What Effect Has Feminism Had on Family? - Page 5

[laralou]

You might want to ask Cat to close this one and redirect to the new ones.

[Els' 3 Ones]

What an interesting thread this has been. You are all so passionate. I, too, think the thread needs to either be renamed or started anew......

In all these threads I fail to see a line drawn from "feminism" to the societal problems that families are facing today. The feminists that I heard as a teenager (Freidan/Steinem) never, that I recall, said to leave your kids. They talked about having a CHOICE. I never heard about "doing it all" . Not all at once. Why would a feminist movement want to add to the burden? Just b/c the message was misinterpreted doesn't draw the line to blame for what is happening now.

You understand even in the 1960's IF an uneducated (formal) woman was working it was a low paying, service job that could barely support one, let alone a family. If she was educated she was most likely a teacher, nurse or secretary. If she happened to be a lawyer or journalist - then she was making far, far less than her male counterparts...............And yes, I do know women were doing many more things than I listed above - but the vast majority were not. What I remember hearing/learning was this:

You don't have to be married for financial support (was this the man hating part?). Advocating for equal pay. You also did not need marriage to have sexual satisfaction (an adult single woman was to have no sex?)

You don't have to have children - you can choose a career if you want. (what happens when you choose something? something else gets left behind) These women were not addressing having a career and children. Just advocating going after the career if you wanted. Delaying or forgoing children. Women back then, on average, really didn't think there was a choice. You were supposed to get married and have children.

IMO, it is other forces that have brought about today's family. Yes, I do believe this dynamic is in flux. Today's "feminists" are advocating for family friendly workplaces and I think that is a great way to go. Good luck to us because we are battling big business so it's a tough fight.

I really believe the rhetoric that blames feminism for family decay is coming from places that would seek to send us back to the 1950's......................

OK, I've stuck my old neck into the fray. Blast my ancient memories away....................

[Britt]

New thread

What should the new thread be called? I'll start it, but want to move forward on the right foot... Maybe:

Developing a feminist agenda

The future of feminism

The future of feminism and family

??? I don't know. Something specifically about feminism from a positive perspective. Anyone have ideas?

I am enjoying reading everyone's thoughts and impressions *so much.* I won't post anything else until we get a new and more positive thread going.

[pie]

Why would a feminist movement want to add to the burden?

You are a SUPER genius, my lady....

[Hilary Briss]

New Thread Name

How about:

Feminism: fix it or f*ck it

[pie]

I would rather have feminism all broken down and screwed up than the alernative... wait we HAVE the alternative...

Fight the power!! Run run run sistahs!

I started a new thread ladies and gent.

[boobybooby]

Here's an idea, why don't we find a new term for "feminism". The problem with the word is that many people, myself included and as someone here pointed out, have an attached meaning already to that word. And it's often not a meaning that sounds appealing.

Like I said before, I commend the fact that early feminists gave women the right to choose what life they wanted. But I also don't give sole credit to the "feminism" movement for that. we are all individuals, and individuals make a difference in the world even if they are not part of a movement. But there is just part of me that cannot understand why a woman would not choose to be her child's primary full-time parent if she can afford to? This country is anything and everything BUT child-centered, and saying that feminism had no part in that is like saying that television has no part in the gelatinous state of mind our youth is experiencing today! The title of the thread was what effect has fem. had on the family, right? Well, from where I sit I can say that capitalism, selfishness, "equality" at the cost of our children, and many other things attribute to the epidemic of family breakdown and childhood problems, feminism surely being one of them.

I am super grateful though to anyone who goes out on a limb to make choices like midwifery available and cost covered by their insurance, I just don't think I would call that feminism. Feminism had set out to make the world a place where men and women would be equal in the workplace, and where women could attend colleges and have hope of becoming Dr's and lawyers eventually, which don't get me wrong, I think is a great cause. I just don't think it mixes well with babies, IMO. And the problem many feminists face even today is that when they do decide to have a baby, they are left with a decision that often feels wrong instinctively to leave their baby at 6 weeks old with a stranger. I think women just need to stand up for themselves more often to peers, husbands, family, employers and say they have thoughtfully chosen to be a SAHM after their baby is born, because research shows it is good for baby. I have many friends who were afraid to leave their jobs after baby, and not for monetary reasons but mostly what others will think of them, sometimes the modern day husband who often times looks at his wife now as not only the housekeeper, wife, mommy but also as a wage earner for the family. And this thinking all started with effects of feminism, women in the workplace struggling to be equal with men. Its often too much for one person to handle, ask around. Women who are juggling all that stuff feel like they are suffocating. Somewhere, although none of us can accurately pinpoint where in history, we as a country have lost the idea that being a wife and mother can be fulfilling w/out anything else, if we choose that road in life. Women were influenced to shut down their sexuality in child bearing and marriage and become more "free" with sexuality. We've got repercussions galore from an era of feminism that tried to replace what it means biologically, emotionally and instinctively to be a woman with what it means to be more like a man, and it's going to real hard for people to forget that. And again, the children are the ones who have and will continue to pay the price of the state of the family today.

