Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

User talk:RobLeonardWoo

2022-09-14T15:17:28Z

RobLeonardWoo: Undo revision 1886215 by RobLeonardWoo (talk)error

You may not edit Conservapedia's feminism article anymore. Your edits are not wanted. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:32, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
:What is this nonsense [[User:Conservative|Conservative]], explain yourself? I made perfectly "legitimate" edits that were intended to make the article more concise and therefore more effective.
::No, I do not care to explain myself. And you are banned from editing the article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:19, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
:Looks like a topic ban. There's been edit warring on the page since May, with little or no constructive changes made to the article. Perhaps you should have posted proposed changes on talk before edit warring? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 17:26, September 13, 2022 (EDT)

::[[User:RobSmith|RobS]], I do not understand this reaction to my copy editing. Where is the edit warring? I thought my edits were constructive and I carefully avoided – or at least tried to – any substantive change to meaning. I admit to finding aspects of the article narrow, even misogynistic, given that there are conservative women, such as Phyllis Schafly, who fought for women's rights from a conservative point of view. Even Andy Schafly, in an interview, felt that his mother might have been a feminist, because she believed in equality.
Surely these edits didn't require discussion and if [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] had problem with anything, he should have calmly explained what was wrong. I began with a small edit to test the water and this was accepted and remains.--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 18:04, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
:::These are the net changes since May [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Feminism&diff=1886085&oldid=1847704]. Look like edit warring to me. And it's impossible to follow your discussions on talk, as well. They're all over the page, unsigned, and undated. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 19:30, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
:::Now there's a fine line between edit warring, and [[trolling]]. Trolling is wasting other editor's time. And it looks like about 4 months of trolling other editors. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 19:31, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
:::I checked my edits and remain bewildered. What has upset you [[User:Conservative|Conservative]]? Let's discuss this on the Talk page..--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 19:09, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
== re: conditions on you editing the feminism article again ==

I now see that you did copy edits. So I restored your edits. Regardless, your former ideological edits, bias tag, etc. are not wanted in the article.

If you want to edit the article further, you will have to understand the conservative perspective better. You will need to read the Bible from front to cover and read the book [https://www.amazon.com/Equality-Impossible-Martin-van-Creveld/dp/9527065526/ref=sr_1_1?crid=23OY3VQO3QCSR&keywords=equality+the+impossible+quest&qid=1663111829&s=books&sprefix=equality+the+i%2Cstripbooks%2C95&sr=1-1 Equality: The Impossible Quest] by Dr. Martin van Creveld before editing the article again.

Below are a few reviews of Dr. Martin van Creveld's book.

*[https://caninedaze.wordpress.com/2015/06/11/115/ A brief review of Equality: The Impossible Quest by Dr. Martin van Creveld (Castalia House, 2015)]
*[http://www.castaliahouse.com/review-equality-the-impossible-quest-by-dr-martin-van-creveld/ REVIEW: Equality – The Impossible Quest by Dr. Martin van Creveld], Review by Castalia House [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:32, September 13, 2022 (EDT)

::::[[User:RobSmith|RobS]], I kind of understand what you mean by "warring", but I saw what I was doing as merely the normal back and forth of editing. I am still trying to come to terms with the ideological sensivity of this site, sorry. Maybe someone might have raised this matter on the Feminism Talk page sometime ago. I am unaware of any unsigned edits and believe that you may be confusing me with another editor – though there is frequently a substandard download, and I added a manual signature temporarily yesterday! The problem appears to be with your server, because my computer has no problems on other sites. Is this a general problem throughout North America? Will Conservapedia be able to continue? --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 09:50, September 14, 2022 (EDT)
:::::You wrote: "Is this a general problem in North America?". You live in Canada. You tell me. As far as the your question about the sustainability of Conservapedia, it is fairly clear that you are a troll and so we are not going to waste much time on you and so you might find yourself banned. I would cease your trollish behavior. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:00, September 14, 2022 (EDT)

User talk:RobLeonardWoo

2022-09-14T13:50:48Z

RobLeonardWoo: Ok I'm getting a better understanding of your point of view

Talk:Feminism

2022-09-14T13:25:36Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Reversion of legitimate copy edits */ Thanks.

{{bias}}
==Article problems==
Second Wave did not "resurge"-the feminism that emerged out of the later 80's/early 90's is Third Wave.

Also, feminism, contrary to what many people think, does not revolve around abortion. Feminist work also involves issues such as affordable access to childcare and prevention of domestic violence, just to name a couple. Couldn't this article reflect that rather than lumping all of feminism into one category of ideology? {{unsigned|}}
:Please sign your comments. Also, please start a new thread at the bottom of the page. Also, "First wave, second wave, third wave" sounds like a bunch of leftist gobbledygook which may not make a lot of sense here. Thanks. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 18:46, September 12, 2022 (EDT)

:Are you asking, or expecting our readers to know and understand, let alone care, what the distinction is between First Wave, Second Wave, and Third Wave Feminism is? Most of our readers have lives and jobs, and life is a little too short to drown in leftist bullcrap. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 18:49, September 12, 2022 (EDT)
----
Removed opinion.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:10, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

This article contains a lot of irrelevant information. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 04:18, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

A big problem with feminism is its desire to erase sex distinctions. Masculinity and femininity are no longer seen as God-given traits, or even ideals. [[Women in the military]], the so-called [[equal pay for equal work]] law; the forced muzzling of that Harvard president who dared suggest that women and men might not be equally suited to academic careers in math and science.

The idea that there's nothing sacred about the male-female relationship obviously provides support for [[gay rights]] agitation and same-sex "marriage". If there's nothing special about a man, then what does a woman need one for? She can have a "wife" too (as Garry Trudeau once put it). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:20, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't think the addition of the Rush Limbaugh "femi-nazi" comment is particularly relevant, largely because it's based on the wholly erroneous assumption that all feminists are pro-abortion. To include anything based on that assumption mischaracterizes the late 20th c/early 21st c "post feminist" era, where women who self-identify as feminists are far more likely to fall within a broad spectrum of ideals than one cookie cutter. [[User:Fsm1975|Fsm1975]] 23:32, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I just found this. This gives a leading source for a definition.
:Hillary Clinton received the endorsement of the National Organization for Women, a group of a half-million members who support feminist candidates for elective office. Asked whether she saw herself as a feminist, Clinton said by the standard definition, yes. "If you look in the dictionary, the word feminist means someone who believes in equal rights for women in society, in the economy, the political process -- generally believes in the equality of women," she said. "And I certainly believe in the equality of women." [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 14:35, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

::I’m curious why a person who would not accept a philosopher of science as a credible source for an entry on science would accept the definition of a politician/lawyer as definitive in terms of a philosophical/social/academic movement. Let alone why you would think she would be a “leading source for a definition”. Not that I object to the content of her definition, but the strongest claim I think you can support with it is “some politicians endorsed by [[NOW]] believe feminism means…” An interesting, but not especaly useful or informative claim.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:48, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

:::The article is full of errors. For example, many feminists love to cook, love having a family, and do housework – though expect their partner's help. Also women did not have equal educational opportunities for a long while, especially a university education. The article needs to be carefully revised '''by a conservative woman'''.--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 09:43, September 12, 2022 (EDT)

==Defining feminism==

Cut from intro:

:However there is no broad consensus among [[feminists]] (followers of feminism) about how gender equality ought to be understood. In recent years this has led many feminists to argue that, because there are so many different and mutually exclusive philosophies and philosophers that are called feminist, it is more appropriate to speak of feminisms (plural) than feminism (singular) <ref>Feminisms [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/]</ref>. For this reason it is difficult, if not impossible, to state any belief universally held by all feminists.

This sounds like a refusal to be categorized, defined or otherwise pinned down. But it's the job of an encyclopedia to define and categorize. How can we solve this problem? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 16:06, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

:The way I would suggest handling it is to take seriously the distinctions feminists make among themselves. (For example there is a clear split between the pro- and anti- pornography feminists (I’m still working on a RD of the [[pornography]] article as per our previous discussion btw) ). If we are going to really flesh out this article we ought to have a number of feminisms represented here—just as we don’t lump all creationists together but observe the very real distinction between Young and Old Earth Creationists.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:44, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

==Abortion poll==

The page I linked to had a whole series of polls. The two most recent polls said that 16% of the American public favored retaining unlimited rights to abortion, and 39% favored abortion being 'legal in most cases'. Of the remainder, 31% favored it being illegal in 'most' cases and 12% illegal in all cases. In other words, 55% favor it being legal in all or most cases and 43% favor it being illegal in all or most cases, with 2% unsure either way. The other poll referred to the retention of the rights granted under Roe v Wade and 62% favored this. This should be reflected in the article because as it stands the article misrepresents the facts. Please tell me why you think we should misrepresent facts clearly laid out in a neutral opinion poll --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:38, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

: Can you explain why abortion polling data is so relevant to this article? What is the point? It is an article about Feminism, not abortion politics.
: You put in a statement that the majority of Americans the current law on abortion rights, but in fact the most recent poll at the cited source says that only 16% support that right. So I corrected that. Now you want various other poll results. What is the point? People can follow the link to the polls if they wish. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:05, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::The statement about feminist support for abortion rights was in the original version of the article I saw. I linked to the poll to provide a citation on an issue that the original article said was of great importance to many feminists, and made it clear that these rights were opposed by many conservatives and some feminists. My original simple statement about 'majority' support for the right to a legal abortion in all or some cases was made convoluted by another editor and I attempted to clarify it. It has now been totally distorted by you. In addition to the 16% support you keep citing, you omit to say that an additional 39% support abortion rights 'in most cases'. Shall we say that only 12% of people - presumably conservatives - oppose abortion? This would be equally valid by your measure of validity. People can certainly follow the link, but it is dishonest to misrepresent its content in the way you are doing.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:16, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::: What is dishonest? It is an article about feminism, not about conservative abortion views. Maybe an article about abortion can explain the polls in detail, I don't know. The feminist organizations that support abortion rights want abortion to be legal in all cases. The 16% figure is the most relevant one. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:29, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::In that case, since there is no evidence that only feminists support abortion in all cases (we know that some are opposed) the relevant figure is the 62% who support the retention of rights under Roe v Wade, which I think we can agree was agreed by most feminists to be a landmark case on this issue. I suggest we cite that instead, which gives a clearer figure both of general feminist support for abortion rights and the degree to which that issue is supported by the population as a whole. The figure was quite unequivocal on the poll, and is probably less confusing than the other poll. I propose substituting that one. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 19:15, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: Could you give me an example of a feminist organization that opposes abortion rights in some cases? I think that the Roe v Wade poll is more confusing because it reflect not just opinions on abortion, but also opinions about legal theories. I wonder how many people even know what the legal consequence of overturning Roe v Wade would be. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 19:32, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::Sure - [ http://www.feministsforlife.org/] are probably the best-known group, but you can find other organisations listed on [http://www.gargaro.com/fem.html] and quotes from a variety of other sources on [http://www.geocities.com/livefreecritique/modernfeminists.html]. Personally, I don't think the Roe v Wade poll is confusing, because most people associate that case with abortion rights and would be unlikely to consider abstract legal theories in that context. Roe v Wade is cited as an event of significance in a timeline of women's rights on [http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html] and certainly supported by the majority of feminists - see [http://www.feminist.org/courts/roe.asp] and [http://www.now.org/press/01-04/01-22.html]. I feel that it is important to demonstrate the extent to which majority feminist thinking is supported by opinion among the country as a whole over this issue, hence my wish to cite either the full figures of the first poll or the limited figures over Roe v Wade of the second. The second set are probably clearer and easier.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 20:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::: There are certainly lots of feminists who are very happy with abortion law. But if you want to argue that a majority of the people agree with a majority of the feminists, then the Roe v Wade poll doesn't do it. A lot of people are for or against Roe v Wade for a lot of reasons. If you want opinions on abortion, the best polls are the ones that ask abortion questions. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 20:37, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::The language on the poll numbers, as it stands, is misleading. Currently the language is “As of April 2007, women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases, and according to a recent poll, 16% of the American public favor the retention of this right.” This is simply not the case, women have a right to abortions in most cases, but it is not unlimited. Parental notification laws, parental consent laws, laws banning third trimester abortions except when necessary to protect the health or life of the mother – all of these laws are (currently) constitutional (laws banning second trimester abortions except when necessary for the life or safety of the mother are also probably, but less clearly, allowable). That means that 16% of people favor an expansion of the right to an abortion, not keeping it the same. 39% seem to favor “keeping it the same” as there is currently a right to abortion in most, but not all cases.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 20:42, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: I agree that the numbers as currently stated are misleading. In that case, given that RSchlafly opposes using the Roe v Wade poll I think the fairest and most representative thing to do is to cite the full figures of the first poll, which is the most recent one in any case, and let people make their own minds up about the extent to which majority feminist thinking on this issue has influenced thinking in the population in general. I will edit accordingly.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:00, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Interestingly enough, even Roe v. Wade didn’t go as far as to say that a woman had a right to an abortion in all cases. It said that a woman had a right to an abortion in the first trimester, in the second trimester a woman has a right to an abortion unless the state can show a really good reason why she should be allowed to have one, and a state could outlaw almost all third trimester abortions. (The Casey decision which is the leading case at the moment, relaxed constraints on what the state could ban). So under current law more abortions can be outlawed than could be under Roe v. Wade and even under Roe it was not the case that “women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases”.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Thank you, that's very helpful and I hope my editing of the paragraph has reflected that. Please clarify if it seems inaccurate. It sounds as if law in the US is, in practice, quite similar to law in the UK, where abortions are illegal after 24 weeks unless there are life-threatening reasons, although in practice only a minute percentage of abortions are performed after 20 weeks.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:13, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::Your restatement in the article looks right to me. Just to be clear though, I am only talking about what women have a constitutionally protected right to (at the moment, I suspect that this will change in the near future). I’m not sure what the law is in any given state—the Supreme Court simply says “this is the most you can outlaw” in many states more abortions are allowed than the bare minimum. And I have no idea what the actual numbers look like here (actually I suspect that those numbers are not attainable here, given how tightly guarded medical records are).--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::: No, it is just not the case that abortion is limited by trimesters under USA law. Not under Roe, and not under Casey. USA law is not like UK law. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 22:03, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

==Why the deleted quotations?==

RobS - it is not very polite to delete another editor's work that is relevant to the article without discussing it first. I reverted your original edit so that it could be discussed. I should be grateful if you would be kind enough to do that here.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:36, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:answers.com is a wikimirror site. It is an invalid citition. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:06, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

::Well that's no problem. It's an extremely famous quotation and I have plenty of other sources for it. The other quotation from Pat Robertson is not from answers.com so I presume that is OK. If that's your only problem with it, I will restore it with a different source. It would have been mannerly of you to have asked me if I had another source for it rather than just deleting it though. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:10, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

==South End Press==
My apologies, but we can't use bigotted and hate filled extremist publishers for references. A blockquote from the mainspace cites a book published by South End Press, which also published this proven and debunked piece of trash. [http://www.southendpress.org/2004/items/OldNazis] The reference will be removed, and the editor is hereby warned to refrain from making further insertions from such hatefilled extremist sources. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:07, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

==To much emphasis on abortion==
I think that this artical is focused mainly on abortion which is not it is for.

