Replies

I'm sorry, but that is what feminism has become, because it has been taken over by the radical fringe. Code Pink doesn't speak for me anymore than NOW speaks for me. I have no problem dealing with men, and I prefer my men NOT to be obsessed with their feminine side OR to listen to so-called feminist groups absolute silence on a CnC's serial assaults on women. Yes, the most rabid feminazi spokespeople that we see on television are lesbians, and I resent lesbians claiming to speak for me or defend what I do with my heterosexual body.

Like it or not, that is what the feminist movement has been for thirty years. Run by the radicals, and based on the leftist ideals of continual Revolution, powered by various causes du jour. I can't even watch sitcoms anymore because the male bashing gets on my nerves.

Artificial empowerment of ANY group via legislation is not freedom. It's totalitarianism.

The biggest feminist mistake was to set themselves up as the hizbah - morality police - and enter our homes and places of work, forcing us to no longer act like human beings and causing all of the social problems so prevalant between men and women today.

I don't need and have never needed their help. I can defend myself and make it on my own, without special legislation forcing me to behave one way and men to behave another, neither of which ways are in our nature. I LIKE having doors opened for me, and I EXPECT it. I understand and respect that a man my height (5' 10") is stronger and faster than me. I accept that I cannot change genetics. It doesn't mean I'm not capable of defending myself, just that the only REASON I am capable is the understanding that men are physically stronger and faster than women, and when fighting a stronger opponent, etc.

Women have been taught that men are the enemy and men that women are. The problem is the COMBATIVENESS. Fighting the ENEMY. Who's idea was battle of the sexes? The feminists. Who set up the field then? Feminists. What have they really accomplished except for a generation of therapy dependant, lonely people in bitter divorce situations AND fat paychecks for themselves via their lobbying groups? Exactly, precisely, nothing.

Artificial empowerment of ANY group via legislation is not freedom. It's totalitarianism.

Legislative representation is how our system works. If you're going to be consistent, you'd have to have the same opinion of all PAC's in Washington and in state government ... like Farmers and Big Oil and Small Business Association ... etc.

I do agree that special interst legislation has gotten out of hand. But don't single out feminism for that. Let's look at the big picture. PAC's are a reality in our political system. If we want to overhaul that system, let's get busy and do it. Campaign finance reform anyone?

The reality also is that even without PAC's, numbers matter in politics. Since women are 50% of the population, and since there are 9 million more women registered voters than men ... women have tremendous political clout. Now there is no gaurantee that any group with political clout will use it wisely. That is why we have a two-party system and, in general, the middle outweighs the extremes politically.

If we want to eliminate equal representation in government, one individual one vote, that's a different matter entirely. Until then we have to live with the reality that numbers matter in politics. (We just got a good lesson on that in California). Even without a PAC, when enough people feel the same or similar way about something ... they will hold sway in elections and legislation, particularly in places with more direct referendum style democracy such as California.

Unfortunately, by agreeing to live in the USA, you do have to put up with legislation you don't agree with some of the time. The alternatives are to get out there and make your opinion heard LOUDER ... or move to a different country. Just sitting around whining about what other people have been able to influence politically is not a sound strategy for change. :)

By the way, did you know that women were the decisive factor in the so-called Republican sweep in the 2002 elections? And they are poised to be the deciding force in the 2004 presidential elections as well. And there is ample evidence that women are moving more to the conservative side politically.

Ain't our system great? I love it !!! even though I have to put up with the "tryanny of the majority" sometimes doing things I don't agree with. If you step back and look at the big picture, overall it balances out to the middle ground and we are still the best country in the world. I wouldn't live anywhere else. It's not perfect but it is the best.

Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

The pendulum swings both ways and is weighted toward the middle. I personally don't want extremists on either side getting ultimate control of my life. :)

You know what? At the very most, only about 3% of women are lesbians. And even that number is disputed as high.

Why would 97% of women cede their numerical political clout to 3%? I certainly never have and I don't know any women who have. I know plenty of strong women in all walks of life and as far as I know none of them are lesbians. They have families, kids, some have careers some don't. NONE of them have succumbed to "men hating" or any of that.

My personal experience just doesn't square with the power some here claim this tiny 3% of women have. I just don't see it. I see women going about their lives and doing what they think is best for themselves and their families ... just like their male counterparts.

I really don't see this radical lesbian fringe influence everyone is so scared of. I didn't even see them when I was in college. Where are they hiding? I must hang around in different circles or something because all the women I know are just regular people living regular peaceful rather hum-drum lives and expecting the same basic rights and freedoms as everyone else in the USA, no more, no less.