|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
canuckistan
Mod Team
Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Location: Training future GS competitors.....
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 6:46 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Bulsajo wrote: |
| My Dutch is terrible, even on the best of days I'd have trouble telling an eingang from an ausfart, but everyone saw Canuckistan's post which verifies that the article this thread complete nonsense? |
Utter absolute nonsense.
Basically she says she was totally misquoted by the media for saying that educated women who choose to stay home should be fined. What she did say was that those people (men AND women) who study on gov't loans and then don't pay them back voluntarily because they choose not to work (as opposed to involuntary unemployment) should have to pay them back as it isn't fair to the people who work and support gov't loan programs through their taxes.
http://www.sharondijksma.nl/renderer.do/
menuId/28950/clearState/true/sf/28950/returnPage
/28950/itemId/246123/realItemId/246123/pageId/28624/instanceId/28956/
Chalk this one up to political manoeuvering by the other side.
Last edited by canuckistan on Wed Apr 05, 2006 7:40 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| people (men AND women) who study on gov't loans and then don't pay them back voluntarily because they choose not to work |
Staying at home and raising children is work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rteacher
Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Even in the early stages of feminism there were always hardcore, bull dyke types who hated men and competed with them in exploiting women. Perhaps the most notorious (and outrageous) was Valerie Solanis, the auther of the S.C.U.M. Manifesto (Society for the Cutting Up of Men) For those younger folks not familiar with it (I vaguely recall reading about it in the Village Voice ...) here is a brief excerpt brimming with twisted, envioius hatred:
 "To call man an animal is to flatter him. He is a biological accident, a walking dildo who will wade through a mile of vomit and swim a river of snot for *beep*. Men are passive, have *beep* envy and are an incomplete female. He is completely egocentric, incapable of empathizing or identifying with others, of love, friendship, affection or tenderness. He is visceral, not cerebral and unfit even for stud service." 
She's best known for shooting Andy Warhol in his studio (after he lost the lone copy of her manuscript...) Reportedly, the S.C.U.M. Manifesto has recently been translated into Arabic...
Lest one think that she was just one madwoman feminist spewing hatred of men in print here is a sampling of other titles that were published in the early days of the feminist movement:
Pamela Kearon
��Man-Hating��
in Shulamith Firestone and Anne Koedt
Notes from the Second Year: Women��s Liberation
(1970, Radical Feminism, New York)
Joanna Russ
��The New Misandry��
in Phyllis Birkby and others
Amazon Expedition: A Lesbian Feminist Anthology
(1973, Times Change Press, Washington NJ)
Jill Johnston
Lesbian Nation
(1973, Simon & Schuster, New York)
Joanna Russ
The Female Man
(1975, Bantam, New York)
Alice Echols
��Daring to Be Bad��: Radical Feminism in America, 1967-1975
(1989, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis)
Judith Levine
My Enemy, My Love: Man-Hating and Ambivalence in Women��s Lives
(1992, Doubleday, New York) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rteacher:
While I don't doubt that there were(and are) some wacked-out strains of feminism, that list of out-of-context book titles you posted doesn't really prove much.
| Quote: |
Alice Echols
��Daring to Be Bad��: Radical Feminism in America, 1967-1975
(1989, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis)
|
I think you have to be pretty tone-deaf to nuance to think that the word "bad" is being used there in the same sense as it is when we say "he commited a bad crime". More likely, I'd imagine the title means something like "daring to rebel".