::Agreed. I suggest cutting out all abortion references except one: Give it a bullet point in the list of goals, and no more. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== Misandry ==
This article has clearly mistaken the definition of femanism for misandry. There are more even-minded, considerate, and heterosexual feminists that can be counted, where as this article only lists those who qualify as man-haters. Honestly I think this kind of blatent bias is what's ruined Conservapedia, and really the entire country, but there's no reason to suggest that feminism goes against any of the values that we all share, and I suggest we completely overhall this entire article and include a section regarding feminist inspired misandry and the differences between the two practices. I also don't think there is any reason to suggest that feminism is a sin and in any way connected to homosexual behavior, which seems to be what this article implys. I'm not so quick to put females who wish to be heard in the same boat as abominations, and I wish I could say the same for all of the Conservapidia editors.
--[[User:YoungConservative|YoungConservative]] 15:43, 2 February 2008 (EST)YoungConservative

:What you say was true, back when the feminists really were seeking legal equality - before the radical feminists hijacked it for their attacks on family life, hate of tradition, and abortionist agenda. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== "boys being cheerleaders for it" ==

Is it not the case that George W. Bush was a cheerleader at Yale back in the day? [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 13:24, 2 March 2008 (EST)

: Could be. Many prominent men were once cheerleaders ... for ''boys'' playing football, not girls.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:27, 2 March 2008 (EST)

== Excessive quotes? ==

I'm not sure if I'm alone here in thinking that there are far too many quotes in this article? They make the layout rather bloated and do not seem to provide much in the way of information. Might I go ahead and perhaps remove some of the less relevant quotes? Thanks. --[[User:TJ|Crookles]] 15:32, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: No, please don't delete factual information, unless you see a clear [[rule]] violation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:27, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::There are no rule violations, but the quotations are not explained, not formatted, and are longer than the rest of the sections of the article put together. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:14, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::: The quotations illustrate what feminists really think, and that is informative.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:34, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::::Have you looked at them though? Some of them don't make sense, some are (supposedly) by feminists and others are ''about'' feminists (with no clear distinction), a lot of them are redundant, there is no formatting, and some of them contain poorly-censored swear words. It might be informative, but it does not look good in an encyclopedia for 75% or so of the article to be made up of unclear, unreferenced quotations. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:54, 3 March 2008 (EST)

I just put bullet points on those quotes, and it really seems like a terribly excessive list. Does anyone else think that some editing could be done to this to make it seem a little less over-the-top? [[User:Reaganite|Reaganite]] 18:05, 9 March 2008 (EDT)

== The list of feminist views ==

Is it just me or goes the top list of feminist views come accross as humourous rather than factual , i laughed when i read it because it sounds funny and witty rather than serious and factual. I think the tone needs altering, i can imagine liberals having a field day over it. --[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 18:58, 3 March 2008 (EST)

It really smacks of parody, and of course, there were no references. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 19:57, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: Both you are clueless if you don't realize what modern feminists think. By the way, "Realist2", "across" has only on "c" and we spell "humorous" without the "our" in [[America]]. Maybe you don't have many feminists in your country. America does.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:35, 3 March 2008 (EST)
::Why did you remove my reference to feminists wanting tougher penalties for rapists? Surely they do (it was the only referenced point on the list). [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:06, 4 March 2008 (EST)

If your can only edit by insulting others spelling or the spelling for the country they come from it shows a distinct lack of tolerance. I am here to be constructive so please dont put others down its not very christain at all. Also how would i know what feminists think ... funny enough im not even a woman so it would be very hard to put myself in that thought of mind. However writing with sarcasm or does not improve the article. I never said whats written is incorrect , i said the tone needs changing, didnt you read or inderstand that Aschlafly? I can say it in spanish if it helps lol. :-)--[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 13:38, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Where in her book did Hillary Clinton say that children should be raised by a "village" RATHER THAN their parents? [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 15:05, 5 March 2008 (EST)

I am removing the part about refusing to admit the wrongness of their ideology; it could be said about any ideology, but it is not listed on the Creationism or Christianity pages (or the Aethism one). [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 22:29, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
Aschlafly- why was my edit reverted? [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 21:51, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

: Because [[censorship]] of the truth is not allowed here. This is not Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:38, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

::How is removing an unsourced statement censorship? I would not take seriously any encyclopedia in which that statement appeared without evidence. [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 07:16, 18 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm really not sure about this list: I think this focuses too much on the radical feminists - the bra-burning, men-hating feminists from the sixties and seventies. But hasn't feminism developed, become more mainstream? For example, I'd consider myself a (conservative) feminist, and almost all of my girlfriends are too. We'd reject all or almost all of the points listed in the article:
- Yes, of course men and women are different; physically and mentally. We certainly don't believe in falsely imposing equality of outcomes - only of opportunity.
- Oppose chivalry? Nope. It's charming that a few men still open doors, give up seats for us. I don't know anyone who would complain about that.
- View traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal? Nope.
- Belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family? No-one I know.
- shirk traditional gender activities, like baking? I really don't understand this one. You're a feminist if you don't bake biscuits? Or is this a synecdoche for wider home-making activities?
- support affirmative action for women? Again, no. Affirmative action does no good in the short, medium or long-term. That's more a liberal value than a feminist one, wouldn't you say?
- prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do - This is straying into the dungaree-wearing radical lesbian feminist stereotype. Most feminists don't care what other women wear, as long as they're not wearing the same outfit as you at a cocktail party.

Look, I could go on, but my point is that this article paints feminism as the ''bête noire'' of conservative values and, while this may be true of more radical / historical feminism, it's too simplistic to cover the very, very large number of women worldwide who identify as feminists and conservatives.[[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 07:34, 21 January 2011 (EST)

==Difficulty of defining feminism==

It's not easy to define [[feminism]]. Is it "organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests"? Must one support [[equal rights]] to be a feminist?

Are there feminists who want women to "get more" than men, just as their are minority advocates who are want their group to "get more" than people in other groups? (Is feminism thus a kind of "group selfishness"?)

Is "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes" consistent with the Bible?

Is it possible to believe that men and women are "equally valuable" but made (in the image of God) to be inherently different? That is, are [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]] equally valuable qualities? Or what?

Are there currents in feminism which seek to advance women's interests but which '''do not''' assert that men and women are (or should be) "equal" in all respects?

What, then, is the proper relationship between men and women? Specifically, in the family, what are the proper roles? (How much leeway is there?)

Do all feminists oppose the "stay at home mom" phenomenon? (Or is that only [[Simone de Beauvoir]]?) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:55, 4 March 2008 (EST)

==Ridiculous Number of Quotes==

About three quarters of this article is made up of selected quotes from selected feminists, often those who do not represent mainstream feminism and are radicalised in their views. There are also a couple of unsubstantiated quotes from anti-feminists which appear to be used to represent fact rather than a person's opinion. Perhaps we could cut down on these or move them to another article ([[Quotes by Radical Feminists]] and [[Quotes by Anti-Feminists]]) in order to make this one a bit more encyclopedic. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:50, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

=="Ideological Edits"==

''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should raise children rather than the child's father and mother[5]''

The supporting reference for this is the title of a book, however the book itself states that it states a village (ie a large number of people - teachers, doctors etc) '''in addition''' to parents to successfully raise a child. Not once does the book say that parents are to be denied the main role in raising their children.

''prefer for role-reversal, like girls playing football and boys being cheerleaders for it, or men baking cookies for women''

Unsupported, mainstream feminism believes in equal roles, that is women can play football and boys can be cheerleaders, they do not believe in role reversal (ie boys cannot play football and women cannot be cheerleaders).

''prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do''

Unsupported, this is a radical view at best.

''Quotes from fictional characters''

The quotes from a character within a fiction book do not provide any valid insight into the mindset of a feminist, even if that book was written by a feminist.

Hope this clears it up, ready for reversion of reversion. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:59, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:Sorry, but conservatives believe that no one other than the parents should have the primary role in establishment of values, etc. Perhaps instead of pushing your liberal POV in editing a conservative encyclopedia, you could work as hard finding additional citations that you will approve of, illustrating the point. You cannot deny what is factual, that Feminism is a vehicle for liberal change of the social order, and the destruction of the traditional family. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:12, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

::This article is not about conservative beliefs, it is about the beliefs of feminists, and it appears that they are currently being misrepresented (the present revision states that feminists believe a village should raise children '''instead''' of parents, whereas the truth is that feminists believe a village should '''support''' parents in raising children). Could you please point out which of my points you believe to not be factually correct? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:15, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:::"Liberal POV" or not, I don't think fictional characters make very reliable as references. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:04, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::I await a response. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 18:07, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

GySom, the changes you made, apparently to make the article more ideologically neutral, would be a fine thing on Wikipedia, where they like to keep the public sheltered from facts, but not on CP, where we actually offer a choice, not an echo to the so-called "wisdom" of the crowd. From my experience here, I would suggest you concern yourself less with seeking out articles to make neutral, and spend your time creating new articles, helpful content that is both Christian and conservative friendly, because that is the stated goals and perspective of this encyclopedia and its Founders. Leave it to Wikipedia, and the dishonest presentations there, to "cleanse" topics near and dear to the liberals hearts. If you wish to make the changes you have, please provide proof that Feminists don't think that way. Responsive enough? --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:34, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Hang on, are you asking me to prove a negative? Asking someone to prove that mainstream feminism does not accept something is akin to proving that there are no invisible unicorns on Mars. It is up to the person making the claim to support it, not my job to weed through every single quote that a feminist has made and then provide an analysis to show that mainstream feminism does not support a claim that is made, it is the job of the person making the claim to support it. Let me lay out the changes I think should be made:

:*Mainstream feminists do not believe a village should raise a child instead of his or her parents, they believe that parents should be supported in their role by others (this I can actually support, by my recollection the book in the reference specifically states that parents should play the main role in raising their children).
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe in role reversal, they believe in the destruction of roles (that is, instead of believing that boys should not be allowed to play football and girls should not believe in cheer leading, they believe that boys and girls should both be able to play football or cheer lead should they desire)
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe that women should not wear dresses and should wear pants
:*A series of quotes from a ''fictional character'' in a book does not provide any insight into modern feminism

:If you have an argument about one of those points please make it, I don't need to hear about how I'm an evil liberal who should run away to Wikipedia as this gets us nowhere. It is conservative ideology to tell the truth no matter what it is, therefore it is imperative to truthfully represent the views of mainstream feminism on this encyclopedia. I guess my edits were ideological after all, just not in the way you think. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 19:48, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::Indeed, I am asking you to prove your assertion, GySom. You made the changes, now back them with proof. ''What Feminists believe is well known''. Do you demand proof of God? That there is air? The Feminist agenda is the complete re-ordering of the nuclear family, its denigration. That has been proved countless times. Your own points above show that Feminists reject completely God's own creation, the differences between men and women. Please stop with these silly distracting arguments promoting liberal ideals! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:59, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::If it has been proven countless times then there should be no problems with finding supporting evidence for it. I am not asking for proof of God or proof of air because the existence of these two is not being debated, rather we are discussing whether or not mainstream feminism believes in the three points I removed, and whether the forth should be included. I notice that you have only taken objection to the first point (regarding families), it is therefore acceptable to alter the information relating to the last three? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:05, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::Well, I am not a sysop here, so I certainly cannot stop you from doing so. If you change it back, and the Administrators and/or Andy are fine with it, so be it. I am not going to engage you in some endless discussion about the falsities and naivety of your assumptions, GySom! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:17, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::I am very open to hearing about the "falsities and naivety of my assumptions" and changing my mind if sources are produced, however at the moment it appears that there are no sources supporting the claim that feminists believe parents should not raise their children (the current cite says the opposite) and it appears that nobody has taken objection to the rewording of the claim that feminists favour role reversal or the removal of the claim that feminists shun dresses or the quotes from the fictional character. I will change the last three points, and leave the first open for now for continued discussion with yourself or others.

:::::Please, I am not trying to invite conflict, I just feel that this claim is not supported and therefore needs to be changed. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:24, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

*Yes, to be sure, I am certain those are your intentions! I stand by what I said above, but I have taken the liberty of asking Andy, Conservative and some others to review this. I hope that helps you out. Godspeed to you! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:26, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::I look forward to it, I was hoping that two users could have a civil discussion without going and calling in the big guns, but sadly this could not be the case. For those reviewing it here are my arguments:
::#The claim that feminists believe a village should raise a child '''instead''' of his/her parents is unsupported by the reference, those who read the book will find that it suggests that a village should '''support''' parents in raising their child, but that parents should play the main role
::#The claim that feminists believe in role reversal is wrong, feminists believe in the destruction of roles altogether
::#The claim that feminists believe that dresses should not be worn is a radical belief at best, and there are no cites supporting it
::#Quotes from a ''fictional character'' should never be used to make a point for or against feminism.
::Of these only number 1 was argued, and during this discussion there was no mention of why the source was correct, nor were any other sources raised. Numbers 2 and 3 were not argued, and number 4 was supported by HelpJazz. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 21:56, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::In response to your four points above:

:::#The thesis of the book is clear: "it takes a village to raise a child," and by its very terms that denies the exclusive role played by parents in raising children. The point in this entry is correct and you have not proposed alternative language that would be more accurate.
:::#No, feminists do crave role reversal, as in men baking cookies and women assuming traditionally male jobs. I'll add an example.
:::#I've added an example in response to your point about dresses.
:::#Your point here is not clear, and I'll look again at the entry.
:::Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:10, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually Andy, could we use your wording just there to clarify it?
*''believe that "it takes a village to raise a child" and deny the exclusive role played by [[parents]] in raising children.''
[[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 23:16, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Thankyou for your reply.
:#The thesis of the book is that it takes a village as well as the parents to raise a child, at the moment the entry reads that it takes a village rather than the parents, so yes the exclusivity of the role is denied, but not the role itself (by memory the book states that parents have a significant and unique role to play). I did have alternate language in my original edit: ''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should assist parents in raising children'' or something along those lines that clarifies that the position taken by the book is not to replace the parents - edit conflict, not adjusted for Feebasfactor's comment
:#There may be some confusion between role reversal and the destruction of roles. Role reversal in your example would be men baking cookies and women being expected not to bake cookies, and women taking traditionally male jobs with men being expected not to take those jobs. By the destruction of roles it is expected that both men and women have an equal right to bake cookies, and that both men and women have an equal right to take whatever job they want to, I believe the latter is closer to the desire of mainstream feminists to have equal roles and to breakdown the concept of gender, rather than pushing for a matriarchal society.
:#I'm not entirely happy that a one line quote from a blog in response to another article can be used to represent mainstream feminism, but it's your encyclopedia
:#There are quotes from a fictional character, I don't see why these should be in the article (using the same logic someone could use quotes from a fictional American president in a book to criticise America).
:Hope this clears it up. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:19, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Aren't the fictional quotes a tiny percentage of the quotes, and aren't they by a feminist author?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"''? Though I have met many feminists, I have never met a woman, ever, who felt that women should only wear pants. I know women who do not wear pants, because they feel the Bible calls them to wear only skirts, though this is not true for all of the Christian women I know, or even a majority of them. Most women, feminist or not, dress according to what they will be doing. If they will be hiking in the woods giving a lesson on the forest habitat, they will probably wear jeans. If they are going to a wedding or a funeral, they will almost certainly wear a dress. Some women personally prefer to wear dresses more than pants, or vice versa, but most women, feminist or not, don't feel that everyone should dress as they do. If the article is going to state that feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"'', then there should be a really good citation to show this. Certainly you can find many articles where women discuss the pros and cons of pants and/or dresses, but I've never seen anything that supported the claim made here. An example to the contrary would be the A Dress A Day blog<ref>A Dress A Day[http://www.dressaday.com/dressaday.html]</ref>, whose author writes regularly about the joys of wearing dresses; I'm quite certain she would consider herself a feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 23:22, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I've added another cite, and frankly am surprised that anyone would dispute this feminist preference to dress like men in order to make an ideological statement.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::::The whole pants thing was a big deal at the time because there were people & institutions who felt that women should *never* wear pants - restaurants that wouldn't serve women wearing pants, schools that wouldn't allow girls to wear pants (even in freezing cold weather - and skirts in those days were *short*!), and so on. Feminists of the time believed that women should be allowed to wear pants if they wished. (Not that they *should* wear pants.) Nowadays, most American women, feminist or not, wear both pants and skirts, just because we like to, or for practical reasons, not for political reasons. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:17, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::Cites about baking cookies and wearing pants are from 1970's, not modern feminism? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:55, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::: The 1970s is "modern". Perhaps a time period should be added to the entry? By the 1960s "modern" feminism was in full bloom.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:01, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::::Is the goal of the entry to describe feminism as it is understood today by the majority of women who consider themselves feminists? (I'm assuming this would be the best approach, though of course the history is of interest as well.) The radical femimism of the '60's and '70's was, well, radical, but I think that the kind of extreme views described in this article would be foreign to most women today who consider themselves feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:08, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

<- The section of the article in dispute is written in the present tense (''"Specifically, modern feminists tend to"'' as opposed to ''"Specifically, modern feminist tended to"'') after having described the era of the 1970's in the past tense, therefore the points should describe those beliefs held by mainstream feminists today. I'm not too sure many modern mainstream feminists favour wearing pants or role reversal, just as we don't see burning bras or (too many) claims that all sexual relationships in marriage are rape. In short, what was mainstream in the 1970's appears to now be classified as radical compared to the views of modern feminists, which appear to be more about breaking down gender inequality and the like. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 00:14, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I agree - though I would add that many of the ideas discussed in the 70's were radical feminism (not mainstream feminism) even then.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:20, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]], Thank you for your grammar edit! It really helps! While we're cleaning up this article, here's another item that might need to be changed. I don't think the statement that feminists ''"oppose single-sex schooling"'' is accurate. There are rather a lot of feminists at all-girl colleges like Smith and Bryn Mawr and Mount Holyoke. Also, I can't see your recent changes on the main article page, only the history page - I don't know if it's me or Conservapedia. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:27, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:It's stupid to argue about this sort of thing on an article discussion page. Just add a quote from a feminist who supports it. This goes for girls' schools, dresses, stay-at-home moms and all the other stuff above. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::: Can't. Article's locked, at least it is for me.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:00, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::Are we trying to use the view of one feminist to represent the views of all, or are we accurately trying to report on the collective views of mainstream feminism? If it's the latter then a single quote from one feminist won't do the job. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:21, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I have unlocked the article so that the requested source can be added. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:07, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Feminism and choice==

Feminists say they '''only want choice''' while actually asserting various "shoulds" and "oughts".

