Feminists Scalded

The Washington Times ^ | 1-19-06 | Mona Charen

[JZelle]

Some women protest, "I'm a feminist, just not a radical feminist." Kate O'Beirne is impatient with such qualifications. She is not any kind of feminist, and when you finish her sparkling new book "Women Who Make the World Worse," you won't be one either. Feminism, far from promoting the happiness and well-being of women and society, has instead left great swaths of melancholy in its wake. Mrs. O'Beirne cites "One large study of well-being data on 100,000 Americans and Britons from the early 1970s to the late 1990s found that while American men had grown happier, women's well-being had dramatically fallen during the period ... women were 20 percent less happy." The so-called "women's movement" was and is a misnomer. Most women reject the anti-male, antifamily bias of professional feminists. But a dedicated cohort of humorless, bitter, crusading women -- mostly from miserable families -- was able to dictate policy in some of life's most important realms. Feminists now claim they never opposed marriage and family. But Mrs. O'Beirne has kept the quotes in her files. In 1971, Ms. Magazine founder Robin Morgan called marriage "a slavery-like practice," adding that "We cannot destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." Australian feminist guru Germaine Greer recommended all women leave their husbands in search of more satisfying "rambling organic structures" (sounds vaguely unhygienic). And Jessie Bernard, a Pennsylvania State University sociologist, asserted the "destructive nature" of marriage was both figuratively and literally making women sick.

[sageb1]

The problem right now is that the 20-somethings now have no knowledge of society ever having been any other way.

[L98Fiero]

"Feminists have peddled more than their share of myths over the last 40 years -- that women earn less than men for the same work..."

"In an otherwise thoughtful article, I find this statement disingenuous."

Do some research. These groups show money earned yearly vs. money earned yearly. Maternity leave, sick kid leave, etc. is not figured into the equations. When compared on a per-hours-worked basis, the gap disappears. Hopefully some FReeper is more pack-ratty than me and has that source stored somewhere.

[sageb1]

The early suffragists would not recognize their original movement in the 2nd and 3rd wave feminists movements. In fact, they would be aghast at what it has turned into.

[Reactionary]

"I think it is often the case that women earn less than men for the same work."

I suppose that depends on what you mean by the "same work." Women don't do the same work in the sense that they do an equal amount of it. They take more time off. They get pregnant. They spend years out of the job market taking care of children, etc.

[generally]

I've thought about it again. Still true.

Here's one example in the engineering field. I know of a case where a woman with a degree from MIT held an engineering position for two years and when she turned in her resignation they begged her to stay because they were delighted with her work. After she left she was replaced with a man who was fresh out of school, i.e., no experience, with a B.S. degree. The man received a higher starting salary than the woman was receiving after 2 years with the company.

This is not a comparison of an unqualified woman to a qualified man. It is not a comparison of a woman with fewer years of experience due to childrearing or other reasons. And it is NOT unusual

You may not want to believe that this happens, but it is common.

If you want a readily available example, look at how much leading actors make compared to leading actresses.

Saying "think again" is a rather feeble argument. Actually, it's not really an argument at all, more of a last resort for someone who has no arguments. I

[N3WBI3]

And the reason its getting even worse is ebcause now a generation of kids who did not have a parent in the home and thus did not learn at an early age good habits are parents themselves..

[sageb1]

"After she left she was replaced with a man who was fresh out of school, i.e., no experience, with a B.S. degree. The man received a higher starting salary than the woman was receiving after 2 years with the company."

You cannot blame this on gender disparity. It is quite possible the same thing would have happened whether the new employee was male or female.

"look at how much leading actors make compared to leading actresses."

It is possible that both men and women go to more movies based on the actor, rather than on the actress.

[TChad]

18 Ways To Be A Good Liberal.......

Talk about cognitive dissonance! No wonder liberals are so miserable. It must be exhausting, depressing work to keep all those opposing ideas from crashing into each other.

[dakine]

Ok...anecdotal evidence always wins...



"Saying "think again" is a rather feeble argument. Actually, it's not really an argument at all, more of a last resort for someone who has no arguments. I"


Not arguing...observing....