| Quote: |
Judith Levine
My Enemy, My Love: Man-Hating and Ambivalence in Women��s Lives
(1992, Doubleday, New York) |
Is this book actually saying that women should hate men? Going by the title, it would sound as if te writer is examining the phenomenon of women having a love-hate relationship with their husbands and boyfriends. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Canuckistan:
That URL you posted is REALLY messing up the format of this thread. Any chance of making it shorter? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rteacher
Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
| "To call man an animal is to flatter him. He is a biological accident, a walking dildo who will wade through a mile of vomit and swim a river of snot for *beep*. Men are passive, have *beep* envy and are an incomplete female. He is completely egocentric, incapable of empathizing or identifying with others, of love, friendship, affection or tenderness. He is visceral, not cerebral and unfit even for stud service." |
Sadly, for every quote like that from a female, there are probably 1000 equivalent quotes from our brother humans. Here is a very very very tiny sample courtesy of google:
"What else is woman but a foe to friendship, an inescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic danger, a delectable detriment, an evil of nature, painted in fair colors...The word woman is used to mean the lust of the flesh, as it is said: I have found a woman more bitter than death, and a good woman more subject to carnal lust...[Women] are more credulous; and since the chief aim of the devil is to corrupt faith, therefore he rather attacks them [than men]...Women are naturally more impressionable...They have slippery tongues, and are unable to conceal from their fellow-women those things which by evil arts they know...Women are intellectually like children...She is more carnal than a man, as is clear from her many carnal abominations...She is an imperfect animal, she always deceives...Therefore a wicked woman is by her nature quicker to waver in her faith, and consequently quicker to abjure the faith, which is the root of witchcraft...Just as through the first defect in their intelligence they are more prone to abjure the faith; so through their second defect of inordinate affections and passions they search for, brood over, and inflict various vengeances, either by witchcraft or by some other means...Women also have weak memories; and it is a natural vice in them not to be disciplined, but to follow their own impulses without any sense of what is due...She is a liar by nature... Malleus Maleficarum
��Girls begin to talk and to stand on their feet sooner than boys because weeds always grow up more quickly than good crops.�� Martin Luther
God created woman. And boredom did indeed cease from that moment -- but many other things ceased as well! Woman was God's second mistake. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them. -- Otto Weininger
Woman reaches as far as desire, but not to value. She reaches as far as sympathy, but not respect. -- Weininger
As children, imbeciles and criminals would be justly prevented from taking any part in public affairs even if they were numerically equal or in the majority; woman must in the same way be kept from having a share in anything which concerns the public welfare. Sex and Character: page 339. -- Weininger
They have the right to work wherever they want to-as long as they have dinner ready when you get home. -- John Wayne
I have found one good man in a thousand, But not one good woman among them. -- Ecclesiastes 7:28
The sacred books should be burned rather than made available to women. -- Talmud, Sotah 3:4, Jewish Scripture
"When a women inclines to learning, there is usually something wrong with her sex apparatus." Nietzsche
"
I consider that women who are authors, lawyers, and politicians are monsters.�� Pierre August Renoir
WC Fields:"I believe in tying the marriage knot, as long as it's around the woman's neck."
"No doubt exists that all women are crazy; it's only a question of degree."
And from H. L. Mencken
A man may be a fool and not know it, but not if he is married.
Misogynist - A man who hates women as much as women hate one another.
��On one issue, at least, men and women agree: they both distrust women��
But Mencken also said: ��Complete masculinity and stupidity are often indistinguishable��
And finally from Timothy Leary:
Women who seek to be equal with men lack ambition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
But Mencken also said: ��Complete masculinity and stupidity are often indistinguishable��
|
I suspect that one comes from In Defense Of Women, a rather amusing satire on early 20th Century gender relations and politics. Unfortunately, it's now out of print, I believe.
And yeah. I wouldn't hold up the SCUM manifesto as representative of feminist thinking any more than I would hold Mencken's satire up as representative of early 20th Century liberalism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:13 pm Post subject: Re: This is why some call them Feminazis |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/946
Sharon Dijksma, a leading parliamentarian of the Dutch Labour Party (PvdA) wants to penalise educated stay-at-home women. ��A highly-educated woman who chooses to stay at home and not to work – that is destruction of capital,�� she said in an interview last week. ��If you receive the benefit of an expensive education at society��s expense, you should not be allowed to throw away that knowledge unpunished.��
The intellectuals strike again!! |
Ho hum. If a nutty bloke spouts some nutty nonsense we say "what a bloody nutter." If a nutty bird spouts some nutty nonsense we hear "bloody feminists gone mad!" Just that mentallity in itself indicates that the work of feminists still has a long way to go. |
Really? People just said, "What a bloody nutter," about former Harvard president Larry Summers when he suggested that perhaps the reason there were many more males in post-graduate science classes than females could be innate differences between the two sexes? I seem to recall a different reaction. |
I don't recall him suggesting punishment of females who dared to delve into traditionally male disiplines.