Wearing dresses is strongly discouraged by feminists; dressing like men is strongly encouraged. Indeed, all sorts of feminine behavior in the workplace is discouraged, and we '''all''' know that [[Simone de Beauvoir]] condemned the [[choice]] of woman staying home to raise her and her husband's children.

What we object to here is the [[liberal deceit|pretense]] that feminism supports women choosing either traditional female roles or modern "liberated" ones. They use coercion quite openly. Pretending that they do not is something you can do on your own blog, using your [[freedom of press]] to tell lies. You can't do it here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:16, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:According to her article she made those views in 1949, we are trying to discuss the views of modern feminists, or more specifically those around in 2008. As has been stated above, these are different to the views held in the past. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:24, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Ed Poor explains this extremely well. I don't know what TheGySom is referencing about 1949, but that is surely "modern" also. [[Feminism]] plainly represents views about how women ''should'' act, and women who disagree with that ideology are ostracized and ridiculed by the more militant feminists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:39, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Simone de Beauvoir wrote her controversial book ''The Second Sex'' in 1949. It is relevant to the history of feminism, but in no way should be used as a source to describe the views of mainstream twenty-first century feminists, as it was written almost 60 years ago. We've come a long way since then - most of today's feminists weren't even born when the book came out. I'm a woman, I have friends who are feminist and friends who definitely aren't, none of them have ever tried to encourage or discourage me from wearing dresses. Some of my friends wear only dresses/skirts for religious reasons (Christian or Jewish), but I've never met a woman who would not wear dresses for political reasons. The idea just doesn't ring true to me. Certainly for some activities or professions pants are a more practical and/or more safe choice, and some women tend towards pants or tend towards dresses for themselves, but those are not political or ideological choices, they are a matter of personal style and/or practicality. Feminists in the '70's fought for the right to wear pants in places and situations where it had not previously been allowed, mostly for practical and personal style reasons. I'm not trying to be argumentative here - just to give a woman's perspective. So far, the only sources in support of the idea that feminists encourage dressing like men have been offhand comments in blogs. Can we find some more solid sources for this idea if it is to be included in the article?--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I'm sure there are millionaire communists who say they have no desire to interfere with private property, and that they don't know any other communists who do either. And they would be right about themselves and their friends, but wrong about the ideology of communism.

:::: Likewise here. The ''[[sine qua non]]'' of modern feminism is for women to act like men. Why would clothes be excluded from that? They aren't. I've already provided two references and there are probably more, but I'm getting the sense that no amount of citations will persuade you because you know what you and your friends think about clothes. I suggest you spend some time researching this and ask women familiar with the feminist agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:26, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Name Changes==
The article says that feminists ''"refuse to take the husband's last name when marrying, despite the confusion and complexity that causes"''. However, the article used as a citation seems to be saying the opposite. It is an article about the complexity of such decisions for 21st century women, and how there are many different approaches to changing one's name, and how quite a few feminists are now changing their name to, one way or another, include their husband's name. (The author, who is marrying soon, begins the article with 8 of her own options, including hyphenation, etc.) The article goes on to give quite a few examples of feminist women who made various choices, for a wide variety of reasons. Based on the cited article, I think a more accurate statement for our article would be ''"feminists are likely to take a number of factors into consideration when deciding whether or not to change their last name to their husband's when they marry."'' Two relevant quotes from the article: ''"...they are doing what they can, making meaning of their own, focusing on what they do with their lives as much as what they do with their names. And by the way, isn't that the whole idea of feminism?"'' and ''"Hey, I'm a stay-at-home mom who took her husband's name and earns a fraction of our household income but none of that makes me any less of a feminist. Because for me, feminism is about respecting women and men and being able to make whatever lifestyle choices you want."'' <ref>"(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller. [http://dir.salon.com/story/mwt/feature/2003/10/16/names/index.html]</ref> I did not make this change, even though the article is now unlocked, because I'd like input from others first - I think that, together, we can make this a better article.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 21:40, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

== References ==

<references/>

==Question for the Editor--==
I just found my way to your site via Google, and read "Feminism." I noticed that your editorial policy says that you're not allowing the use of material that isn't accurate. That site says that early feminists were "suffragettes." The suffragettes were English, in fact -- in the use, the folks who supported the right to vote for women were suffragists, from Woodrow Wilson to good ol' Theodore Roosevelt. Your writers also have no idea that the term "feminist" at times has been somewhat conservative (hey! surprise!), as when the National Women's Party supported an Equal Rights Amendment while most women opposed it. In the meantime, in the twentieth century, some Republican women would have been comfortable calling themselves "feminists," from Margaret Chase Smith to Oveta Culp Hobby. The term has had somewhat varied meanings over the course of the century, and any accurate description should reflect that. Interested readers could check out Catherine Rymph's Republican Women, published by the very reputable U.North Carolina Press. {{unsigned|Mm444}}

== Unsourced quotes ==

There are tons of unsourced quotes in this article, and I will go through the list to see how many I can actually source. I will remove those quotes I couldn't find any info on, and I'll post them here so others can re-add them if they do find reliable sources. The key words are: Where was it said, and when. Evidence should be supplied. Quote-sites that simply say "She said so." are off-limits.

*"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." - Robin Morgan
I couldn't find anything more than just anti-feminist comments and "Men Rights" sites. No mention of where or when she supposedly said so. (Update: Found a site that says it's from "Sisterhood is Powerful". --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:56, 16 April 2008 (EDT))

A somewhat special case is the next one:
*"I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero-sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary-vested-interest-power. But then, I have great difficulty examining what men in general could possibly do about all this. In addition to doing the sh*twork that women have been doing for generations, possibly not exist? No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" - Robin Morgan
I found out that this quote comes from her introduction to the 1970 book "Sisterhood is Powerful". I also found this [http://www.feministcampus.org/network/chat/morgan04232003.asp snippet] about the quote:
{{cquote|Halimat: Following is a quote from you. Assuming that you weren't misquoted, do you still feel this way? How are women to get ahead without collaberation from those who currently hold the majority of legislative power? "I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero- sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary- vested-interest-power."

Robin Morgan: That quote is from the early 1970s and fortunately both the movement and I have matured in terms of developing a much more sophisticated range of tactics and strategies, due to our enormous numbers, than we ever could have imagined back in the late 60s and early 70s. While it is still true that "pale males" are at the top of the "food chain" - more men are changing every day. They're more involved with their children and families and on every level, from slowly learning to use Ms. through to adopting and adapting to anti-sexual harrassment workplace rules, men have been changing. It's not enough by far, but it is a start. And it's the power of the women's movement that has brought them even this far.}}
I'll leave the quote in the article, but I will also link to that interview so people can get a more modern reflection on the quote. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:03, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

One more from Robin Morgan:
*"Women are not inherently passive or peaceful. We're not inherently anything but human."
It's a really nice quote, so I regret that I couldn't find any proper sourcing for it. :/ --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:42, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Took out two (for now) from Dworkin:
*"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig."<nowiki><ref></nowiki>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp From] her book "Ice and Fire"<nowiki></ref></nowiki>
"Ice and Fire" is a ''novel''. As in ''fiction''. As such, I won't treat this as her own quote, just like I don't claim that authors like King or Clancy endorse every sentence from their books as their own views.
*Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman."
This quote is [http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp attributed] to "Liberty", but I couldn't find it in her Bibliography, so I'll cut it until somebody actually figures out whether it's a book (and whether it's fiction or non-fiction) or a paper or something. Citing made-up books sounds vaguely unlikely, but I'd rather be safe than sorry. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 17:27, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Dworkin again:
*"To be rapeable, a position that is social, not biological, defines what a woman is."
Couldn't find any proper sourcing, only quote pages that simply say she said it, but not where or when. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 18:00, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==Quotations and flowing prose==

There are way too many quotations here. Sure, we've proved the point. There's a lot of nasty things that were said by genuine, card-carrying feminists. But quotes don't make an article.

I want to know the roots of feminism, what it originally tried to do, what else it started to do, and how it did (and does) differ from simply "making sure women don't get mistreated". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:11, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
:Agree with the "way too many quotations" bit. A few quotes from several eras to illustrate how feminism developed and matured would be nice. If that's not possible, just crop it down. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:17, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
::It probably wouldn't hurt to review this. I am also pleased Miles that you have chosen a constructive approach of finding and adding references instead of just complaining. There is a greater chance of seeing constructive changes occur under that format than merely confronting. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:40, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==I think we have misrepresented Jilly Cooper==

I think Jilly Cooper, the veteran right-wing journo and toff, would be surprised to find herself identified as a feminist and downright astonished to be labelled a member of SCUM. Somebody has got a little confused here. (Or else they are being mischievious).

== Suggestion for separation ==

I personally feel it would be beneficial to make two articles on this subject. What's described here is what many call "radical feminism" whereas average everyday feminism is quite different. I'm not an expert in this field, but I can assure you that the generalizations made here are on the most extreme examples of feminists. -EternalCritic

I agree, much of what is addressed here under the heading of "feminism" would more properly be described as "radical feminism" (of the all women should be lesbians/all heterosexual intercourse is rape slant), and much of the substantive article seems to be un-cited impressions that appear to be sourced in popular culture (for example, if the ideological doctrine is too difficult to define, how can it be said that *all* feminists balk at chivalry or belittle family women?). Can the lengthy list of sound-bite quotations (from which the reader is apparently supposed to cobble together an idea of what feminism is) be removed to ultimately be replaced with an attempt to seriously engage with the tenants of feminism with a stronger focus on peer-reviewed academia reflecting a broader overview of the field rather than a relatively small group of extremists? -- [[User:BillyWest|BillyWest]] 11:28, August 28 2011

== Reversion explained ==

The edit summary to the last edit said, "I changed some awkward phrasing. I also think the bullets should be made into one coherent paragraph. Thoughts?" In fact, that edit introduced liberal bias and censored conservative truth. It was fully reverted even though it did also include some harmless stylistic changes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:20, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

== Citations? ==

I'm not clear on the policy. In the list of quotes, there are some that don't have real citations like:

"The nuclear family must be destroyed ... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process" - Linda Gordon

and

"Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women ... We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men ... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft" (from "The Declaration of Feminism" November, 1971)

I think these need real citations or they should be removed. Also, quotes about feminists should be in a separate section than quotes from feminists. Pat Robertson is mixed in with a bunch of feminists right now, under the "Other" heading.

--[[User:AdamBurns|AdamBurns]] 18:47, 16 December 2009 (EST)

== Enough quotations? ==

This article could make a more mature examination of feminism than putting up a bunch of quotations. --[[User:Marxian21|Marxian21]] 22:53, 22 January 2010 (EST)

== "No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" ==

I cannot find the phrase in either of the two references given. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:12, 30 January 2010 (EST)

:Please feel free to delete that phrase, then.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:18, 30 January 2010 (EST)
::I would, but TK has already reverted someone who edited it out--and I don't want to anger him. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:22, 30 January 2010 (EST)

== Reversion explained ==

Modern feminists are overwhelmingly pro-abortion, and even those who are not pro-abortion are still anti-motherhood.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:54, 1 June 2010 (EDT)

==Full rewrite==

I like the quotes, and we certainly need a conservative critique of modern "radical" feminism, but the movement has also had its good points. There are even places/issues where currents in contemporary feminism match up with conservative ideas.

The idea that men shouldn't use their power to abuse women is a longstanding conservative idea (see [[Chivalry]]), although this is nothing more than the general idea that no one, male or female, should abuse his power; it doesn't matter if it's man to woman, white to black, rich to poor, educated to ignorant, etc. However, many feminists bristle at the idea of accepting '''any''' help from men (such help seen as condescending at best). Most conservative Christians oppose [[pornography]] and [[sexual slavery]], and so on. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:23, 8 September 2010 (EDT)

I am trying to make this page compatible with a little Amazon Alexa Mod I cooked up, so far when It reads it,
There were multiple spelling errors, and when she spoke it sounded more like a rant then an actual informative conservative essay. Also the bulleted list doesn't play and the alexia device just stops playing, I believe the hardware isn't used to bullet points not being with-in heading or heading font so the Device just tries to reload the text in pure html using Wikipedias default source php (which I deleted to make my own.)
I understand that I need to be of higher standing, so can someone edit the article so it doesn't sound like a gigantic rant without any sources.
--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] [[User talk:Reevestehsnek|Talk]] 10:59, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:Sorry, we don't change pages so Amazon Alexa handles them better. That's Alexa's problem, not ours. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:48, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::I wasn't clear I made a mod for an alexa device that uses conservapedia as its source, but its obvi you don't care about all the hard hours of work it took to actual remove the php through bluetooth and rewrite the script using BSD. {{unsigned|Reevestehsnek}}
:::I'm not saying that at all, and that sounds like a great accomplishment that I could not do myself.

:::What I '''am''' saying is that this is not a sufficient reason for making major changes to the article. We simply cannot change an article's wording and point of view because it runs better through a speaking device. Articles are generally created to be read, and it's unusual for people to have them spoken to them by a device. Wording and point of view changes should only be made based on their own merits. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:09, 8 November 2018 (EST)

== feminism and obesity ==

feminism and obesity: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html I will leave it up to others decide what constitutes feminism as I am taking a break from Conservapedia barring any news events. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:03, 5 February 2011 (EST)

== Create a feminism and obesity article ==

Consider creating a [[Feminism and obesity]] article at Conservapedia and cite this material: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:08, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

:The blog you want cited makes a ''huge'' leap in its conclusions. Being a working mother does not automatically translate into being a feminist. I would guess the majority of working women are in the job market because there is a need for a second income to support a family, given the cost of basic necessities such as rent, food, gasoline, electricity, medical costs, clothing, etc. I know that is the case in my situation. We can't pay for the basics on my husband's salary alone. We haven't had a vacation in years. Most of my friends are in the same situation. And the blog completely ignores the single working mother - what is she supposed to do? Not work? --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 11:01, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

I agree that this article is no good, even though I wish it were true.
--[[User:corneliuscalvin|corneliuscalvin]] 7:56, 26 November 2012 (PDT)

:Can't talk now. of the World happening. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 23:01, 26 November 2012 (EST)

== No Christian feminism? ==

I think that this article would be served well if a section on [[Christian feminism]] was included. Maybe a new article on it would be better.[[User:Mr. Guye|Mr. Guye]] ([[User talk:Mr. Guye|talk]]) 19:15, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:That seems like a good idea, but an article on it would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view. But there's also the fact that the same term can have a different meaning for different people -- what one person considers Christian feminism can be completely different than what another person does. We would need to define the term clearly, but I think we'd be talking about second- and third-wave feminism, adherents of which have theologically and socially left-wing views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:47, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:::No, there is no requirement that a Conservapedia article discussing the topic of Christian feminism "would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view." There are no such requirements on content at Conservapedia, and no one, except perhaps Andy, has the authority to enforce such a requirement. All that is required is that "Conservapedia is a politically conservative, Christian encyclopedia project". Though many of our members are not Christians and are not politically conservative, they are required to edit in a manner consistent with the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]]. To require otherwise would turn this wiki into a Wikipedia-style "mobocracy" rather than a "best of the public" project.

:::The concept of feminism covers a lot of ground. There are conservative feminists, Christian feminists, and Republican feminists. Not all feminists subscribe to some of the silly excesses that one sometimes sees looking around on the internet and various media outlets. Many conservative feminists, for example, fully support encouraging girls to go into STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects.

:::So feel free to write sensible content on this topic. I look forward to reading it.

:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:49, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::::SamHB, they have found that promoting the idea that women are underrepresented in STEM fields and that this has to be corrected has the effect of telling women that STEM is not feminine/girly and thus women are more likely to avoid those fields. In other words, the policy is probably backfiring. See: http://review.chicagobooth.edu/economics/2017/article/how-promoting-stem-fields-women-can-backfire

::::Women tend to be more likely to be conformists and not mavericks.

::::Over and over again, liberals fail to take into account the unintended consequences of their social engineering! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:48, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::Once Christian denominations filly embrace the notion of female pastors, their memberships almost invariably spiral downward. That should surely be mentioned in relation to "Christian feminism".