[suzyq5558]

Iam not a feminist thats why Im happy!:)

[Mordacious]

I told my husband the other day, "You give me almost any societal problem, and I can directly relate it to feminism.

Okay. Explain all the societal ills associated with islam. Ain't no feminism there.

[sageb1]

"And the reason its getting even worse is ebcause now a generation of kids who did not have a parent in the home and thus did not learn at an early age good habits are parents themselves.."

You are exactly right. We, as a society, saw this occur first in areas where there was a higher proportion of single mothers who had never married. When we saw it hit the middle class, which had begun divorcing at a higher rate, all heck broke loose, and society began to break down. As the traditional family as the mainstay of civil society began to disintegrate, the public schools began to demand and exert more control over the lives of America's children.

[generally]

You have posted no evidence whatsoever, anecdotal or otherwise. I'd appreciate seeing your evidence.

[sageb1]

"Okay. Explain all the societal ills associated with islam. Ain't no feminism there."

Are you asking me to write a book? Actually, there is plenty of feminism there. Google muslim feminists. I guarantee you won't be happy. They sound just like NOW members.

[generally]

How is obesity related to mothers entering the workforce? I'm not arguing that it isn't, I just don't see the obvious link.

I can see how the change from an agrarian society is a factor - less manual labor, less exercise. But I have met quite a few overweight farmers! Maybe that's because even though they are "agrarian" they have a lot of machinery to lessen the workload.

[VOA]

bump

[Unmarked Package]

generally wrote: "After she left she was replaced with a man who was fresh out of school, i.e., no experience, with a B.S. degree. The man received a higher starting salary than the woman was receiving after 2 years with the company."

sageb1 wrote: "You cannot blame this on gender disparity. It is quite possible the same thing would have happened whether the new employee was male or female."

I completely agree with the assessment by sageb1. We dealt with this issue occasionally in my engineering department. The issue was a matter of starting salary compression, not gender discrimination.

We ran into situations where rapidly escalating recruiting salaries for engineering disciplines in great demand outpaced compensation of our newest employees for a brief period of time. Every effort was made to eliminate the inequity quickly with mid-year raises if necessary. However, the problem had nothing to do with gender bias.

[cvq3842]

Understood, on all points!

I have a huge pile of books to read, music to hear, movies to see. I may have to ait until retirement to make a dent . . .

[MillerCreek]

Another thing that is very significant as to civilization is that (and this is taught in univeristy):

-- the literacy level overall reduces when mothers are not present in the home during their children's youth.

That is, the more often and frequently that mothers leave the home (work, negligence, hiring nannies to 'relieve' the responsibilities involved in rearing children, whatever reason, just that they leave their children in the care of others even after school hours), the lower the overall literacy rate.

Our SOCIETY actually suffers when women are not the caregivers of their own children, their own family. Children become more literate as the consistency of their mothers being routinely available to them increases. The less time they have with their mothers, the higher the overall illiteracy becomes.

Thus, women with children who leave their care to others due to whatever reason actually reduce the success rate and competency of society in general.

It's established, studied and proven...lest someone decry some 'guilt trip' mentality to that information, as if it's an effort to discourage women from working, taking flight when a nanny is afforded, etc., because most feminists do respond like that, as if it's some effort to coerce them to "be slaves" and such.

Women serve a very, very important place in the ongoing education of their children and among that is that, by remaiing available to children in the home, mothers "work" to improve our society, certainly their own children's abilities.

[sageb1]

I was trying to locate an article at publicinterest.com on this subject. I haven't read it myself. My daughter mentioned that she'd used it as a source for her paper, so it must be there someplace, although I haven't located it yet.

However, when mothers began to enter the workforce, several things began to happen all at once. Just a couple for now - children began to stay indoors, rather than playing outside where there used to be a neighborhood network of moms who kept them safe. So, to begin with, children immediately became less active. Secondly, mothers had less time to plan healthy meals (and the current emphasis on healthy meals is out there because kids are no longer exercising food off), plus mothers were more likely to stop at fast food places because they now had spending money, and last, but not least, mothers were not home to monitor their children who (because the moms now had spending money) bought more junk food. We never had junk food in the house when I was growing up. This is just for starters. Im going to try to find the article at publicinterest.com.