Benk

‘My point is that much of the media only promotes a particular stream of feminism that focusses on choice/independence and self confidence/self esteem. "Dissenting feminists" are those feminists who think outside this particular box.’

Well, on that particular basis I must be a ‘dissenting feminist’ then, because I couldn’t give a flying fig about choice, independence, self confidence or self esteem. But somehow I doubt if you will agree with that as you seem to have a very narrow definition of what constitutes both feminism and feminist dissent.

There will always be those who believe that any form of critical analysis that focuses on unequal power distribution across genders, classes and races etc is all about victimhood, and will resist all attempts to convince them otherwise.

Cornflower

Perhaps you're the one who should get off that dead horse. I already had a quick scan of those links you put up on the supposed legalised discrimination against white males (Andrew Bolt? Oz Conservative? Yuk!) and found them to be full of the same old victimhood rhetoric that you are so fond of projecting onto feminism.

And BTW, please try to stop responding to any post I write about how feminism has moved on from the 80s by telling me that I need to move on from the feminism of the 80s. Have you ever thought of getting your eyes tested?

SJF

Those links should have made it easier for you to apply your own 'take' of feminism to the definition of 'equal', 'discrimination' and 'stereotyping'.

This would be most illuminating and instructive for 'white' male students who are struggling with their studies and are assured they will face discrimination in recruitment, certainly for government positions federally where it has been that way for decades and now for all employment in Victoria.

Don't you think these young hopefuls are entitled to know how they will be selected for discrimination and why? What would you use as the HR manager of (say) the Equal Opportunity Commission, Victoria to determine who is 'white' and 'advantaged' and as a result the CV should be put to the bottom of the pile or more likely, in the round filing cabinet at the foot of the desk?

Bolt is right, it is a licence to despise.

'Rather than indulge yourself with yet another undergraduate femrad rant out of the Eighties,'

Haha! C'mon that's when she's most entertaining.

SJF,

Are you also 'a woman of taste' like Germaine?

Do you not find any hypocrisy in promoting a book of naked male adolescents as objects of desire for 'pederast' 'women of taste' and campaigning against the exploitation of young women?

Houlley
I admire Germaine on some fronts, she does not tolerate fools and is very honest and straightfoward 'what you see is what you get' - see her dish it out on First Tuesday Bookclub?

In my own opinion, the problem was she approached feminism, as many others did, from the viewpoint of the male position within society and sought to match that. Instead of seeking to raise the profile of "woman" and feminine traits she sought to make women more like men to be able to compete with men. To be fair maybe this was the only way to achieve any sense of equality in seeking those first basic rights like equal pay.

Regarding the book - I am not sure if Germaine was trying to make a particular point but if it was a man writing a book about naked girls there would probably be a Royal Commission. I have not seen the book, so I don't know how old the 'boys' were or if they were consenting adults.

I would prefer feminism had emphasised some of traditional female 'traits' as being positive. What used to annoy me as a stay-at-home mum was the idea that somehow we were betraying feminism and I have even heard some top women make comments like "who would want to choose to stay at home raising kids" or "if you had a brain...".

We give a lot more lip service now to the rights of children but in reality children are very low down in priority. You only have to look at the poor wages of those who we pay to care for our children while we are at work.

Back to the workplace - perhaps purely through exposure there has been some postive female influences which have been absorbed. There are a plethora of management courses which teach people to be more consultative and how to negotiate within the workplace. This might have been the result of more women in management or maybe just a consequence of the continuing maturity of civilisation. I am not sure.

SJF

Now that you have provided us with plenty of examples of what you don't believe in, would you be so kind as to tell the rest of us what you do believe in? What are some examples of this 'unequal power distributions' thingy?

SJF,

'who gets to define what a ‘dissenting feminist idea’ is?'

It's like in any politics, someone who is brave enough not to just reflexively quote the party line on any issue. Like how you quote your gender studies texts as a religious leader quotes the bible.

Dissenting feminist idea’s are actually pretty common in the real world, something you've been pretty sheltered from by your indoctrination to the religious order.

pelican,

I think you're one of robert's 'good' feminists. SJF probably hates you! You're too keen to please the patriarchal oppressor she would say. She goes on about defining 'dissenting feminist idea’s', but she never ever has said anything derogative about any aspect of feminism, which kinda gives you 2 zillion more points for credibility. Reading something negative about feminism by SJF is about as likely as reading something positive about women from antiseptic.

I am merely fishing anyway as you no doubt know.

But, I really like your points. (on most threads actually)

'if it was a man writing a book about naked girls there would probably be a Royal Commission.'
Exactly! And I wager many a feminist gender studies student has used examples of David Hamilton, Henson et al to demonstrate many many things, but these many many things would of course not apply to 'The Boy' by some bizarre justification. TO maintain credibility, the constitutional feminist like SJF, is caught between denouncing something Germaine did (not possible) or denouncing some of their theories about male sexual exploitation of women (also not possible).

'perhaps purely through exposure there has been some postive female influences which have been absorbed.'
Definately! As there have been many advances in the home by men who have argued 'does it really matter if our 2 year old doesn't have matching socks on'.

BTW: I agreed muchly with Germaine's opinion of Steve Irwin, and the timing of her comments. When the world was crying a river of tears for someone they had never met, she had the ovaries to say she thought he was a tosser who tormented animals.