::"But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve." - 1 Timothy 2:12-13[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:15, 2 December 2017 (EST)
:::Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I don't think Mr. Guye was even talking about female pastors when he was talking about Christian feminism, just something akin to, say, the Suffragettes, many of whom were Christian women who would NEVER advocate the pill, let alone abortion. But yes, we probably should note that bit somewhere either way. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:35, 2 December 2017 (EST)
::::What percentage of so-called "Christian feminists" believe that a wife is to obey her husband and that a husband is the head of the family? At least in its present form "Christian feminism" is just another endeavor to infect Christianity with unbiblical ideas. As far as the suffragette movement, I don't know if any of them were Christian women who held biblical Christianity views related to women. I do know that various suffragettes burned down churches.[https://www.christiantoday.com/article/suffrage-the-churchs-rocky-relationship-with-rebellion/67361.htm]

::::Christianity was at the forefront of various movements like abolition, child labor laws, etc. etc. Christendom is also known for its favorable views on the treatment of women (husbands loving their wives like Christ loved the church, etc. etc.), but it is not known for leading the charge as far as feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:48, 2 December 2017 (EST)

:::::Well, I do know that Susan B. Anthony specifically condemned abortion and the pill and stated that would make women even more enslaved, and I do know that Christians also do not support abortion and the pill (in fact, among us Catholics, it's considered a mortal sin), so there's that to consider. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 09:53, 2 December 2017 (EST)
==First-wave feminism was good?==
This article makes it sound like first-wave feminism was good and its doctrines were just simply corrupted in the 1960s. As it turns out, first-wave feminists were anti-Christianity and anti-man too, as pointed out by Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire and [[John Doyle]].[https://youtu.be/sgJoJsaI1WY][https://youtu.be/ME-JIO8_cic] Elizabeth Cady Stanton once said that the Bible and the church were the two greatest stumbling blocks in the way of women's emancipation. Susan B. Anthony was a religious skeptic, and other early feminists held similar views too. In fact, many were free lovers, like Victoria Woodhull. I strongly recommend that the early section saying liberals just twisted the term be deleted. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 20:22, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:But the early feminists were [[pro-life]], right?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:45, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::The Bible says wives must submit to their husbands (Pauline epistles and the Apostle Peter taught this). No doubt this was anethema to first wave feminists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:04, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure if they were truly anti-Christianity, they'd be all in favor of unlimited abortion on demand even back then (especially when the Church was ALWAYS against abortion), and yet, as demonstrated with [[Susan B. Anthony]], several of them were AGAINST abortion. I know [[Vladimir Lenin]] [https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/11/17/november-1920-2020-a-century-of-abortion-in-russia/ certainly was all in for unlimited abortion], being notorious for literally legalizing unlimited and unrestricted abortion in the USSR and being the first state leader to EVER do so, even having the audacity to claim THIS emancipated women, and was such that even the likes of [[Margaret Sanger]], herself no pro-life adherer, was reportedly aghast at it. Besides, my idea of having my hypothetical wife submitting to me would be closer to [https://youtu.be/xtO-AHuEhJc?t=428 what Geldoblame advocated for everyone under his rule] from ''Baten Kaitos'', and I'm pretty sure even Jesus and his disciples NEVER advocated for that kind of submission (even less so when Geldoblame used THAT as justification for committing mass murder against a mining community by torching it simply because they withheld ore shipments thanks to his draconian labor statutes that left them dangerously overworked). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:03, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:Being pro-life does not necessarily make one pro-Christianity. Victoria Woodhull was against abortion and she was a Marxist and practically a communist. Also even Sanger claimed to be against abortion if I am not incorrect, saying birth control got rid of the need for it. Planned Parenthood did not start to endorse the legalization of abortion until 1969, and abortion did not even start to become popular until after Roe v. Wade. That was really more of the Overton Window being shifted in conservatism's direction back then than feminism being conservative. It just really goes to show how much ground we've lost. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 22:42, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::Maybe so, but the anti-Christians most certainly tended to be very much anti-life, as Lenin and even Trotsky proved there (not to mention the Bolsheviks), and even the Jacobins, their ideological ancestors, were known to practice abortion in the most crude manner (specifically, bayonetting pregnant women, and/or using wine pressers to crush them). And since Marx was brought into it, Marx himself advocated massively for abortion as well, as did Engels, all in their plan to "abolish the family." And what better way to abolish the family than to destroy reproduction. If she was a Marxist, it only shows she didn't know Marx all that well, as otherwise, she'd be all in favor of abortion like her idol Marx. And let's not forget that this view of pro-abortion has been going on since 1923 with [https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/marxist-roots-abortion-joseph-hippolito/ Dr. Antoinette Konikow], who was a fellow traveler of Trotsky during the Russian Revolution, AND committed several abortions in the Boston area specifically as part of her Marxist advocacy. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:49, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:That may be true, but some anti-Christians are more radical than others. Also America was more conservative than Russia at the time of the Russian Revolution, so something like abortion would definitely be seen as morally unacceptable in that time regardless of where you were on the political spectrum. But my main point is if Stanton said Christianity got in the way of feminism, and she was the founder of American feminism and first-wave feminism, I just don't know how you can say feminism wasn't anti-Christian even back then. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 23:27, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::I've heard of some feminists getting back to the Christian faith. Victoria Woodhull, for one actually renounced the free love bits and advocated strongly for the Christian concept of motherhood later in life (too bad she didn't quite own up to how she did badly during that time, though). Besides, technically speaking, there have been PLENTY of Founding Fathers in America who were significantly anti-Christian, including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and apparently even John Adams. By that same logic, America ITSELF is anti-Christian from conception. In fact, [[Christopher Ferrara|Christopher A. Ferrara]] actually makes this argument in his book ''Liberty: The God that Failed''. I guess you could also argue that liberty in itself was anti-Christian. For that matter, I'd argue [[Freedom of Religion]] is ultimately anti-Christian as well. The Israelites tried that bit back in the day, and that led directly towards the [[Babylonian Exile]], per God's direction. And Russia was still conservative enough to have abortion be deemed explicitly illegal until Lenin and his Bolsheviks took over (there's a reason why the USSR under Lenin was the first country in all of history to actually make unlimited abortion legal, to the extent that STALIN of all people threw a bone to us pro-lifers by outlawing abortion for a year). I'd mention divorce, but Robespierre and the French Revolution beat Lenin to that bit. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:33, November 9, 2021 (EST)

== Fatherless children ==

Does only feminism cause this? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 10:28, January 24, 2022 (EST)
:Re-reading the section "Cultural Marxism", it seems out of place in an article on feminism. Isn't it about men who abandon their children? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 13:24, March 11, 2022 (EST)

==Bias?==
I thought feminists went out of business with [[vaccine mandate]]s (''my body my choice'') and [[transgender]]s taking over girls sports. Not to mention rape in prisons by transgenders. It's the law now. We've finally reached full equality. What more is there to debate? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 20:18, May 28, 2022 (EDT)

== Pants ==

I'm puzzled by the linking of pants and feminism. I suppose it is an assertion by women of their independence but hardily any women, whatever their age, wears a dress where I live, though there's a few more in hot weather (I'm envious). Isn't more a matter of convenience than ideology? It's the norm and so non-partisan. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:49, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
:Phyllis Schlafly was a conservative woman who defeated the feminists by preventing the passage of the [[Equal Rights Amendment]]. I have never seen a picture of her wearing pants. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:50, August 7, 2022 (EDT)

:What has this to do with the fact that most women of all ages wear trousers in North American? This has far more to do with comfort and convenience than feminism. I suspect that more women wear dresses in more liberal Europe. Personally I find women more attractive in dresses but I would not be so arrogant to insist that any woman has to wear one! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 13:52, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
::There's too much feminism in the USA and the fruits are not positive. 13th highest divorce rate in the world.[https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/divorce-rates-by-country] Lots of women taking depression pills. And there are surveys which show that women are now LESS happy post feminism. Thank God that the religious have a higher fertility rate, Roe vs. Wade was overturned and that the Bible is not pro-feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:10, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
:::Have you read the essay: [[Essay: Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)|Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)]]. In 22nd century North America, the majority of women may be wearing dresses. In all likelihood, should Jesus tarry, the majority of women in North America will not be pant-wearing, feminist whores!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:16, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

::Oh dear!--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:57, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

===Does the Bible forbid women from wearing pants?===
According to the [[ United Church of God]] it does not.

::Does Deuteronomy 22:5 forbid women from wearing pants? No, it doesn't. In fact, clothing “that pertains to a man” at the time the verse was written would not have been understood to mean pants. Men in the Middle East through the history of the Old and New Testaments did not ordinarily wear pants, trousers or slacks; they wore robe-like garments. And in many cultures such as in China, women have commonly worn pants. The scripture more specifically addresses and forbids transvestism and cross-dressing.
::The underlying principle certainly applies to today. Men should dress in an appropriately masculine manner and women should dress in an appropriately feminine manner. Clothing manufacturers make pants designed for men, and pants, slacks and pantsuits designed for women. The Bible emphasizes modesty, and for women, slacks are often more modest than a short skirt.
::God does not intend for this scripture to be understood in an extreme or unreasonable way. For example, it’s perfectly fine for a woman to wear her husband’s old shirt when she’s painting or to put on her male friend’s jacket when she’s cold.[https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/bible-questions-and-answers/does-the-bible-forbid-women-from-wearing-pantsPosted on Jan 27, 2011 by United Church of God]
--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:37, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:::A sensible and intelligent reading of the Bible and history, --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:42, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

::::Thanks. I guess we were all too stupid to figure that out. Does this apply to Drag Queen Story Hour at Pizza Hut, as well? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 14:45, August 28, 2022 (EDT)
See also [https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/365-does-the-bible-forbid-women-to-wear-pants] and [https://bibleask.org/does-the-bible-say-women-should-not-wear-pants/]. Can you clarify [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|RobSmith]]? The above quotation does not support transvestism! And trousers didn't exist in the biblical world. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 15:57, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:There is no reference to Deuteronomy in the article. And the Deuteronomy reference basically is about honesty, not enticing a member of your own sex by dressing up as something that you are not. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 16:26, August 28, 2022 (EDT)
:The point you are trying to make has nothing to do with feminism. It does, however have to do with gender confusion or dysphoria. While modern science may brand gender dysphoria as a mental handicap (perhaps involuntary or uncontrollable), Deuteronomy says gender confusion is a choice. But that is not a discussion for here in this article. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 16:32, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:::Really I was responding to another editor's ranting, though this article isn't so much about feminism as an extreme version of it. Even Andy Schafly agreed in an interview that his mother believed in the equal rights of women:
::::: Schlafly wants to know what I mean by "feminist". I offer a dictionary definition: "A feminist is someone who believes in equal rights for men and women."
:::::His response is surprising. "She may have agreed with that sort of general statement - as stated like that, yes."
:::::It seems that - as her opponents always maintained - the matriarch of American antifeminism was deep down a feminist herself. ''Daily Telegraph'' Jul 23, 2020

::::::Feminists today are taking the lead in the anti-[[transgenderism]] movement. So maybe it's time for a reconciliation. (Oh, and they are doing so because what Phyllis prophesied about the 1970s Feminist movement has come true). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 17:27, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

== Reversion of legitimate copy edits ==
Why were minor, non-ideologial, copy editsb recently reverted without adequate explanation?--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 19:26, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
:I now see that you did copy edits. So I restored your edits. Regardless, your former ideological edits, bias tag, etc. are not wanted in the article.

:If you want to edit the article further, you will have to understand the conservative perspective better. You will need to read the Bible from front to cover and read the book [https://www.amazon.com/Equality-Impossible-Martin-van-Creveld/dp/9527065526/ref=sr_1_1?crid=23OY3VQO3QCSR&keywords=equality+the+impossible+quest&qid=1663111829&s=books&sprefix=equality+the+i%2Cstripbooks%2C95&sr=1-1 Equality: The Impossible Quest] by Dr. Martin van Creveld before editing the article again.

:Below are a few reviews of Dr. Martin van Creveld's book.

:*[https://caninedaze.wordpress.com/2015/06/11/115/ A brief review of Equality: The Impossible Quest by Dr. Martin van Creveld (Castalia House, 2015)]
:*[http://www.castaliahouse.com/review-equality-the-impossible-quest-by-dr-martin-van-creveld/ REVIEW: Equality – The Impossible Quest by Dr. Martin van Creveld], Review by Castalia House [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:32, September 13, 2022 (EDT)

::Thanks. I am trying to respect the fundamentalist Christian values of this site, even though I have problems with the lack of awareness, at times here, of the profound difference between the Old and New Testaments. The book that you recommend sounds most interesting. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 09:25, September 14, 2022 (EDT)

Talk:Feminism

2022-09-13T23:26:20Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Reversion of legitimate copy edits */ Signed

Talk:Feminism

2022-09-13T23:23:05Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Reversion of legitimate copy edits */ new section

{{bias}}
==Article problems==
Second Wave did not "resurge"-the feminism that emerged out of the later 80's/early 90's is Third Wave.

Also, feminism, contrary to what many people think, does not revolve around abortion. Feminist work also involves issues such as affordable access to childcare and prevention of domestic violence, just to name a couple. Couldn't this article reflect that rather than lumping all of feminism into one category of ideology? {{unsigned|}}
:Please sign your comments. Also, please start a new thread at the bottom of the page. Also, "First wave, second wave, third wave" sounds like a bunch of leftist gobbledygook which may not make a lot of sense here. Thanks. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 18:46, September 12, 2022 (EDT)

:Are you asking, or expecting our readers to know and understand, let alone care, what the distinction is between First Wave, Second Wave, and Third Wave Feminism is? Most of our readers have lives and jobs, and life is a little too short to drown in leftist bullcrap. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 18:49, September 12, 2022 (EDT)
----
Removed opinion.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:10, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

This article contains a lot of irrelevant information. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 04:18, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

A big problem with feminism is its desire to erase sex distinctions. Masculinity and femininity are no longer seen as God-given traits, or even ideals. [[Women in the military]], the so-called [[equal pay for equal work]] law; the forced muzzling of that Harvard president who dared suggest that women and men might not be equally suited to academic careers in math and science.

The idea that there's nothing sacred about the male-female relationship obviously provides support for [[gay rights]] agitation and same-sex "marriage". If there's nothing special about a man, then what does a woman need one for? She can have a "wife" too (as Garry Trudeau once put it). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:20, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't think the addition of the Rush Limbaugh "femi-nazi" comment is particularly relevant, largely because it's based on the wholly erroneous assumption that all feminists are pro-abortion. To include anything based on that assumption mischaracterizes the late 20th c/early 21st c "post feminist" era, where women who self-identify as feminists are far more likely to fall within a broad spectrum of ideals than one cookie cutter. [[User:Fsm1975|Fsm1975]] 23:32, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I just found this. This gives a leading source for a definition.
:Hillary Clinton received the endorsement of the National Organization for Women, a group of a half-million members who support feminist candidates for elective office. Asked whether she saw herself as a feminist, Clinton said by the standard definition, yes. "If you look in the dictionary, the word feminist means someone who believes in equal rights for women in society, in the economy, the political process -- generally believes in the equality of women," she said. "And I certainly believe in the equality of women." [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 14:35, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

::I’m curious why a person who would not accept a philosopher of science as a credible source for an entry on science would accept the definition of a politician/lawyer as definitive in terms of a philosophical/social/academic movement. Let alone why you would think she would be a “leading source for a definition”. Not that I object to the content of her definition, but the strongest claim I think you can support with it is “some politicians endorsed by [[NOW]] believe feminism means…” An interesting, but not especaly useful or informative claim.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:48, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

:::The article is full of errors. For example, many feminists love to cook, love having a family, and do housework – though expect their partner's help. Also women did not have equal educational opportunities for a long while, especially a university education. The article needs to be carefully revised '''by a conservative woman'''.--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 09:43, September 12, 2022 (EDT)

==Defining feminism==

Cut from intro:

:However there is no broad consensus among [[feminists]] (followers of feminism) about how gender equality ought to be understood. In recent years this has led many feminists to argue that, because there are so many different and mutually exclusive philosophies and philosophers that are called feminist, it is more appropriate to speak of feminisms (plural) than feminism (singular) <ref>Feminisms [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/]</ref>. For this reason it is difficult, if not impossible, to state any belief universally held by all feminists.