I don't know much about the Larry Summers furore, as it was an American issue. However, I would suspect that it was the 'sexier' reactions that caught the attention of the press. People making middle of the road comments are not reportable. Similarly, feminists without extreme man-hating tendencies (the vast majority of feminists) are not media sexy - unless, of course, they're rather photogenic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| She's making a blatantly chauvanist statement and you're blaming feminists? You're blaming the PC movement for a woman calling for punishment of women? |
You assume though that modern day feminism is all about equality, while to many self-styled 'feminists' it is about the destruction of 'patriarchy' and any vestiges of socially constructed 'genders'. Thus, women who stay at home have betrayed the feminist movement, from this woman's point of view. Feminists are to sexism, what 'anti-racists' are to racism. The policies both groups propose are often both sexist and racist respectively. Both movements stopped being about equal rights along time ago. |
Ah Bigverne....sigh. The term "Feminism" is an umbrella that covers a wide range of viewpoints. You choose to ascribe the most radical and militant ideologies to all 'modern day feminism.' Yawn. For most feminists I know (including my late father - one of my favourite all time feminists) feminism meant not being a doormat for society to walk all over. Feminism does mean equal rights to 99% of feminists. Those who most fascinate you, those nasty feminists wishing to emasculate poor Bigverne, are a radical minority (and possibly an imaginary minority?) - but they have the greatest strangle hold over modern man's psyche.
| Quote: |
| Thus, women who stay at home have betrayed the feminist movement, |
This is a criticism by many modern day feminists looking back at the 70s feminism movement. You are about 20 years behind - as usual. As far back as the 80s I recall that feminist accademics have been trying to address this. Politicians (who are mostly male) have a long way to go before they come up with adequate solutions to address the inequalities that we mothers face in our society. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| She's making a blatantly chauvanist statement and you're blaming feminists? You're blaming the PC movement for a woman calling for punishment of women? |
You assume though that modern day feminism is all about equality, while to many self-styled 'feminists' it is about the destruction of 'patriarchy' and any vestiges of socially constructed 'genders'. Thus, women who stay at home have betrayed the feminist movement, from this woman's point of view. Feminists are to sexism, what 'anti-racists' are to racism. The policies both groups propose are often both sexist and racist respectively. Both movements stopped being about equal rights along time ago. |
Ah Bigverne....sigh. The term "Feminism" is an umbrella that covers a wide range of viewpoints. You choose to ascribe the most radical and militant ideologies to all 'modern day feminism.' Yawn. For most feminists I know (including my late father - one of my favourite all time feminists) feminism meant not being a doormat for society to walk all over. Feminism does mean equal rights to 99% of feminists. Those who most fascinate you, those nasty feminists wishing to emasculate poor Bigverne, are a radical minority (and possibly an imaginary minority?) - but they have the greatest strangle hold over modern man's psyche.
| Quote: |
| Thus, women who stay at home have betrayed the feminist movement, |
This is a criticism by many modern day feminists looking back at the 70s feminism movement. You are about 20 years behind - as usual. As far back as the 80s I recall that feminist accademics have been trying to address this. Politicians (who are mostly male) have a long way to go before they come up with adequate solutions to address the inequalities that we mothers face in our society. |
All I know is that when working in IT, women were still making between 5 and 15% less than I was. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yu_Bum_suk
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| She's making a blatantly chauvanist statement and you're blaming feminists? You're blaming the PC movement for a woman calling for punishment of women? |
You assume though that modern day feminism is all about equality, while to many self-styled 'feminists' it is about the destruction of 'patriarchy' and any vestiges of socially constructed 'genders'. Thus, women who stay at home have betrayed the feminist movement, from this woman's point of view. Feminists are to sexism, what 'anti-racists' are to racism. The policies both groups propose are often both sexist and racist respectively. Both movements stopped being about equal rights along time ago. |
Ah Bigverne....sigh. The term "Feminism" is an umbrella that covers a wide range of viewpoints. You choose to ascribe the most radical and militant ideologies to all 'modern day feminism.' Yawn. For most feminists I know (including my late father - one of my favourite all time feminists) feminism meant not being a doormat for society to walk all over. Feminism does mean equal rights to 99% of feminists. Those who most fascinate you, those nasty feminists wishing to emasculate poor Bigverne, are a radical minority (and possibly an imaginary minority?) - but they have the greatest strangle hold over modern man's psyche.
| Quote: |
| Thus, women who stay at home have betrayed the feminist movement, |
This is a criticism by many modern day feminists looking back at the 70s feminism movement. You are about 20 years behind - as usual. As far back as the 80s I recall that feminist accademics have been trying to address this. Politicians (who are mostly male) have a long way to go before they come up with adequate solutions to address the inequalities that we mothers face in our society. |
Mmm, I find myself mostly siding with a woman on this forum over a gender issue ... that doesn't happen very often. However, while I think BB is basically right, I don't think she's taking into consideration what non-academics who consider themselves 'feminists' think or how practically useless academic feminism sometimes is.
