It's about time!

[alliemaddyn]

Hear ye, hear ye!

Go read this: link.

Then come back here and post your thoughts. It's about time, I say.

Comments

Bwahahaha

[clayse]

Ok. Well, first, it seems like this guy has already accepted stock feminist dogma and has tailored all of his arguments to come to conclusions he long ago made, making broad dismissals without giving credence to other viewpoints

Re: Bwahahaha

[alliemaddyn]

This is exactly what I wanted to get when I posted that link. Yay for lively discussion.

I'm at work right now, but when I get home I promise to read your post at length and post a reply.

Thanks Billy!

Re: Bwahahaha

[yoda21182]

The lively discussion has seemed to die down. I mostly agree with most of what Billy said and would comment myself but I could not eclipse his way of saying it so I'll just say I agree with him. Of course, I'm a male and, therefore, am now considered a jerk along with Billy, if such was already thought.

I still liked the article and felt it was well written. But, the points I did not agree with so much. But, I'm not as strong felt on my opinions on the subject, as say Billy is, so again, thsi is the best you'll get from me.

Owlmoose, I'd still like to read your reasons for disagreement.

[owlmoose]

That is a fabulous article, and I wish I had more time to go through with a point-to-point explaining why. Maybe when I get home. But thank you for sharing it.

I could not disagree more with the other commenter. Again, no time to make coherant arguments now, but I will get back to it.

[an_aikidoka]

I confess I did not care for the article. I also did not agree with it academically. These are two very different but important things to note in my opinion. I had high hopes for the article given its topic as it seems to me the feminist movement has fallen from the public's eye as a matter of import. There is still much to be accomplished in the way of equal opportunity, treatment, and justice for the sexes (to include the now diverse selection of genders). I agree with the author on these points and was glad to see someone approach the issue

continued...

[an_aikidoka]

Even the very premise of the article seems contradicted by its delivery and arguments. The conclusion urges a unification of the sexes for the common good, to discard artificial roles and redefine ourselves for the progress of all mankind. Yet the majority of the article singles out the males of the species and piles labels, roles, and generalizations about them throughout. I feel the ultimate goal of combating racism, for example, is for children to one day not comprehend any distinction between people based on cosmetic differences. As such, I feel organizations such as the NAACP are harmful as they must constantly re-enforce a division between 'black' and 'other' to exist. There can be no National Association for the Advancement of Colored People if there is no distinction between race. Likewise, feminism cannot exist without a distinction between the sexes. In this light, perhaps it would have been better for the author to have bypassed feminism altogether and make a call for a larger humanist movement. The author's 'us and them'

And just for fun

[anonymous]

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33858