This sounds like a refusal to be categorized, defined or otherwise pinned down. But it's the job of an encyclopedia to define and categorize. How can we solve this problem? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 16:06, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

:The way I would suggest handling it is to take seriously the distinctions feminists make among themselves. (For example there is a clear split between the pro- and anti- pornography feminists (I’m still working on a RD of the [[pornography]] article as per our previous discussion btw) ). If we are going to really flesh out this article we ought to have a number of feminisms represented here—just as we don’t lump all creationists together but observe the very real distinction between Young and Old Earth Creationists.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:44, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

==Abortion poll==

The page I linked to had a whole series of polls. The two most recent polls said that 16% of the American public favored retaining unlimited rights to abortion, and 39% favored abortion being 'legal in most cases'. Of the remainder, 31% favored it being illegal in 'most' cases and 12% illegal in all cases. In other words, 55% favor it being legal in all or most cases and 43% favor it being illegal in all or most cases, with 2% unsure either way. The other poll referred to the retention of the rights granted under Roe v Wade and 62% favored this. This should be reflected in the article because as it stands the article misrepresents the facts. Please tell me why you think we should misrepresent facts clearly laid out in a neutral opinion poll --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:38, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

: Can you explain why abortion polling data is so relevant to this article? What is the point? It is an article about Feminism, not abortion politics.
: You put in a statement that the majority of Americans the current law on abortion rights, but in fact the most recent poll at the cited source says that only 16% support that right. So I corrected that. Now you want various other poll results. What is the point? People can follow the link to the polls if they wish. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:05, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::The statement about feminist support for abortion rights was in the original version of the article I saw. I linked to the poll to provide a citation on an issue that the original article said was of great importance to many feminists, and made it clear that these rights were opposed by many conservatives and some feminists. My original simple statement about 'majority' support for the right to a legal abortion in all or some cases was made convoluted by another editor and I attempted to clarify it. It has now been totally distorted by you. In addition to the 16% support you keep citing, you omit to say that an additional 39% support abortion rights 'in most cases'. Shall we say that only 12% of people - presumably conservatives - oppose abortion? This would be equally valid by your measure of validity. People can certainly follow the link, but it is dishonest to misrepresent its content in the way you are doing.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:16, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::: What is dishonest? It is an article about feminism, not about conservative abortion views. Maybe an article about abortion can explain the polls in detail, I don't know. The feminist organizations that support abortion rights want abortion to be legal in all cases. The 16% figure is the most relevant one. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:29, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::In that case, since there is no evidence that only feminists support abortion in all cases (we know that some are opposed) the relevant figure is the 62% who support the retention of rights under Roe v Wade, which I think we can agree was agreed by most feminists to be a landmark case on this issue. I suggest we cite that instead, which gives a clearer figure both of general feminist support for abortion rights and the degree to which that issue is supported by the population as a whole. The figure was quite unequivocal on the poll, and is probably less confusing than the other poll. I propose substituting that one. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 19:15, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: Could you give me an example of a feminist organization that opposes abortion rights in some cases? I think that the Roe v Wade poll is more confusing because it reflect not just opinions on abortion, but also opinions about legal theories. I wonder how many people even know what the legal consequence of overturning Roe v Wade would be. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 19:32, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::Sure - [ http://www.feministsforlife.org/] are probably the best-known group, but you can find other organisations listed on [http://www.gargaro.com/fem.html] and quotes from a variety of other sources on [http://www.geocities.com/livefreecritique/modernfeminists.html]. Personally, I don't think the Roe v Wade poll is confusing, because most people associate that case with abortion rights and would be unlikely to consider abstract legal theories in that context. Roe v Wade is cited as an event of significance in a timeline of women's rights on [http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html] and certainly supported by the majority of feminists - see [http://www.feminist.org/courts/roe.asp] and [http://www.now.org/press/01-04/01-22.html]. I feel that it is important to demonstrate the extent to which majority feminist thinking is supported by opinion among the country as a whole over this issue, hence my wish to cite either the full figures of the first poll or the limited figures over Roe v Wade of the second. The second set are probably clearer and easier.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 20:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::: There are certainly lots of feminists who are very happy with abortion law. But if you want to argue that a majority of the people agree with a majority of the feminists, then the Roe v Wade poll doesn't do it. A lot of people are for or against Roe v Wade for a lot of reasons. If you want opinions on abortion, the best polls are the ones that ask abortion questions. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 20:37, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::The language on the poll numbers, as it stands, is misleading. Currently the language is “As of April 2007, women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases, and according to a recent poll, 16% of the American public favor the retention of this right.” This is simply not the case, women have a right to abortions in most cases, but it is not unlimited. Parental notification laws, parental consent laws, laws banning third trimester abortions except when necessary to protect the health or life of the mother – all of these laws are (currently) constitutional (laws banning second trimester abortions except when necessary for the life or safety of the mother are also probably, but less clearly, allowable). That means that 16% of people favor an expansion of the right to an abortion, not keeping it the same. 39% seem to favor “keeping it the same” as there is currently a right to abortion in most, but not all cases.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 20:42, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: I agree that the numbers as currently stated are misleading. In that case, given that RSchlafly opposes using the Roe v Wade poll I think the fairest and most representative thing to do is to cite the full figures of the first poll, which is the most recent one in any case, and let people make their own minds up about the extent to which majority feminist thinking on this issue has influenced thinking in the population in general. I will edit accordingly.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:00, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Interestingly enough, even Roe v. Wade didn’t go as far as to say that a woman had a right to an abortion in all cases. It said that a woman had a right to an abortion in the first trimester, in the second trimester a woman has a right to an abortion unless the state can show a really good reason why she should be allowed to have one, and a state could outlaw almost all third trimester abortions. (The Casey decision which is the leading case at the moment, relaxed constraints on what the state could ban). So under current law more abortions can be outlawed than could be under Roe v. Wade and even under Roe it was not the case that “women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases”.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Thank you, that's very helpful and I hope my editing of the paragraph has reflected that. Please clarify if it seems inaccurate. It sounds as if law in the US is, in practice, quite similar to law in the UK, where abortions are illegal after 24 weeks unless there are life-threatening reasons, although in practice only a minute percentage of abortions are performed after 20 weeks.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:13, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::Your restatement in the article looks right to me. Just to be clear though, I am only talking about what women have a constitutionally protected right to (at the moment, I suspect that this will change in the near future). I’m not sure what the law is in any given state—the Supreme Court simply says “this is the most you can outlaw” in many states more abortions are allowed than the bare minimum. And I have no idea what the actual numbers look like here (actually I suspect that those numbers are not attainable here, given how tightly guarded medical records are).--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::: No, it is just not the case that abortion is limited by trimesters under USA law. Not under Roe, and not under Casey. USA law is not like UK law. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 22:03, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

==Why the deleted quotations?==

RobS - it is not very polite to delete another editor's work that is relevant to the article without discussing it first. I reverted your original edit so that it could be discussed. I should be grateful if you would be kind enough to do that here.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:36, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:answers.com is a wikimirror site. It is an invalid citition. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:06, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

::Well that's no problem. It's an extremely famous quotation and I have plenty of other sources for it. The other quotation from Pat Robertson is not from answers.com so I presume that is OK. If that's your only problem with it, I will restore it with a different source. It would have been mannerly of you to have asked me if I had another source for it rather than just deleting it though. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:10, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

==South End Press==
My apologies, but we can't use bigotted and hate filled extremist publishers for references. A blockquote from the mainspace cites a book published by South End Press, which also published this proven and debunked piece of trash. [http://www.southendpress.org/2004/items/OldNazis] The reference will be removed, and the editor is hereby warned to refrain from making further insertions from such hatefilled extremist sources. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:07, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

==To much emphasis on abortion==
I think that this artical is focused mainly on abortion which is not it is for.

::Agreed. I suggest cutting out all abortion references except one: Give it a bullet point in the list of goals, and no more. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== Misandry ==
This article has clearly mistaken the definition of femanism for misandry. There are more even-minded, considerate, and heterosexual feminists that can be counted, where as this article only lists those who qualify as man-haters. Honestly I think this kind of blatent bias is what's ruined Conservapedia, and really the entire country, but there's no reason to suggest that feminism goes against any of the values that we all share, and I suggest we completely overhall this entire article and include a section regarding feminist inspired misandry and the differences between the two practices. I also don't think there is any reason to suggest that feminism is a sin and in any way connected to homosexual behavior, which seems to be what this article implys. I'm not so quick to put females who wish to be heard in the same boat as abominations, and I wish I could say the same for all of the Conservapidia editors.
--[[User:YoungConservative|YoungConservative]] 15:43, 2 February 2008 (EST)YoungConservative

:What you say was true, back when the feminists really were seeking legal equality - before the radical feminists hijacked it for their attacks on family life, hate of tradition, and abortionist agenda. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== "boys being cheerleaders for it" ==

Is it not the case that George W. Bush was a cheerleader at Yale back in the day? [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 13:24, 2 March 2008 (EST)

: Could be. Many prominent men were once cheerleaders ... for ''boys'' playing football, not girls.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:27, 2 March 2008 (EST)

== Excessive quotes? ==

I'm not sure if I'm alone here in thinking that there are far too many quotes in this article? They make the layout rather bloated and do not seem to provide much in the way of information. Might I go ahead and perhaps remove some of the less relevant quotes? Thanks. --[[User:TJ|Crookles]] 15:32, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: No, please don't delete factual information, unless you see a clear [[rule]] violation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:27, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::There are no rule violations, but the quotations are not explained, not formatted, and are longer than the rest of the sections of the article put together. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:14, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::: The quotations illustrate what feminists really think, and that is informative.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:34, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::::Have you looked at them though? Some of them don't make sense, some are (supposedly) by feminists and others are ''about'' feminists (with no clear distinction), a lot of them are redundant, there is no formatting, and some of them contain poorly-censored swear words. It might be informative, but it does not look good in an encyclopedia for 75% or so of the article to be made up of unclear, unreferenced quotations. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:54, 3 March 2008 (EST)

I just put bullet points on those quotes, and it really seems like a terribly excessive list. Does anyone else think that some editing could be done to this to make it seem a little less over-the-top? [[User:Reaganite|Reaganite]] 18:05, 9 March 2008 (EDT)

== The list of feminist views ==

Is it just me or goes the top list of feminist views come accross as humourous rather than factual , i laughed when i read it because it sounds funny and witty rather than serious and factual. I think the tone needs altering, i can imagine liberals having a field day over it. --[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 18:58, 3 March 2008 (EST)

It really smacks of parody, and of course, there were no references. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 19:57, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: Both you are clueless if you don't realize what modern feminists think. By the way, "Realist2", "across" has only on "c" and we spell "humorous" without the "our" in [[America]]. Maybe you don't have many feminists in your country. America does.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:35, 3 March 2008 (EST)
::Why did you remove my reference to feminists wanting tougher penalties for rapists? Surely they do (it was the only referenced point on the list). [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:06, 4 March 2008 (EST)

If your can only edit by insulting others spelling or the spelling for the country they come from it shows a distinct lack of tolerance. I am here to be constructive so please dont put others down its not very christain at all. Also how would i know what feminists think ... funny enough im not even a woman so it would be very hard to put myself in that thought of mind. However writing with sarcasm or does not improve the article. I never said whats written is incorrect , i said the tone needs changing, didnt you read or inderstand that Aschlafly? I can say it in spanish if it helps lol. :-)--[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 13:38, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Where in her book did Hillary Clinton say that children should be raised by a "village" RATHER THAN their parents? [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 15:05, 5 March 2008 (EST)

I am removing the part about refusing to admit the wrongness of their ideology; it could be said about any ideology, but it is not listed on the Creationism or Christianity pages (or the Aethism one). [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 22:29, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
Aschlafly- why was my edit reverted? [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 21:51, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

: Because [[censorship]] of the truth is not allowed here. This is not Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:38, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

::How is removing an unsourced statement censorship? I would not take seriously any encyclopedia in which that statement appeared without evidence. [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 07:16, 18 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm really not sure about this list: I think this focuses too much on the radical feminists - the bra-burning, men-hating feminists from the sixties and seventies. But hasn't feminism developed, become more mainstream? For example, I'd consider myself a (conservative) feminist, and almost all of my girlfriends are too. We'd reject all or almost all of the points listed in the article:
- Yes, of course men and women are different; physically and mentally. We certainly don't believe in falsely imposing equality of outcomes - only of opportunity.
- Oppose chivalry? Nope. It's charming that a few men still open doors, give up seats for us. I don't know anyone who would complain about that.
- View traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal? Nope.
- Belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family? No-one I know.
- shirk traditional gender activities, like baking? I really don't understand this one. You're a feminist if you don't bake biscuits? Or is this a synecdoche for wider home-making activities?
- support affirmative action for women? Again, no. Affirmative action does no good in the short, medium or long-term. That's more a liberal value than a feminist one, wouldn't you say?
- prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do - This is straying into the dungaree-wearing radical lesbian feminist stereotype. Most feminists don't care what other women wear, as long as they're not wearing the same outfit as you at a cocktail party.

Look, I could go on, but my point is that this article paints feminism as the ''bête noire'' of conservative values and, while this may be true of more radical / historical feminism, it's too simplistic to cover the very, very large number of women worldwide who identify as feminists and conservatives.[[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 07:34, 21 January 2011 (EST)

==Difficulty of defining feminism==

It's not easy to define [[feminism]]. Is it "organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests"? Must one support [[equal rights]] to be a feminist?

Are there feminists who want women to "get more" than men, just as their are minority advocates who are want their group to "get more" than people in other groups? (Is feminism thus a kind of "group selfishness"?)

Is "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes" consistent with the Bible?

Is it possible to believe that men and women are "equally valuable" but made (in the image of God) to be inherently different? That is, are [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]] equally valuable qualities? Or what?

Are there currents in feminism which seek to advance women's interests but which '''do not''' assert that men and women are (or should be) "equal" in all respects?

What, then, is the proper relationship between men and women? Specifically, in the family, what are the proper roles? (How much leeway is there?)

Do all feminists oppose the "stay at home mom" phenomenon? (Or is that only [[Simone de Beauvoir]]?) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:55, 4 March 2008 (EST)

==Ridiculous Number of Quotes==

About three quarters of this article is made up of selected quotes from selected feminists, often those who do not represent mainstream feminism and are radicalised in their views. There are also a couple of unsubstantiated quotes from anti-feminists which appear to be used to represent fact rather than a person's opinion. Perhaps we could cut down on these or move them to another article ([[Quotes by Radical Feminists]] and [[Quotes by Anti-Feminists]]) in order to make this one a bit more encyclopedic. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:50, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

=="Ideological Edits"==

''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should raise children rather than the child's father and mother[5]''

The supporting reference for this is the title of a book, however the book itself states that it states a village (ie a large number of people - teachers, doctors etc) '''in addition''' to parents to successfully raise a child. Not once does the book say that parents are to be denied the main role in raising their children.

''prefer for role-reversal, like girls playing football and boys being cheerleaders for it, or men baking cookies for women''

Unsupported, mainstream feminism believes in equal roles, that is women can play football and boys can be cheerleaders, they do not believe in role reversal (ie boys cannot play football and women cannot be cheerleaders).

''prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do''

Unsupported, this is a radical view at best.

''Quotes from fictional characters''

The quotes from a character within a fiction book do not provide any valid insight into the mindset of a feminist, even if that book was written by a feminist.

