3 ms·

Look at how feminists act, not at the definition in a random dictionary. That's in general good advice. For example, if somebody says they are your friend, look

Look at how feminists act, not at the definition in a random dictionary. That's in general good advice. For example, if somebody says they are your friend, look at how they act, not at what they say. "An alternative is paid leave for either partner (or the single parent) for example for a year -- with freedom to choose who stays home." This is already case in many countries (for example Germany), but women still stay home most of the time. I am actually all for it. All I am saying is that there are more forces at work than people are aware of. Women are not forced to stay home, many mothers like to stay home with their kids. It's actually more of a men's right thing to say men should also be allowed to stay home more often. In general men staying home will mean women going to work instead. Feminists believe that this is better for the women. A corollary is that feminists think it's awful to stay at home with kids, or at least worse than going to work.

e12e 13y ago
> Look at how feminists act, not at the definition in a random dictionary. That's in general good advice. For example, if somebody says they are your friend, look at how they act, not at what they say. If someone says they are my friend, I assume they claim to be a friend according to the definition of the word "friend". If they're not my friend, then that doesn't change the definition of the word friend, it changes their classification from "being my friend" to something else. I'm not sure what your point is: that many that claim to be feminists are not? Or that you've decided on a different use of the word, so those that claim the established definition are all wrong? >> "An alternative is paid leave for either partner (or the single parent) for example for a year -- with freedom to choose who stays home." > This is already case in many countries (for example Germany), but women still stay home most of the time. I know, and I believe I've implied in one of my other comments, how the fact that stay at home pay is often reduced compared to full time pay -- and how if on average women make less -- many families cannot afford to have the man stay home as much as the women. For certain families the roles are reversed, and the woman cannot afford to stay home. In either case, economic realities dictate who stays home and how long -- and that is an impediment to equal (parenting) rights. As have been established in this thread, in general women make less than men, so in general such economic incentives works against men's right to stay home, or against women's right to work -- in effect the work as an incentive for "traditional" family values and gender roles.
- facepalm 13y ago
  "If someone says they are my friend, I assume they claim to be a friend according to the definition of the word "friend"." OK, good point. However friend is not really defined by Wikipedia. We all have an intuitive notion of what a friend is. Likewise I don't think people look on Wikipedia to check if they might be feminists. My point is that many who say they are feminists because they want equal rights have actually joined forces with something much more negative instead. "In either case, economic realities dictate who stays home and how long -- and that is an impediment to equal (parenting) rights." But what if women choose jobs with lower pay but higher flexibility, so that they can stay at home with kids? Isn't that a sensible and reasonable choice? Which, btw., nobody is forced to make. There are plenty of women who earn a lot of money. You will argue that society expects women to stay at home, but ultimately, people in the Western world are free to choose their own mates. I think a lot of men wouldn't mind staying at home and marrying well earning women. As I said in other comments, I think it is actually a female privilege to be allowed to stay home, and also to choose jobs with lower wages. That's where I think feminists have it completely backwards. If you think about it, why would a woman support a man staying at home? Why not pay a nurse instead, might be cheaper than paying half of your income. The other way round it doesn't work because women give childbirth. Of course all the articles about relationships breaking when the woman earns more than the man make the cause out to be male desire for dominance and vanity. What if instead it is the women who can't cope with it - because they don't have to? You look at the numbers and decide women must get a bad rap - you claim all you want is free choice for everyone. But the possibility that women chose their path deliberately doesn't enter your mind. That's the feminist bias at work. Which, btw., seems to assume women are stupid. Feminism is a weird beast indeed. Another indicator that women's choices might not be so stupid at all is their significantly longer life expectancy over men's. Personally I'd happily trade a chunk of my pay check for a 10 years longer life.

e12e 13y ago

> Look at how feminists act, not at the definition in a random dictionary. That's in general good advice. For example, if somebody says they are your friend, look at how they act, not at what they say. If someone says they are my friend, I assume they claim to be a friend according to the definition of the word "friend". If they're not my friend, then that doesn't change the definition of the word friend, it changes their classification from "being my friend" to something else. I'm not sure what your point is: that many that claim to be feminists are not? Or that you've decided on a different use of the word, so those that claim the established definition are all wrong? >> "An alternative is paid leave for either partner (or the single parent) for example for a year -- with freedom to choose who stays home." > This is already case in many countries (for example Germany), but women still stay home most of the time. I know, and I believe I've implied in one of my other comments, how the fact that stay at home pay is often reduced compared to full time pay -- and how if on average women make less -- many families cannot afford to have the man stay home as much as the women. For certain families the roles are reversed, and the woman cannot afford to stay home. In either case, economic realities dictate who stays home and how long -- and that is an impediment to equal (parenting) rights. As have been established in this thread, in general women make less than men, so in general such economic incentives works against men's right to stay home, or against women's right to work -- in effect the work as an incentive for "traditional" family values and gender roles.

facepalm 13y ago
"If someone says they are my friend, I assume they claim to be a friend according to the definition of the word "friend"." OK, good point. However friend is not really defined by Wikipedia. We all have an intuitive notion of what a friend is. Likewise I don't think people look on Wikipedia to check if they might be feminists. My point is that many who say they are feminists because they want equal rights have actually joined forces with something much more negative instead. "In either case, economic realities dictate who stays home and how long -- and that is an impediment to equal (parenting) rights." But what if women choose jobs with lower pay but higher flexibility, so that they can stay at home with kids? Isn't that a sensible and reasonable choice? Which, btw., nobody is forced to make. There are plenty of women who earn a lot of money. You will argue that society expects women to stay at home, but ultimately, people in the Western world are free to choose their own mates. I think a lot of men wouldn't mind staying at home and marrying well earning women. As I said in other comments, I think it is actually a female privilege to be allowed to stay home, and also to choose jobs with lower wages. That's where I think feminists have it completely backwards. If you think about it, why would a woman support a man staying at home? Why not pay a nurse instead, might be cheaper than paying half of your income. The other way round it doesn't work because women give childbirth. Of course all the articles about relationships breaking when the woman earns more than the man make the cause out to be male desire for dominance and vanity. What if instead it is the women who can't cope with it - because they don't have to? You look at the numbers and decide women must get a bad rap - you claim all you want is free choice for everyone. But the possibility that women chose their path deliberately doesn't enter your mind. That's the feminist bias at work. Which, btw., seems to assume women are stupid. Feminism is a weird beast indeed. Another indicator that women's choices might not be so stupid at all is their significantly longer life expectancy over men's. Personally I'd happily trade a chunk of my pay check for a 10 years longer life.