of mental illness or what comprises mental illness.

You wrote, <I would suggest that there are still millions, if not billions of women who are still oppressed, still exploited and still treated like chattel,>

So if for example women in many of these countries don't see themselves as being oppressed or exploited, then what you are saying in the typical western superiority way, that they must be 'educated' and convinced that they are being exploited and oppressed.

In a book I read along time ago there was an example given about a family that was functional, content and reasonably happy, but behaved in ways that were judged as being dysfunctional of which they were not aware. What right did social workers, have to disrupt this family by pointing out the dysfunctional ways that the family operated.(this was not referring to violence or abuse)

There is documented evidence that when Missionaries went to save and educate the non believers, that they create more problems in that the mortality rate rose in many of those cultures and the standard of living fell by trying to enforce their (missionary) standards on the native population.

Conquers in the past have tried to impose their religion, values and standards on the conquered, with very little value for the conquered except for the destruction of the conquereds culture and way of life. Thus causing disharmony that may last for generations.

Antiseptic
Boys have been disadvantaged in some aspects ie. education and the focus shifted to girls. Feminism was not about dominance, it was about levelling the playing field. Maybe it did go too far in some respects. That sometimes happens even with political revolutions.

The pendulum should stabilise and that is why discussions like those on OLO are good to sort the reality from the perceptions.

I bought up the feminist past in the context of Jefferson's post about natural factors. There are still disadvantages experienced by women today - you won't agree as you are too busy being a masculinist.

There are many double standards that affect women as regards sexualisation and social norms, although even this has improved over time. Women who are raped are still to some extent considered not as victims but somehow as aiding and abetting the crime unlike any other crime in society. Children (mainy girls - but boys as well) are now sexualised in advertising and in the media to serve some corporate bottom line. Men still outnumber women on Boards and as CEOs and not all of it is due to women taking time out of the workforce to raise kids.

However, no doubt you will disagree on all counts. You seem to think that women have achieved some sort of utopian existence and that there is no discrimination (formal or informal) remaining, but you are wrong and on that we will have to agree to disagree. One thing we do agree is that we should not replace the Boys Club with the Girls Club - both are equally discriminatory.

JamesH
My comment about slavery was not to paint the picture of women as enslaved - it is more telling that you immediately jumped to that conclusion.

Read the comment in context of Jefferson's natural factors argument. My point is that it is a testament to human fairness that women are not enslaved by men due to their physical superiority - it was in fact a compliment. If you look for insults you will miss what is actually written.

1.
"The trouble with terms like natural factors is who decides what is natural other than the obvious (such as reproduction or physical strength)."

Okay well let's just stick with the obvious for now.

Once a woman gets pregnant, there is nothing more she can do to ensure her reproductive success than to keep looking after that child. But a man is different by nature. He can beget more children by more women.

Remember, we're not talking about the social construction of gender differences yet. We're talking about the natural construction of sexual differences.

So now my next question is, does a woman have an equal right to the same capacity for reproductive success from multiple partners simultaneously as a man? It is no more possible than for a man to give birth, so the answer must be no, right?

2.
There is formal equality and there is substantive equality. If the law treats people equally - formal equality - in practice people will arrange themselves unequally. But if the law tries to make everyone equal in practice - substantive equality - it will require the law to treat everyone unequally. Formal and substantive equality are opposites.

Under the current dispensation, women get both the benefit of policies for formal, and policies for substantive equality, and *both* in the name of "equality". For example formal equality in policies against sexual discrimination in hiring, and substantive equality in policies such as special allowance for breastfeeding employees. The result is a double standard.

3.
If there are no natural rights, and if rights are whatever those in power say they are, then there is no basis for saying anything is fair. To say that something is fair there must be a reason for it.

For reasons in favour of natural rights, see:
http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/one.asp

4. Grim, your argument doesn't comply with your own standard of fairness.

Pelican as you point out, what means one thing to one person, maybe entirely different to another.

When I read slavery, it seems to imply to me more the hollywood stereotype. ;)

But then some feminist material also portrays women as slaves to mens desires etc. Slavery and servitude.

The slavery of housework.

Insult? I really wasn't looking for one.

grim -
'Well, suck it up, lads.'

'Perhaps the pendulum has (in some areas) swung too far. Tough.'

Thanks for being honest with us. We only have to scratch the surface before we find out what people like you, people who claim to be for equality, really think.

Now you only need to be honest with yourself.