Hope this clears it up, ready for reversion of reversion. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:59, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:Sorry, but conservatives believe that no one other than the parents should have the primary role in establishment of values, etc. Perhaps instead of pushing your liberal POV in editing a conservative encyclopedia, you could work as hard finding additional citations that you will approve of, illustrating the point. You cannot deny what is factual, that Feminism is a vehicle for liberal change of the social order, and the destruction of the traditional family. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:12, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

::This article is not about conservative beliefs, it is about the beliefs of feminists, and it appears that they are currently being misrepresented (the present revision states that feminists believe a village should raise children '''instead''' of parents, whereas the truth is that feminists believe a village should '''support''' parents in raising children). Could you please point out which of my points you believe to not be factually correct? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:15, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:::"Liberal POV" or not, I don't think fictional characters make very reliable as references. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:04, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::I await a response. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 18:07, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

GySom, the changes you made, apparently to make the article more ideologically neutral, would be a fine thing on Wikipedia, where they like to keep the public sheltered from facts, but not on CP, where we actually offer a choice, not an echo to the so-called "wisdom" of the crowd. From my experience here, I would suggest you concern yourself less with seeking out articles to make neutral, and spend your time creating new articles, helpful content that is both Christian and conservative friendly, because that is the stated goals and perspective of this encyclopedia and its Founders. Leave it to Wikipedia, and the dishonest presentations there, to "cleanse" topics near and dear to the liberals hearts. If you wish to make the changes you have, please provide proof that Feminists don't think that way. Responsive enough? --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:34, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Hang on, are you asking me to prove a negative? Asking someone to prove that mainstream feminism does not accept something is akin to proving that there are no invisible unicorns on Mars. It is up to the person making the claim to support it, not my job to weed through every single quote that a feminist has made and then provide an analysis to show that mainstream feminism does not support a claim that is made, it is the job of the person making the claim to support it. Let me lay out the changes I think should be made:

:*Mainstream feminists do not believe a village should raise a child instead of his or her parents, they believe that parents should be supported in their role by others (this I can actually support, by my recollection the book in the reference specifically states that parents should play the main role in raising their children).
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe in role reversal, they believe in the destruction of roles (that is, instead of believing that boys should not be allowed to play football and girls should not believe in cheer leading, they believe that boys and girls should both be able to play football or cheer lead should they desire)
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe that women should not wear dresses and should wear pants
:*A series of quotes from a ''fictional character'' in a book does not provide any insight into modern feminism

:If you have an argument about one of those points please make it, I don't need to hear about how I'm an evil liberal who should run away to Wikipedia as this gets us nowhere. It is conservative ideology to tell the truth no matter what it is, therefore it is imperative to truthfully represent the views of mainstream feminism on this encyclopedia. I guess my edits were ideological after all, just not in the way you think. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 19:48, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::Indeed, I am asking you to prove your assertion, GySom. You made the changes, now back them with proof. ''What Feminists believe is well known''. Do you demand proof of God? That there is air? The Feminist agenda is the complete re-ordering of the nuclear family, its denigration. That has been proved countless times. Your own points above show that Feminists reject completely God's own creation, the differences between men and women. Please stop with these silly distracting arguments promoting liberal ideals! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:59, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::If it has been proven countless times then there should be no problems with finding supporting evidence for it. I am not asking for proof of God or proof of air because the existence of these two is not being debated, rather we are discussing whether or not mainstream feminism believes in the three points I removed, and whether the forth should be included. I notice that you have only taken objection to the first point (regarding families), it is therefore acceptable to alter the information relating to the last three? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:05, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::Well, I am not a sysop here, so I certainly cannot stop you from doing so. If you change it back, and the Administrators and/or Andy are fine with it, so be it. I am not going to engage you in some endless discussion about the falsities and naivety of your assumptions, GySom! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:17, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::I am very open to hearing about the "falsities and naivety of my assumptions" and changing my mind if sources are produced, however at the moment it appears that there are no sources supporting the claim that feminists believe parents should not raise their children (the current cite says the opposite) and it appears that nobody has taken objection to the rewording of the claim that feminists favour role reversal or the removal of the claim that feminists shun dresses or the quotes from the fictional character. I will change the last three points, and leave the first open for now for continued discussion with yourself or others.

:::::Please, I am not trying to invite conflict, I just feel that this claim is not supported and therefore needs to be changed. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:24, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

*Yes, to be sure, I am certain those are your intentions! I stand by what I said above, but I have taken the liberty of asking Andy, Conservative and some others to review this. I hope that helps you out. Godspeed to you! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:26, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::I look forward to it, I was hoping that two users could have a civil discussion without going and calling in the big guns, but sadly this could not be the case. For those reviewing it here are my arguments:
::#The claim that feminists believe a village should raise a child '''instead''' of his/her parents is unsupported by the reference, those who read the book will find that it suggests that a village should '''support''' parents in raising their child, but that parents should play the main role
::#The claim that feminists believe in role reversal is wrong, feminists believe in the destruction of roles altogether
::#The claim that feminists believe that dresses should not be worn is a radical belief at best, and there are no cites supporting it
::#Quotes from a ''fictional character'' should never be used to make a point for or against feminism.
::Of these only number 1 was argued, and during this discussion there was no mention of why the source was correct, nor were any other sources raised. Numbers 2 and 3 were not argued, and number 4 was supported by HelpJazz. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 21:56, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::In response to your four points above:

:::#The thesis of the book is clear: "it takes a village to raise a child," and by its very terms that denies the exclusive role played by parents in raising children. The point in this entry is correct and you have not proposed alternative language that would be more accurate.
:::#No, feminists do crave role reversal, as in men baking cookies and women assuming traditionally male jobs. I'll add an example.
:::#I've added an example in response to your point about dresses.
:::#Your point here is not clear, and I'll look again at the entry.
:::Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:10, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually Andy, could we use your wording just there to clarify it?
*''believe that "it takes a village to raise a child" and deny the exclusive role played by [[parents]] in raising children.''
[[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 23:16, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Thankyou for your reply.
:#The thesis of the book is that it takes a village as well as the parents to raise a child, at the moment the entry reads that it takes a village rather than the parents, so yes the exclusivity of the role is denied, but not the role itself (by memory the book states that parents have a significant and unique role to play). I did have alternate language in my original edit: ''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should assist parents in raising children'' or something along those lines that clarifies that the position taken by the book is not to replace the parents - edit conflict, not adjusted for Feebasfactor's comment
:#There may be some confusion between role reversal and the destruction of roles. Role reversal in your example would be men baking cookies and women being expected not to bake cookies, and women taking traditionally male jobs with men being expected not to take those jobs. By the destruction of roles it is expected that both men and women have an equal right to bake cookies, and that both men and women have an equal right to take whatever job they want to, I believe the latter is closer to the desire of mainstream feminists to have equal roles and to breakdown the concept of gender, rather than pushing for a matriarchal society.
:#I'm not entirely happy that a one line quote from a blog in response to another article can be used to represent mainstream feminism, but it's your encyclopedia
:#There are quotes from a fictional character, I don't see why these should be in the article (using the same logic someone could use quotes from a fictional American president in a book to criticise America).
:Hope this clears it up. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:19, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Aren't the fictional quotes a tiny percentage of the quotes, and aren't they by a feminist author?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"''? Though I have met many feminists, I have never met a woman, ever, who felt that women should only wear pants. I know women who do not wear pants, because they feel the Bible calls them to wear only skirts, though this is not true for all of the Christian women I know, or even a majority of them. Most women, feminist or not, dress according to what they will be doing. If they will be hiking in the woods giving a lesson on the forest habitat, they will probably wear jeans. If they are going to a wedding or a funeral, they will almost certainly wear a dress. Some women personally prefer to wear dresses more than pants, or vice versa, but most women, feminist or not, don't feel that everyone should dress as they do. If the article is going to state that feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"'', then there should be a really good citation to show this. Certainly you can find many articles where women discuss the pros and cons of pants and/or dresses, but I've never seen anything that supported the claim made here. An example to the contrary would be the A Dress A Day blog<ref>A Dress A Day[http://www.dressaday.com/dressaday.html]</ref>, whose author writes regularly about the joys of wearing dresses; I'm quite certain she would consider herself a feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 23:22, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I've added another cite, and frankly am surprised that anyone would dispute this feminist preference to dress like men in order to make an ideological statement.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::::The whole pants thing was a big deal at the time because there were people & institutions who felt that women should *never* wear pants - restaurants that wouldn't serve women wearing pants, schools that wouldn't allow girls to wear pants (even in freezing cold weather - and skirts in those days were *short*!), and so on. Feminists of the time believed that women should be allowed to wear pants if they wished. (Not that they *should* wear pants.) Nowadays, most American women, feminist or not, wear both pants and skirts, just because we like to, or for practical reasons, not for political reasons. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:17, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::Cites about baking cookies and wearing pants are from 1970's, not modern feminism? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:55, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::: The 1970s is "modern". Perhaps a time period should be added to the entry? By the 1960s "modern" feminism was in full bloom.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:01, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::::Is the goal of the entry to describe feminism as it is understood today by the majority of women who consider themselves feminists? (I'm assuming this would be the best approach, though of course the history is of interest as well.) The radical femimism of the '60's and '70's was, well, radical, but I think that the kind of extreme views described in this article would be foreign to most women today who consider themselves feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:08, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

<- The section of the article in dispute is written in the present tense (''"Specifically, modern feminists tend to"'' as opposed to ''"Specifically, modern feminist tended to"'') after having described the era of the 1970's in the past tense, therefore the points should describe those beliefs held by mainstream feminists today. I'm not too sure many modern mainstream feminists favour wearing pants or role reversal, just as we don't see burning bras or (too many) claims that all sexual relationships in marriage are rape. In short, what was mainstream in the 1970's appears to now be classified as radical compared to the views of modern feminists, which appear to be more about breaking down gender inequality and the like. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 00:14, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I agree - though I would add that many of the ideas discussed in the 70's were radical feminism (not mainstream feminism) even then.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:20, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]], Thank you for your grammar edit! It really helps! While we're cleaning up this article, here's another item that might need to be changed. I don't think the statement that feminists ''"oppose single-sex schooling"'' is accurate. There are rather a lot of feminists at all-girl colleges like Smith and Bryn Mawr and Mount Holyoke. Also, I can't see your recent changes on the main article page, only the history page - I don't know if it's me or Conservapedia. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:27, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:It's stupid to argue about this sort of thing on an article discussion page. Just add a quote from a feminist who supports it. This goes for girls' schools, dresses, stay-at-home moms and all the other stuff above. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::: Can't. Article's locked, at least it is for me.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:00, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::Are we trying to use the view of one feminist to represent the views of all, or are we accurately trying to report on the collective views of mainstream feminism? If it's the latter then a single quote from one feminist won't do the job. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:21, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I have unlocked the article so that the requested source can be added. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:07, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Feminism and choice==

Feminists say they '''only want choice''' while actually asserting various "shoulds" and "oughts".

Wearing dresses is strongly discouraged by feminists; dressing like men is strongly encouraged. Indeed, all sorts of feminine behavior in the workplace is discouraged, and we '''all''' know that [[Simone de Beauvoir]] condemned the [[choice]] of woman staying home to raise her and her husband's children.

What we object to here is the [[liberal deceit|pretense]] that feminism supports women choosing either traditional female roles or modern "liberated" ones. They use coercion quite openly. Pretending that they do not is something you can do on your own blog, using your [[freedom of press]] to tell lies. You can't do it here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:16, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:According to her article she made those views in 1949, we are trying to discuss the views of modern feminists, or more specifically those around in 2008. As has been stated above, these are different to the views held in the past. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:24, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Ed Poor explains this extremely well. I don't know what TheGySom is referencing about 1949, but that is surely "modern" also. [[Feminism]] plainly represents views about how women ''should'' act, and women who disagree with that ideology are ostracized and ridiculed by the more militant feminists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:39, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Simone de Beauvoir wrote her controversial book ''The Second Sex'' in 1949. It is relevant to the history of feminism, but in no way should be used as a source to describe the views of mainstream twenty-first century feminists, as it was written almost 60 years ago. We've come a long way since then - most of today's feminists weren't even born when the book came out. I'm a woman, I have friends who are feminist and friends who definitely aren't, none of them have ever tried to encourage or discourage me from wearing dresses. Some of my friends wear only dresses/skirts for religious reasons (Christian or Jewish), but I've never met a woman who would not wear dresses for political reasons. The idea just doesn't ring true to me. Certainly for some activities or professions pants are a more practical and/or more safe choice, and some women tend towards pants or tend towards dresses for themselves, but those are not political or ideological choices, they are a matter of personal style and/or practicality. Feminists in the '70's fought for the right to wear pants in places and situations where it had not previously been allowed, mostly for practical and personal style reasons. I'm not trying to be argumentative here - just to give a woman's perspective. So far, the only sources in support of the idea that feminists encourage dressing like men have been offhand comments in blogs. Can we find some more solid sources for this idea if it is to be included in the article?--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I'm sure there are millionaire communists who say they have no desire to interfere with private property, and that they don't know any other communists who do either. And they would be right about themselves and their friends, but wrong about the ideology of communism.

:::: Likewise here. The ''[[sine qua non]]'' of modern feminism is for women to act like men. Why would clothes be excluded from that? They aren't. I've already provided two references and there are probably more, but I'm getting the sense that no amount of citations will persuade you because you know what you and your friends think about clothes. I suggest you spend some time researching this and ask women familiar with the feminist agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:26, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Name Changes==
The article says that feminists ''"refuse to take the husband's last name when marrying, despite the confusion and complexity that causes"''. However, the article used as a citation seems to be saying the opposite. It is an article about the complexity of such decisions for 21st century women, and how there are many different approaches to changing one's name, and how quite a few feminists are now changing their name to, one way or another, include their husband's name. (The author, who is marrying soon, begins the article with 8 of her own options, including hyphenation, etc.) The article goes on to give quite a few examples of feminist women who made various choices, for a wide variety of reasons. Based on the cited article, I think a more accurate statement for our article would be ''"feminists are likely to take a number of factors into consideration when deciding whether or not to change their last name to their husband's when they marry."'' Two relevant quotes from the article: ''"...they are doing what they can, making meaning of their own, focusing on what they do with their lives as much as what they do with their names. And by the way, isn't that the whole idea of feminism?"'' and ''"Hey, I'm a stay-at-home mom who took her husband's name and earns a fraction of our household income but none of that makes me any less of a feminist. Because for me, feminism is about respecting women and men and being able to make whatever lifestyle choices you want."'' <ref>"(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller. [http://dir.salon.com/story/mwt/feature/2003/10/16/names/index.html]</ref> I did not make this change, even though the article is now unlocked, because I'd like input from others first - I think that, together, we can make this a better article.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 21:40, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

== References ==

<references/>

==Question for the Editor--==
I just found my way to your site via Google, and read "Feminism." I noticed that your editorial policy says that you're not allowing the use of material that isn't accurate. That site says that early feminists were "suffragettes." The suffragettes were English, in fact -- in the use, the folks who supported the right to vote for women were suffragists, from Woodrow Wilson to good ol' Theodore Roosevelt. Your writers also have no idea that the term "feminist" at times has been somewhat conservative (hey! surprise!), as when the National Women's Party supported an Equal Rights Amendment while most women opposed it. In the meantime, in the twentieth century, some Republican women would have been comfortable calling themselves "feminists," from Margaret Chase Smith to Oveta Culp Hobby. The term has had somewhat varied meanings over the course of the century, and any accurate description should reflect that. Interested readers could check out Catherine Rymph's Republican Women, published by the very reputable U.North Carolina Press. {{unsigned|Mm444}}

== Unsourced quotes ==

There are tons of unsourced quotes in this article, and I will go through the list to see how many I can actually source. I will remove those quotes I couldn't find any info on, and I'll post them here so others can re-add them if they do find reliable sources. The key words are: Where was it said, and when. Evidence should be supplied. Quote-sites that simply say "She said so." are off-limits.

*"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." - Robin Morgan
I couldn't find anything more than just anti-feminist comments and "Men Rights" sites. No mention of where or when she supposedly said so. (Update: Found a site that says it's from "Sisterhood is Powerful". --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:56, 16 April 2008 (EDT))

A somewhat special case is the next one:
*"I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero-sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary-vested-interest-power. But then, I have great difficulty examining what men in general could possibly do about all this. In addition to doing the sh*twork that women have been doing for generations, possibly not exist? No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" - Robin Morgan
I found out that this quote comes from her introduction to the 1970 book "Sisterhood is Powerful". I also found this [http://www.feministcampus.org/network/chat/morgan04232003.asp snippet] about the quote:
{{cquote|Halimat: Following is a quote from you. Assuming that you weren't misquoted, do you still feel this way? How are women to get ahead without collaberation from those who currently hold the majority of legislative power? "I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero- sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary- vested-interest-power."

Robin Morgan: That quote is from the early 1970s and fortunately both the movement and I have matured in terms of developing a much more sophisticated range of tactics and strategies, due to our enormous numbers, than we ever could have imagined back in the late 60s and early 70s. While it is still true that "pale males" are at the top of the "food chain" - more men are changing every day. They're more involved with their children and families and on every level, from slowly learning to use Ms. through to adopting and adapting to anti-sexual harrassment workplace rules, men have been changing. It's not enough by far, but it is a start. And it's the power of the women's movement that has brought them even this far.}}
I'll leave the quote in the article, but I will also link to that interview so people can get a more modern reflection on the quote. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:03, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

One more from Robin Morgan:
*"Women are not inherently passive or peaceful. We're not inherently anything but human."
It's a really nice quote, so I regret that I couldn't find any proper sourcing for it. :/ --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:42, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Took out two (for now) from Dworkin:
*"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig."<nowiki><ref></nowiki>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp From] her book "Ice and Fire"<nowiki></ref></nowiki>
"Ice and Fire" is a ''novel''. As in ''fiction''. As such, I won't treat this as her own quote, just like I don't claim that authors like King or Clancy endorse every sentence from their books as their own views.
*Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman."
This quote is [http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp attributed] to "Liberty", but I couldn't find it in her Bibliography, so I'll cut it until somebody actually figures out whether it's a book (and whether it's fiction or non-fiction) or a paper or something. Citing made-up books sounds vaguely unlikely, but I'd rather be safe than sorry. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 17:27, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Dworkin again:
*"To be rapeable, a position that is social, not biological, defines what a woman is."
Couldn't find any proper sourcing, only quote pages that simply say she said it, but not where or when. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 18:00, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==Quotations and flowing prose==

There are way too many quotations here. Sure, we've proved the point. There's a lot of nasty things that were said by genuine, card-carrying feminists. But quotes don't make an article.