[pie]

We both agree on the problem but see the effects of feminism differently.

I have no idea why I find your point of view on this subject so engaging, Booby but I do! Hopefully you will join the new discussion on feminism in this column.

[boobybooby]

Thanks Mamapie!

I'll try to get in the new discussion a bit later, we are off to the chiropractor for awhile.

[steph]

ok, my very humble two cents...it seems to me in this discussion that much of what is maligned about feminism is based on an ideal that some feel has never materialised - or manifested differently than intended. Any movement - social, political, religious is merely the group dynamic of a bunch of individuals responding to an idea of some sorts. So the actions that people are reacting to are merely that - the actions of individuals, and how the personally respond to an ideology. Feminism can't be perfect because we as individuals aren't perfect. All social movements are flawed to some degree because we're just a bunch of people, doing the best we can. Feminism hasn't failed IMHO, it still has a long way to go. What makes us think we can overturn 2000 years of patriarchal entrenchment in a few decades? When the needs of women and their children are given the same amount of serious consideration as say our military, we will have begun to make some real progress.

[pie]

STANDING OVATION Steph.... YES!!!!!!

[mama joy]

I have not had time to read all posts, but felt I had to respond in support of mamapie's first post.
I agree that capitalism is part of the problem. I would go further and say that it is the push for consumerism by our government, advertising and economists that is causing the problem of children being in daycare etc....
We have been brainwashed that we believe that we need a nice care, large home, many clothers and lots of toys. We need two parents working to keep up with this. This is of course what the middle class are working for. People in poverty are working to survive, if they can find work at all.
Feminism has given women a choice in what they do. Without feminism, women would not be able to get good jobs to support their families. That would leave women helpless in many ways, especially in abusive households. Abuse obviously has not disappeared with the advent of feminism, but now we can fight it. We can fight forced gender roles, inequity, poveryt, injustice because we have the right to educate ourselves and work towards our passions.
If we cut our consumption we can cut our time out of the home. Both men and women can do this. If we all do this, there will be more jobs for the people who need them. It will take both genders to make change.
Excuse my rant. It is rather disjointed because I'm in a hurry. Just please consider the many societal issues before trashing feminism.
I wonder if anyone has info on feminism in less consumer-oriented societies. What kind of comparisons could we make?

[simonee]

The thread was too long to for me to read in its entirety, but I sure found a load of good points.

Like some of the others, I believe that feminism is not meant to be prescriptive; it's meant to give women a choice that is acceptable to them. Patriarchal society is just behind ~ it makes it hard for us to combine working and having kids, it still want to make our choices on how to birth and feed our children, and now that women have cracked at least a few glass ceilings it came up with a new beauty ideal that takes our femininity away by trying to make us look like non-threatening pre-adolescent boys.

Of course sahm, wahm, and wohm shouldn't pit against each other. That's just what the powers that be want and expect: us being unable to solve our differences. So they can step in and once again "solve" everything for us. I wah, not just for the money but also because I like to stimulate myself intellectually. Since dh does the same, the money usually ends up being the most important reason because we hardly make doodlysquat~LOL~ but I don't think any worse of women who made and make different choices.

And I fiercely believe capitalism is the big evil. NOt just consumerism, tho that's bad enough, but especially the uneven division of capital. Several comments on this thread suggested that a couple of lawyers make a lot of money, and they do when we on the bottom look up at it, but the real culprit are the 5% that own 70% of the money in the US! YEs, 5%, having 70%!!! Don't even think that the lawyers, doctors and other "good lifestyle" people are in that range. And fyi I'm not in that middle range either ~ dh and I were quite impressed with ourselves when we saw our w2's add up to almost 30K (and the wonderful people at MasterCard love us too

Feminism should bring us together, not break us into little groups. Society can take care of that well enough, as we all know. By educating our children, we can hope that in 30 years our daughters and sons look back on this era and feel proud of the possibilities they have, thanks to us and our sisters. And maybe laugh a bit at poor ol' mom who didn't get it quite yet

[daylily]

I agree, Simonee, that the gap between the rich and the poor is widening. I read a great book called "How We Got Here". It's a history of the 1970s. It describes how in the 1940s through the 1960s American incomes were relatively homogonous. There were rich and poor, but not such an enormous gap between the very richest and the very poorest such as we have today. The gap started to widen during the 70s, when the feminist movement really got going. (I don't blame feminism for this gap and neither does the book's author, but the many social changes he describes are facsinating.) It's a really good book. I wish I could remember the author's name.