BD, I have not spent much time on the historical roots of "Feminism". Maybe it did take an extremist to get over the inertia to get things going (I don't know). Whatever the bits that brought it together there have been real issues which needed addressing (some of them having something to do with that biblical pattern for men and women you love).

- Women should have the vote.
- Women should be paid equally to men doing the same work.
- Women should be as safe as men to walk in the street, or their garden unmolested as men (more about social attitude than law).
- Women should have career opportunities based on their ability not their gender (not sure that men always have this either)
- Women should have the same freedoms to dress as they like as enjoyed by men. They probably have more freedom in the workplace than men currently but my comment is more in regard to those who insist on women dressing by their standard of modesty rather than a fashion commentary.
- Women should be treated as being as responsible for their actions as men are treated.
- Women should be able to exercise the same freedoms and responsibilities in their lives as exercised by men.

Once we are sure that those objectives are met (and similar ones I may have missed) then the issues are about the kind of society we live in - the balance between individual freedom and community etc rather than feminism or masculism (or whatever it might be called).

I would agree that there are areas where the shift has gone along way past equality but there are still area's where there is some way to go. The task of those who care is to work towards fixing the imbalances not pushing entire agenda's.

R0bert

Wow, BD what an excellent example and description of how religion has approached societies throughout history. Tiny minorities with big mouths and empty self righteous heads, trying to take over.

I am not sure as to whether Timkins got the text recognition loop machine, from you, or the other way round. Please explain. (oops, sorry Pauline)

Robert, you have the right approach and understand the subject. Even though something may have effected us adversely, approaching things in a humble and understanding way, always brings enlightenment and improves our lives, making us stronger. As you say, “there are still area's where there is some way to go.”

Irrelevant as what radical feminism has done and is trying to do to society, it has shown us all how lacking it is in its implementation and outcomes. Thus giving us the ability to counter it with reason.

We are lucky that the majority of both genders realise this and are beginning to speak out at the useless politically correct attacks on society, by the out of touch feminist (blanks). As most of the women and men say in their posts, we know whats going on, we understand the problem, and we are overcoming this mental malignancy.

How, like all loopy isms, they can't sustain their illusions for long, because reality always rears it head and shows us what they are, a sinister joke.

Thanx Robert, your insights always contribute to furthering the discussion. Lets have a closer look at some of those in the light of Biblical teaching:

- VOTE I can't actually see any Biblical problem with this.

- EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK "Don't muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain" (i.e. if its working for you, pay it ) No suggestion of less grain for female oxen :)

-SAFETY Never gonna happen while men are stronger than women, but I support the ideal and so does Scripture, which also underlines mens responsibilities to protect the fairer sex. (see book of Ruth)

-CAREER OPPORTUNITIES. I still struggle with the idea of women having dominion over men, but, the N.T. Picture always seems to see a difference between social life and Church/Worship life. In Worship, the God==> Man==> Woman pattern should be observed always, in Work, well, I see examples where women have excelled, so in non church activities, go for it.

-DRESS All should adopt a code of modesty as opposed to flaunting which is clearly aimed at our lower nature.

- EQUAL RESPONSIBILITY sure, why not ?

- FREEDOMS. Should be ok

So there u go

Laurie,
You have not provided specific details about feminism, just given generalisations.

I could say that there needs to be more “democracy” in the country. But that is too general, and if I keep saying it, I would eventually be asked to provide specific details about the lack of democracy, and also state what should be done to increase or improve democracy.

The same now goes for so called “progressive” feminism. For many years people have had to listen to feminists demonise males (and try and excuse it by saying that it is “satire” etc), and listen to feminists talk about “patriarchy”, and listen to feminists say there needs to be more “equality” etc.

So time is up, and feminists can now be very specific. Feminists should be able to point to specific feminist policies, and specific feminist texts, and make known which feminists can be relied upon, and which feminists can’t be relied upon etc.

BD
Some feminists were abused, although the vast majority of people who call themselves feminist would not have been abused. But I tend to think that feminism teaches people to be abusive to other people. Newspaper writers such as Susan Maushart, Emma Tom etc are the most foul-minded, foul-mouthed and abusive writers in mainstream newspapers, perhaps ever in Australian newspaper history. Doesn’t say much for all these years of feminism one would think.

Robert,
The list of “gender equality rights” you mention were acquired by women many decades ago, and much, much more besides. But the greatest challenge now for feminism, would be to be honest.

There has been the most minimal evidence of honesty, truthfulness, or reliability within feminism, and it probably won’t be achieved until feminists start to call themselves feminist / masculinists or masculinists / feminists. However many professional feminists would be out of a job if they were to change their name.

The Alchemist,
The term “text recognition loop” was first said by a feminist supporter, so as to avoid having to answer specific questions about feminism. That person has still not provided satisfactory answers to those questions on feminism.

BD, thanks for the open response. That bit "I still struggle with the idea of women having dominion over men" seems to lie at the core of a lot of these issues. Some men obviously do better at managing that struggle than others. Where faith is optional (and no social pressure to conform) I don't really care what unbalanced power structures you use within the church. It is a problem if that approach is adopted anywhere that has a less than consentual involvement for people or where public money is used to support it (church schools etc).

I don't regard sexuality as necessarily part of a lower nature (ignoring possible puns on physical placement). Personally I consider prudity (I know that is different to modesty) to be part of a lower nature than healthy expressions of sexuality.

My comments about safety were more in regard to a recognition of someone elses right to autonomy than a personal responsibility to protect blonds :) . I don't see physical strength as the issue, rather a level of acceptance by some for taking by force what is not given freely. A gun can make up for a lot of physical strength.

Whatever we do there will always be some who fail to respect appropriate boundaries however I do think that community attitudes play a role in the numbers willing to harm others. That is part of why it is not OK to have teachers teaching that women who do not dress modestly invite rape.

At the end of the day each of us should take responsibility for the choices we make, my role is not to protect blonds but rather to work towards a society where no-one need fear violent attack as they go about their lives. Women have a responsibility to think about the level of risk they take (time and place) and make choices they can live with.

Cheers
R0bert

Trinity,
Thanks for the response.

I have asked around a few of my female friends/colleagues. From what I can tell, there still seems to be a certain amount of chauvinism in the world. Many women I know get treated ‘delicately’ or as a sexual person (in the wrong settings) rather than as equals or even respected competitors.

From this, I get a mixed response. Some women use the image men hold to manipulate the situation to their advantage (i.e. get the man to pay, do the work, etc) while others feel outrage that their equality is questioned.

And from a quiz to my male friends/colleagues, the same kind of mixed response – recognition of equality to downright ignorance of potential in women.

The main thread in those who cannot see the stupidity in not finding women equal in all respects I have found is one of two issues:
- Fear of being ‘shown up’ or ‘outdone’ by ‘a woman’; or
- Anger towards a woman who has done them wrong (in either a relationship or work setting)

I guess it is easy to see how blind anger can taint a view (without pointing fingers or suggesting anything, I think we have seen a version of this on this thread!).

However, the fear side is a bit of a mystery. I guess if you are raised or chose to believe a certain way, fear take over when the unfamiliar knocks at your door.

In my mind, it is a fading mindset and in the next 20 to 30 years, the now younger men, more used to seeing women compete equally and successfully, will become the role models for the next generations to come through.

Well I hope so anyway.

I’ll just ignore the loops and loopys…. It does get repetitive!

Well, thanks for the support here. I expect we may meet in another thread regarding abortion and religion – there will be some serious ‘fundy’ work going on there needing a dose of moderation