Hyerdahl3 wrote:
> >From: "bluesmama" onebluesmama{at}gmail.com
> >Message-id: 

> >You see it as a tendency, I see it as more than that, but we'll have
to
> disagree. I think it's possible to be aware of bias and try to
correct for it,
> whatever a person chooses to call themself. Why should I let the
radical
> feminists co-opt the term and keep it for themselves?
>
> What is wrong with radical feminism, mama?  How equal is too equal?
However,
> as a radical feminist, myself, I feel compelled to say that ideas
from all
> feminists should be expressed.  BTW, what makes a feminist "radical"?
That has
> always escaped me.  :-)

I don't think anything is wrong with radical feminism, if it's
considered to be one end of the continuum. I believe that without
extremes of opinion to goad them, sometimes middle-of-the-road people
like me would be satisfied with things as they are, or at least
resigned to them. Not much change would happen that way.

I just don't think feminists with radical or extreme views (like some
of those quotes from Andre, I'm sure you've read them) should be
considered to be THE voice of feminism, instead of just one of the MANY
voices of feminism. Because that radical voice is the only one that
seems to be heard, I guess because of its extreme nature. I think that
scares a lot of men and women off from understanding what the push for
equal rights is all about. Then men like S Taylor start talking about
sex farms ad nauseum.

>  I>believe feminism started out as a good thing, and can be one
again,
>
> I believe feminism has always been a good thing, in every part of the
world,
> and in the many ways it has been expressed.  The equality of women is
always a
> good thing, no?  What does a "radical" feminist do to make her or him
> "radical"?  :-)  'Betcha' can't eat just one.  :-)

I don't believe there's anything good about things like talk of male
genocide, unless it serves that goading purpose I talked about earlier,
or even acts in a sort of satirical function to point out that men are
not about to go away, so we might as well try like hell to understand
and interact with them.

> if it's taken back by women who are more interested in loving men
than>hating
> them.
> >
> Feminism isn't about men at all; it isn't about loving or hating men.
It's
> simply about equal rights, and when women enforce the right they
already have
> at law, men scream "manhating".   There was a funny story-line in a
film called
> "The American President" where some guy was telling the prez that
women were
> ruining men's sports by insisting equal amounts of money be spent on
women's
> sports.  The prez replied that this was the very premise of Title IX,
and the
> man replied, "...yes, but now they want it enforced..."  :-)

I didn't mean to imply that feminism was about loving or hating men.
What I want is for the feminists who love men to be heard as much as
the feminists that hate them.



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 1/30/05 2:01:33 PM ---