I want to know the roots of feminism, what it originally tried to do, what else it started to do, and how it did (and does) differ from simply "making sure women don't get mistreated". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:11, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
:Agree with the "way too many quotations" bit. A few quotes from several eras to illustrate how feminism developed and matured would be nice. If that's not possible, just crop it down. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:17, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
::It probably wouldn't hurt to review this. I am also pleased Miles that you have chosen a constructive approach of finding and adding references instead of just complaining. There is a greater chance of seeing constructive changes occur under that format than merely confronting. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:40, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==I think we have misrepresented Jilly Cooper==

I think Jilly Cooper, the veteran right-wing journo and toff, would be surprised to find herself identified as a feminist and downright astonished to be labelled a member of SCUM. Somebody has got a little confused here. (Or else they are being mischievious).

== Suggestion for separation ==

I personally feel it would be beneficial to make two articles on this subject. What's described here is what many call "radical feminism" whereas average everyday feminism is quite different. I'm not an expert in this field, but I can assure you that the generalizations made here are on the most extreme examples of feminists. -EternalCritic

I agree, much of what is addressed here under the heading of "feminism" would more properly be described as "radical feminism" (of the all women should be lesbians/all heterosexual intercourse is rape slant), and much of the substantive article seems to be un-cited impressions that appear to be sourced in popular culture (for example, if the ideological doctrine is too difficult to define, how can it be said that *all* feminists balk at chivalry or belittle family women?). Can the lengthy list of sound-bite quotations (from which the reader is apparently supposed to cobble together an idea of what feminism is) be removed to ultimately be replaced with an attempt to seriously engage with the tenants of feminism with a stronger focus on peer-reviewed academia reflecting a broader overview of the field rather than a relatively small group of extremists? -- [[User:BillyWest|BillyWest]] 11:28, August 28 2011

== Reversion explained ==

The edit summary to the last edit said, "I changed some awkward phrasing. I also think the bullets should be made into one coherent paragraph. Thoughts?" In fact, that edit introduced liberal bias and censored conservative truth. It was fully reverted even though it did also include some harmless stylistic changes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:20, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

== Citations? ==

I'm not clear on the policy. In the list of quotes, there are some that don't have real citations like:

"The nuclear family must be destroyed ... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process" - Linda Gordon

and

"Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women ... We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men ... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft" (from "The Declaration of Feminism" November, 1971)

I think these need real citations or they should be removed. Also, quotes about feminists should be in a separate section than quotes from feminists. Pat Robertson is mixed in with a bunch of feminists right now, under the "Other" heading.

--[[User:AdamBurns|AdamBurns]] 18:47, 16 December 2009 (EST)

== Enough quotations? ==

This article could make a more mature examination of feminism than putting up a bunch of quotations. --[[User:Marxian21|Marxian21]] 22:53, 22 January 2010 (EST)

== "No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" ==

I cannot find the phrase in either of the two references given. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:12, 30 January 2010 (EST)

:Please feel free to delete that phrase, then.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:18, 30 January 2010 (EST)
::I would, but TK has already reverted someone who edited it out--and I don't want to anger him. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:22, 30 January 2010 (EST)

== Reversion explained ==

Modern feminists are overwhelmingly pro-abortion, and even those who are not pro-abortion are still anti-motherhood.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:54, 1 June 2010 (EDT)

==Full rewrite==

I like the quotes, and we certainly need a conservative critique of modern "radical" feminism, but the movement has also had its good points. There are even places/issues where currents in contemporary feminism match up with conservative ideas.

The idea that men shouldn't use their power to abuse women is a longstanding conservative idea (see [[Chivalry]]), although this is nothing more than the general idea that no one, male or female, should abuse his power; it doesn't matter if it's man to woman, white to black, rich to poor, educated to ignorant, etc. However, many feminists bristle at the idea of accepting '''any''' help from men (such help seen as condescending at best). Most conservative Christians oppose [[pornography]] and [[sexual slavery]], and so on. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:23, 8 September 2010 (EDT)

I am trying to make this page compatible with a little Amazon Alexa Mod I cooked up, so far when It reads it,
There were multiple spelling errors, and when she spoke it sounded more like a rant then an actual informative conservative essay. Also the bulleted list doesn't play and the alexia device just stops playing, I believe the hardware isn't used to bullet points not being with-in heading or heading font so the Device just tries to reload the text in pure html using Wikipedias default source php (which I deleted to make my own.)
I understand that I need to be of higher standing, so can someone edit the article so it doesn't sound like a gigantic rant without any sources.
--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] [[User talk:Reevestehsnek|Talk]] 10:59, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:Sorry, we don't change pages so Amazon Alexa handles them better. That's Alexa's problem, not ours. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:48, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::I wasn't clear I made a mod for an alexa device that uses conservapedia as its source, but its obvi you don't care about all the hard hours of work it took to actual remove the php through bluetooth and rewrite the script using BSD. {{unsigned|Reevestehsnek}}
:::I'm not saying that at all, and that sounds like a great accomplishment that I could not do myself.

:::What I '''am''' saying is that this is not a sufficient reason for making major changes to the article. We simply cannot change an article's wording and point of view because it runs better through a speaking device. Articles are generally created to be read, and it's unusual for people to have them spoken to them by a device. Wording and point of view changes should only be made based on their own merits. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:09, 8 November 2018 (EST)

== feminism and obesity ==

feminism and obesity: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html I will leave it up to others decide what constitutes feminism as I am taking a break from Conservapedia barring any news events. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:03, 5 February 2011 (EST)

== Create a feminism and obesity article ==

Consider creating a [[Feminism and obesity]] article at Conservapedia and cite this material: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:08, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

:The blog you want cited makes a ''huge'' leap in its conclusions. Being a working mother does not automatically translate into being a feminist. I would guess the majority of working women are in the job market because there is a need for a second income to support a family, given the cost of basic necessities such as rent, food, gasoline, electricity, medical costs, clothing, etc. I know that is the case in my situation. We can't pay for the basics on my husband's salary alone. We haven't had a vacation in years. Most of my friends are in the same situation. And the blog completely ignores the single working mother - what is she supposed to do? Not work? --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 11:01, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

I agree that this article is no good, even though I wish it were true.
--[[User:corneliuscalvin|corneliuscalvin]] 7:56, 26 November 2012 (PDT)

:Can't talk now. of the World happening. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 23:01, 26 November 2012 (EST)

== No Christian feminism? ==

I think that this article would be served well if a section on [[Christian feminism]] was included. Maybe a new article on it would be better.[[User:Mr. Guye|Mr. Guye]] ([[User talk:Mr. Guye|talk]]) 19:15, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:That seems like a good idea, but an article on it would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view. But there's also the fact that the same term can have a different meaning for different people -- what one person considers Christian feminism can be completely different than what another person does. We would need to define the term clearly, but I think we'd be talking about second- and third-wave feminism, adherents of which have theologically and socially left-wing views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:47, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:::No, there is no requirement that a Conservapedia article discussing the topic of Christian feminism "would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view." There are no such requirements on content at Conservapedia, and no one, except perhaps Andy, has the authority to enforce such a requirement. All that is required is that "Conservapedia is a politically conservative, Christian encyclopedia project". Though many of our members are not Christians and are not politically conservative, they are required to edit in a manner consistent with the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]]. To require otherwise would turn this wiki into a Wikipedia-style "mobocracy" rather than a "best of the public" project.

:::The concept of feminism covers a lot of ground. There are conservative feminists, Christian feminists, and Republican feminists. Not all feminists subscribe to some of the silly excesses that one sometimes sees looking around on the internet and various media outlets. Many conservative feminists, for example, fully support encouraging girls to go into STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects.

:::So feel free to write sensible content on this topic. I look forward to reading it.

:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:49, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::::SamHB, they have found that promoting the idea that women are underrepresented in STEM fields and that this has to be corrected has the effect of telling women that STEM is not feminine/girly and thus women are more likely to avoid those fields. In other words, the policy is probably backfiring. See: http://review.chicagobooth.edu/economics/2017/article/how-promoting-stem-fields-women-can-backfire

::::Women tend to be more likely to be conformists and not mavericks.

::::Over and over again, liberals fail to take into account the unintended consequences of their social engineering! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:48, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::Once Christian denominations filly embrace the notion of female pastors, their memberships almost invariably spiral downward. That should surely be mentioned in relation to "Christian feminism".

::"But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve." - 1 Timothy 2:12-13[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:15, 2 December 2017 (EST)
:::Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I don't think Mr. Guye was even talking about female pastors when he was talking about Christian feminism, just something akin to, say, the Suffragettes, many of whom were Christian women who would NEVER advocate the pill, let alone abortion. But yes, we probably should note that bit somewhere either way. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:35, 2 December 2017 (EST)
::::What percentage of so-called "Christian feminists" believe that a wife is to obey her husband and that a husband is the head of the family? At least in its present form "Christian feminism" is just another endeavor to infect Christianity with unbiblical ideas. As far as the suffragette movement, I don't know if any of them were Christian women who held biblical Christianity views related to women. I do know that various suffragettes burned down churches.[https://www.christiantoday.com/article/suffrage-the-churchs-rocky-relationship-with-rebellion/67361.htm]

::::Christianity was at the forefront of various movements like abolition, child labor laws, etc. etc. Christendom is also known for its favorable views on the treatment of women (husbands loving their wives like Christ loved the church, etc. etc.), but it is not known for leading the charge as far as feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:48, 2 December 2017 (EST)

:::::Well, I do know that Susan B. Anthony specifically condemned abortion and the pill and stated that would make women even more enslaved, and I do know that Christians also do not support abortion and the pill (in fact, among us Catholics, it's considered a mortal sin), so there's that to consider. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 09:53, 2 December 2017 (EST)
==First-wave feminism was good?==
This article makes it sound like first-wave feminism was good and its doctrines were just simply corrupted in the 1960s. As it turns out, first-wave feminists were anti-Christianity and anti-man too, as pointed out by Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire and [[John Doyle]].[https://youtu.be/sgJoJsaI1WY][https://youtu.be/ME-JIO8_cic] Elizabeth Cady Stanton once said that the Bible and the church were the two greatest stumbling blocks in the way of women's emancipation. Susan B. Anthony was a religious skeptic, and other early feminists held similar views too. In fact, many were free lovers, like Victoria Woodhull. I strongly recommend that the early section saying liberals just twisted the term be deleted. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 20:22, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:But the early feminists were [[pro-life]], right?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:45, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::The Bible says wives must submit to their husbands (Pauline epistles and the Apostle Peter taught this). No doubt this was anethema to first wave feminists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:04, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure if they were truly anti-Christianity, they'd be all in favor of unlimited abortion on demand even back then (especially when the Church was ALWAYS against abortion), and yet, as demonstrated with [[Susan B. Anthony]], several of them were AGAINST abortion. I know [[Vladimir Lenin]] [https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/11/17/november-1920-2020-a-century-of-abortion-in-russia/ certainly was all in for unlimited abortion], being notorious for literally legalizing unlimited and unrestricted abortion in the USSR and being the first state leader to EVER do so, even having the audacity to claim THIS emancipated women, and was such that even the likes of [[Margaret Sanger]], herself no pro-life adherer, was reportedly aghast at it. Besides, my idea of having my hypothetical wife submitting to me would be closer to [https://youtu.be/xtO-AHuEhJc?t=428 what Geldoblame advocated for everyone under his rule] from ''Baten Kaitos'', and I'm pretty sure even Jesus and his disciples NEVER advocated for that kind of submission (even less so when Geldoblame used THAT as justification for committing mass murder against a mining community by torching it simply because they withheld ore shipments thanks to his draconian labor statutes that left them dangerously overworked). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:03, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:Being pro-life does not necessarily make one pro-Christianity. Victoria Woodhull was against abortion and she was a Marxist and practically a communist. Also even Sanger claimed to be against abortion if I am not incorrect, saying birth control got rid of the need for it. Planned Parenthood did not start to endorse the legalization of abortion until 1969, and abortion did not even start to become popular until after Roe v. Wade. That was really more of the Overton Window being shifted in conservatism's direction back then than feminism being conservative. It just really goes to show how much ground we've lost. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 22:42, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::Maybe so, but the anti-Christians most certainly tended to be very much anti-life, as Lenin and even Trotsky proved there (not to mention the Bolsheviks), and even the Jacobins, their ideological ancestors, were known to practice abortion in the most crude manner (specifically, bayonetting pregnant women, and/or using wine pressers to crush them). And since Marx was brought into it, Marx himself advocated massively for abortion as well, as did Engels, all in their plan to "abolish the family." And what better way to abolish the family than to destroy reproduction. If she was a Marxist, it only shows she didn't know Marx all that well, as otherwise, she'd be all in favor of abortion like her idol Marx. And let's not forget that this view of pro-abortion has been going on since 1923 with [https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/marxist-roots-abortion-joseph-hippolito/ Dr. Antoinette Konikow], who was a fellow traveler of Trotsky during the Russian Revolution, AND committed several abortions in the Boston area specifically as part of her Marxist advocacy. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:49, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:That may be true, but some anti-Christians are more radical than others. Also America was more conservative than Russia at the time of the Russian Revolution, so something like abortion would definitely be seen as morally unacceptable in that time regardless of where you were on the political spectrum. But my main point is if Stanton said Christianity got in the way of feminism, and she was the founder of American feminism and first-wave feminism, I just don't know how you can say feminism wasn't anti-Christian even back then. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 23:27, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::I've heard of some feminists getting back to the Christian faith. Victoria Woodhull, for one actually renounced the free love bits and advocated strongly for the Christian concept of motherhood later in life (too bad she didn't quite own up to how she did badly during that time, though). Besides, technically speaking, there have been PLENTY of Founding Fathers in America who were significantly anti-Christian, including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and apparently even John Adams. By that same logic, America ITSELF is anti-Christian from conception. In fact, [[Christopher Ferrara|Christopher A. Ferrara]] actually makes this argument in his book ''Liberty: The God that Failed''. I guess you could also argue that liberty in itself was anti-Christian. For that matter, I'd argue [[Freedom of Religion]] is ultimately anti-Christian as well. The Israelites tried that bit back in the day, and that led directly towards the [[Babylonian Exile]], per God's direction. And Russia was still conservative enough to have abortion be deemed explicitly illegal until Lenin and his Bolsheviks took over (there's a reason why the USSR under Lenin was the first country in all of history to actually make unlimited abortion legal, to the extent that STALIN of all people threw a bone to us pro-lifers by outlawing abortion for a year). I'd mention divorce, but Robespierre and the French Revolution beat Lenin to that bit. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:33, November 9, 2021 (EST)

== Fatherless children ==

Does only feminism cause this? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 10:28, January 24, 2022 (EST)
:Re-reading the section "Cultural Marxism", it seems out of place in an article on feminism. Isn't it about men who abandon their children? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 13:24, March 11, 2022 (EST)

==Bias?==
I thought feminists went out of business with [[vaccine mandate]]s (''my body my choice'') and [[transgender]]s taking over girls sports. Not to mention rape in prisons by transgenders. It's the law now. We've finally reached full equality. What more is there to debate? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 20:18, May 28, 2022 (EDT)

== Pants ==

I'm puzzled by the linking of pants and feminism. I suppose it is an assertion by women of their independence but hardily any women, whatever their age, wears a dress where I live, though there's a few more in hot weather (I'm envious). Isn't more a matter of convenience than ideology? It's the norm and so non-partisan. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:49, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
:Phyllis Schlafly was a conservative woman who defeated the feminists by preventing the passage of the [[Equal Rights Amendment]]. I have never seen a picture of her wearing pants. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:50, August 7, 2022 (EDT)

:What has this to do with the fact that most women of all ages wear trousers in North American? This has far more to do with comfort and convenience than feminism. I suspect that more women wear dresses in more liberal Europe. Personally I find women more attractive in dresses but I would not be so arrogant to insist that any woman has to wear one! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 13:52, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
::There's too much feminism in the USA and the fruits are not positive. 13th highest divorce rate in the world.[https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/divorce-rates-by-country] Lots of women taking depression pills. And there are surveys which show that women are now LESS happy post feminism. Thank God that the religious have a higher fertility rate, Roe vs. Wade was overturned and that the Bible is not pro-feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:10, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
:::Have you read the essay: [[Essay: Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)|Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)]]. In 22nd century North America, the majority of women may be wearing dresses. In all likelihood, should Jesus tarry, the majority of women in North America will not be pant-wearing, feminist whores!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:16, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

::Oh dear!--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:57, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

===Does the Bible forbid women from wearing pants?===
According to the [[ United Church of God]] it does not.