That said, I'd interpret the OP's quotation to be an anti-feminist remark, on the whole. It's all about controlling women's lives, and it's interesting how it makes no reference to men who get an education and don't contribute a thing to the society that paid for it (like me, for instance, having abandoned my country after being a career student for my 20s). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 9:23 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Really? People just said, "What a bloody nutter," about former Harvard president Larry Summers when he suggested that perhaps the reason there were many more males in post-graduate science classes than females could be innate differences between the two sexes? I seem to recall a different reaction. |
OK, so here comes the new tack: "What a bloody nutter" is not a sufficient response.
Before we go there, flak, what do you think about someone portraying a woman calling for women to be punished a case of "feminists gone wild"?
In other words, before you try to change the topic, I believe your response to the OP is insufficient.
Do comment. |
I'm not sure I should respond now that Canuck has stated that the OP quote is basically untrue rendering the whole discussion rather moot. However, just to flavor things up a bit, I'll respond anyway under the hypothetical situation: "What is the OP's quote is accurate?"
Firstly, this is not a new "tack," as you say. It was just a new post. I am simply a different person from other posters and it was BB's statement that caught my eye. I didn't respond to the OP because I try not to resond much to BJWD or whatever his name is as I don't particualrly take him seriously. (See his views on religious people- "grown-ups who talk to imaginary friends") Also, he never really seemed to make a point to be attacked of defended. Indeed, the only things he attacked were his own integrity and BB's feet (Both of which are much smaller than he estimates).
I simply don't agree that a man (in my country) can say something that could be contrued as sexist, and get off with a shoulder shrug and a "bah, he's just crazy." If a man in a high position says something that can be construed as sexist, it WILL be construed as sexist and he will suffer for it.
As for your assumption that a policy that punishes women couldn't possibly be feministic, I totally disagree. Many critics of feminism have argued that feminism often hurts women. In fact, this is true of many progressive movements. Welfare, for example, was designed, in part, to help the unemployed. However, when it was found that some people would make more money by not working than by working at a low-paying job, they saw that the system needed to be tweaked. The very system that should have helped the unemployed get back on their feet, was encouraging them not to. Some would argue that some unions, who are supposed to make things better for workers, have made things worse for workers. Even if this were not true, it easy to imagine it being true. If unions demand so much that the company struggles to be profitable and competitive, workers will eventually have to be cut. It is certainly true that many movements often lose sight of their original goals. I have no idea as to whether this woman actually said what the OP said she said, nor whether she is a "feminist." However, it is not hard for me to imagine that her alleged statement was rooted in feminisim. I mean, if someone says, "A woman place is in the home," that would be considered sexist against women. Ideally, feminism would counter with, "A woman's place is wherever she chooses, which could very well be the home, but not necessarily." However, the opposite of the original statement would be , "Not only is a woman's place not in the home, she should ashamed to settle for anything less than a career outside the home. Why be "just a mother," or "just a homemaker" when you can have it all?" This would be the voice of a feminist who cares more about feminism than she does about women. The original idea was to give women the power to be free. However, some one might easily forget the "to be free" part and focus on the "power" part. In that case, it is not hard to see that some feminists might upset with women who, though educated, are not out in the workplace increasing the power and influence of women in the business world and in the community.
Just to be clear, a lot of this hypothetical. I don't know what is going on with this story or inside this woman's mind. I am simply saying that the notion that a cause is hurting the people it was supposed to help is not unbelievable in the least. I think it is a very common occurance, indeed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
canuckistan
Mod Team
Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Location: Training future GS competitors.....
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
Canuckistan:
That URL you posted is REALLY messing up the format of this thread. Any chance of making it shorter? |
Done! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