::Does Deuteronomy 22:5 forbid women from wearing pants? No, it doesn't. In fact, clothing “that pertains to a man” at the time the verse was written would not have been understood to mean pants. Men in the Middle East through the history of the Old and New Testaments did not ordinarily wear pants, trousers or slacks; they wore robe-like garments. And in many cultures such as in China, women have commonly worn pants. The scripture more specifically addresses and forbids transvestism and cross-dressing.
::The underlying principle certainly applies to today. Men should dress in an appropriately masculine manner and women should dress in an appropriately feminine manner. Clothing manufacturers make pants designed for men, and pants, slacks and pantsuits designed for women. The Bible emphasizes modesty, and for women, slacks are often more modest than a short skirt.
::God does not intend for this scripture to be understood in an extreme or unreasonable way. For example, it’s perfectly fine for a woman to wear her husband’s old shirt when she’s painting or to put on her male friend’s jacket when she’s cold.[https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/bible-questions-and-answers/does-the-bible-forbid-women-from-wearing-pantsPosted on Jan 27, 2011 by United Church of God]
--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:37, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:::A sensible and intelligent reading of the Bible and history, --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:42, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

::::Thanks. I guess we were all too stupid to figure that out. Does this apply to Drag Queen Story Hour at Pizza Hut, as well? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 14:45, August 28, 2022 (EDT)
See also [https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/365-does-the-bible-forbid-women-to-wear-pants] and [https://bibleask.org/does-the-bible-say-women-should-not-wear-pants/]. Can you clarify [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|RobSmith]]? The above quotation does not support transvestism! And trousers didn't exist in the biblical world. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 15:57, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:There is no reference to Deuteronomy in the article. And the Deuteronomy reference basically is about honesty, not enticing a member of your own sex by dressing up as something that you are not. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 16:26, August 28, 2022 (EDT)
:The point you are trying to make has nothing to do with feminism. It does, however have to do with gender confusion or dysphoria. While modern science may brand gender dysphoria as a mental handicap (perhaps involuntary or uncontrollable), Deuteronomy says gender confusion is a choice. But that is not a discussion for here in this article. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 16:32, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:::Really I was responding to another editor's ranting, though this article isn't so much about feminism as an extreme version of it. Even Andy Schafly agreed in an interview that his mother believed in the equal rights of women:
::::: Schlafly wants to know what I mean by "feminist". I offer a dictionary definition: "A feminist is someone who believes in equal rights for men and women."
:::::His response is surprising. "She may have agreed with that sort of general statement - as stated like that, yes."
:::::It seems that - as her opponents always maintained - the matriarch of American antifeminism was deep down a feminist herself. ''Daily Telegraph'' Jul 23, 2020

::::::Feminists today are taking the lead in the anti-[[transgenderism]] movement. So maybe it's time for a reconciliation. (Oh, and they are doing so because what Phyllis prophesied about the 1970s Feminist movement has come true). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 17:27, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

== Reversion of legitimate copy edits ==

Why were minor, non-ideologial, copy editsb recently reverted without adequate explanation?[[RLeonardWoo]] (signing not possible!!!)

User talk:RobLeonardWoo

2022-09-13T23:09:26Z

RobLeonardWoo: Let's have a proper discussion!

User talk:RobLeonardWoo

2022-09-13T22:04:45Z

RobLeonardWoo: Yes, it is impossible to explain this kind of action. How can copy edits offend, it isn't clear?

User talk:RobLeonardWoo

2022-09-13T21:13:21Z

RobLeonardWoo: Response to unexplained actions

Feminism

2022-09-13T18:23:27Z

RobLeonardWoo: Copy edit: punctuation and wordiness

[[Image:Braque woman 400pix.jpg|thumb|200px|''Woman with a guitar'' by [[Georges Braque]], 1913.]]

'''Feminism''' is a destructive ideology that can cause an alienation between women and men. Feminism denies, or downplays, differences between men and women; opposes homemaking, child-rearing, and [[homeschooling]] and promotes participation by women in predominantly male activities, regardless of their life pursuits or interests. Most prominent modern feminists support [[abortion]].

Attributes common to many feminists, include, an [[entitlement mentality]] and a "chip on one's shoulder" attitude, despite often benefiting from a life of privilege.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSo-q2Dq1aY ''Mickey Randleman - _Feminist_ (IWPS 2014) - 1080P HD_this video was deleted by buttons youtube channel'']</ref>

Feminism can disrupt marriages, relationships, child-rearing, education, and the workplace. The feminist ideology is particularly dominant in elite universities, many large corporations, and competitive women's team sports. Feminism claims it wants to make men and women equal but in reality, it opposes equal support for men.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2015/11/18/male-university-of-york-student-commits-suicide-on-day-his-university-ditches-international-mens-day-after-pressure-from-feminists/ "Male University of York Student Commits Suicide on Day His University Ditches International Men’s day"]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow ''Feminists protesting Men's Rights talk pull fire alarm, 4/4/2013'']</ref>

Feminism was originally a term used by [[suffragettes]] – who were predominantly [[pro-life]]<ref>[http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/wallace4.html ''Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion'']</ref><ref>''"There is no question that she deplored the practice of abortion, as did every one of her colleagues in the suffrage movement."'' [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ''Desperately Seeking Susan''] [[New York Times]] (13 October 2006)</ref><ref>[http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/foremoth.htm ''Voices of our Feminist Foremothers''] Feminists for Life</ref> – to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. By the 1970s, however, at the height of Second-wave feminism, [[liberals]] had changed the meaning to represent people who favored [[abortion]] and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole. Today in the midst of Third-wave feminism, or [[Feminazism]], some feminists are enforcers of [[liberal censorship]] and [[political correctness]], at the expense of [[free speech]]. In fact, much of what drove Second-wave feminism and what now drives Third-wave feminism was derived from Communist doctrine and both have a great deal in common, including the shared goal of the destruction of the family and the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity (via Goal 26 of the 1963 Communist goals for America).<ref>[https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2014/09/04/feminism-is-communism/ Feminism is Communism]</ref><ref>[http://fathersforlife.org/feminism/hubbard1.htm Feminist family politics and their roots in Communist ideology]</ref>

==Opinions of feminists==

Most feminists

* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike. We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."
* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>
* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).
** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).
* conveniently pretend that there are no meaningful differences between men and women when that advances [[liberal]] causes (e.g., women and men equally in military combat, to weaken the U.S. military), but reject equality when that results in more money to women (e.g., [[VAWA]] funding of women's groups).
* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).
* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".
* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>
* support [[affirmative action]] for women.
* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/ Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>
* believe marriage implies "female servitude" when it is in fact a mutual bond.
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".
* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'
* support the [[homosexual agenda]].
* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>
* demands that women choose a career over raising children without any remorse.
* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".
* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].
* Denounce and demean any women who have more feminine traits and embrace their femininity.

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

==History==
Roots of the movement in the United States and the United Kingdom include the [[suffrage|Women's Suffrage]] movement of the early 1900s (First-wave feminism) and the Women's Liberation (Second-wave feminism) movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminism was glamourized in the 1940s and 1950s by Hollywood film stars such as [[Joan Crawford]], attempting to portray a single mother as having a successful career and family without a husband. Second-wave feminism had its roots from [[Betty Friedan]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], who both advocated for the abolition of the career of housewife with the false implication that it was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp or a parasite, though they are more akin to the later third-wave feminism, as they fought against what they saw as patriarchal systems designed to hold women down. Another notable feminist was Simone Veil, who was instrumental to legalizing abortion in France. One of her key methods to its legalization was citing her experience as a holocaust survivor.<ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/30/534974403/french-politician-simone-veil-holocaust-survivor-and-abortion-pioneer-dies-at-89</ref>

The [[Equal Rights Amendment]] (ERA), whose proponents claimed would address the inadequacies of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] concerning women and citizenship, was proposed in the US in 1923. The amendment passed Congress in 1972 but was ultimately defeated, falling just three states short of the required [[three-quarters majority]] on June 30, 1982. Some conservatives, particularly [[Phyllis Schlafly]], felt that its passage would entail adverse consequences, including making girls subject to the [[military draft]], requiring taxpayer-funded [[abortion]], the end of [[single-sex schools]] and classes, requiring the issuance of [[homosexual marriage]] licenses, and the revocation of laws that protect women in dangerous jobs, such as factory or mining work. Indeed, in states that passed their own versions of ERA, several of these results were subsequently ordered by courts.<ref>For example, the [[Hawaii]] and [[Massachusetts]] Supreme Courts illegally ordered the issuance of homosexual "marriage" licenses based in part on their on their state ERAs, and the [[New Mexico]] Supreme Court illegally ordered taxpayer-funded abortion based on its state ERA.</ref>

The feminist movement in the West evolved in the 1980s with the rise of so-called [[Post-Feminism]] (Third-wave feminism), which stresses that women have many rights that go unrecognized, often by women themselves, in everyday life, and in the [[Critical legal studies|American legal structure]]. Most members of the feminist movement support reproductive rights currently guaranteed by American law, including the legal right to abortion. This stance is opposed by many conservatives. Third-wave feminism has been highly influenced by postmodern thought, and is a more intellectual form of feminism. It fights against the systems that it sees as detrimental to women as a group, systems designed to keep women in traditional roles, in contrast with second-wave feminism, which fought for equal rights and pay with men in a fight against the traditional status of women as second class citizens. Another distinction made from second-wave feminism is the claimed recognition of the struggles faced by women who are minorities, disabled, immigrants, etc. (intersection theory), as most second-wave feminists focused only on white suburban middle-class able-bodied women. Second-wave feminism, however, was not always a good thing, as it pushed for abortion.

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

Dr. [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]], a staunch advocate of [[civil rights]] and [[non-violence]] said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection." <ref>''Stride Toward Freedom : The Montgomery Story'', Martin Luther King, Jr., Harper and Rowe, New York, 1958, p. 203.</ref>

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for ''American Thinker'', links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and [[Marxism|Marx]], is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the State."<ref>Larrey Anderson, ''The Feminine Mistake'', ''American Thinker'', November 29, 2009</ref>

==Critique==

[[Christine Hoff Sommers]] wrote:
:... The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. [https://www.amazon.com/WAR-AGAINST-BOYS-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849577]

==Feminism and reason==

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

Feminists in the [[Swedish]] government on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2017, were urged by the Iranian women's right activist Masih Alinejad “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to wear the compulsory [[hijab]] while visiting Iran. The pleas were ignored. The Jihad Watch website reported,<ref>[https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/swedens-first-feminist-government-dons-hijabs-in-iran ]</ref>
{{Quotebox|Sweden’s female leaders have not only betrayed all women who fight for equality globally, but they have also fully exposed how confused they are: they are so-called feminists who – for example — furiously insist on control over their own bodies to choose abortion, but they are willing to fully submit to male dominance at the demand of Muslim men to dictate their clothing. And they did so in front of a global audience to boot.}}

==Cultural Marxism==
While the Feminist movement may contribute to the [[Cultural Marxist]] undermining of [[family values]] , the main cause is [[divorce|marital breakdown]], and fathers who abandon their family, or fail to contribute to the raising of their children, Studies show that:
*63 percent of youth suicides take place in fatherless homes.
*90 percent of all homeless youth and runaways are from fatherless homes, which is a whopping 32 times the national average.
*85 percent of all children with behavior issues come from fatherless homes, 20 times the national average.
*80 percent of rapists with established anger issues come from fatherless homes, 14 times the national average.
*71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*70 percent of those in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*85 percent of all juveniles in prison come from single-parent households, 20 times the national average.
*90 percent of adolescent repeat arson offenders are from fatherless homes.
*Fatherless children are nearly twice as likely to be victims of abuse or neglect.<ref>https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/bowling-alone-how-washington-has-helped-destroy-american-civil-society-and-family-life/</ref>

== Feminism and population decline ==

The historian Martin van Creveld wrote in his book ''Equality: The Impossible Quest':
{{Cquote|In many modern societies, the advent of feminism has caused men and women to be placed on a more equal footing than ever before. The catch is that, in most of the societies in question, women, desperately trying to achieve what they see as equality, no longer bear enough children to maintain the population. Some countries, such as the U.S., are making up for the deficit by importing millions of foreigners. Others, such as Japan, seem resigned to gradual demographic decline and hope that robots will make up the difference. If demographics count for anything, the future of patriarchy — not the comparatively mild form of patriarchy that is said to have characterized the West, but the more rigorous [[Islam]]ic variety—seems assured...

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

See [[Quotations about Feminism]]

== Atheist feminism ==

''See also:'' [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women]]
[[File:Annie Laurie Gaylor.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]] is an atheist feminist. She is co-president of the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]].

Gaylor's husband, [[Dan Barker]], who heads the organization along with her, is usually the person invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization's leader and her many books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref> See: [[Atheism and women]]

[[Atheist feminism]] is a type of feminism whose advocates are [[Atheism|atheists]].

Writing on the [[Atheism and sexism|sexism within the atheist population]], atheist Victoria Bekiempis wrote in a ''Guardian'' article entitled ''Why the [[New Atheism]] is a boys' club'':
{{cquote|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]], who founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation with her mother, Anne Nicol Gaylor, in 1978, sums it up succinctly: “One word — sexism.” Gaylor’s husband, Dan Barker, who helms the organization along with her, is usually the one invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization’s leader and her numerous books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>}}

Feminists who are [[theism|theists]] often belong to religious bodies which practice [[liberal]] theology. In addition, some feminists practice goddess worship. Since atheism rejects theism, atheistic feminism rejects/disbelieves in the existence of God or gods (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).

=== Atheism, women, men and atheist feminism ===

Since most atheists lean Left politically (see: [[Atheism and politics]]) most atheist women are feminists. However, this may not apply to atheist men or apply to a lesser degree, given that a significant majority of atheist are men and that the men's rights movement has many atheist men within it. [[Reddit]] is a popular place for atheists and a Reddit survey found that 94% of Men's Rights Movement supporters indicated that they had no religion (see also: [[Reddit atheism]]).<ref>[http://www.rawstory.com/2014/04/confirmed-mens-rights-activism-is-for-misogynists-without-god/ Confirmed: "Men’s Rights Activism" Is For Misogynists Without God], ''Raw Story''</ref> YouTube's most popular atheist is [[TheAmazingAtheist]] who is a men's rights activist. Another popular YouTube atheist [[Thunderf00t]] is very critical of feminism within atheism (See also: [[Atheism plus]]).

=== Atheist movement, feminism and schism within atheism ===

Within the [[atheist movement]] post [[New Atheism]] and the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy, there has been a lot of conflict between [[Atheism|atheists]] concerning feminism. One of the results of the conflict was the new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] losing a lot of public support and support among the irreligious (see: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]]).

=== Atheist feminism and its view of religion ===

See: [[Atheist feminism and religion]]

== Intersectionality==
As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing "identity groups." In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress. For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender? Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity. Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.
== Femen ==

''See also:'' [[Femen]] and [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women]]

[[Femen]] is a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] radical feminist activist group which is now based in Paris. According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', "Femen’s members consider [[atheism]] to be a fundamental tenet of the group’s ideology."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/12/meet-femen-naked-shock-troops-feminism-who-greeted-trump-with-topless-protest-paris/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb5ef3499053 Meet Femen, the ‘naked shock troops of feminism’ who greeted Trump with a topless protest in Paris], By Antonia Noori Farzan, Washington Post, November 12, 2018</ref>

Femen engages in topless publicity stunts/protests. Femen was one of the first radical feminist organizations to gain transnational media publicity.

== Christianity and women's rights ==

See: [[Christianity and women's rights]]

==See also==

*[[Anti-Feminism]]
*[[Me Too Movement]]
*[[Essay:Conservative Women Vs. Feminism]]
*[[Feminism and housewives]]
*[[Feminist style]]
*[[Gender equality]]
*[[Gender police]]
*[[Feminists for Life]]
*[[Feminism and reason]]
*[[Feminist hypocrisy]]
*[[Battered woman syndrome]]
*[[Communism and feminism]]
*[[Feminist myths]]
*[[Feminist nitpicking]]
*[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Liberal totalitarianism]]
*[[The personal is political]]
*[[Misandry]]
*[[Erica Jong]]
*[[Trans-exclusionary feminism]]
{{liberalism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-ftIGVsCI Dana Loesch Rips Feminists] on [[Louder With Crowder]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_ESpTudus #SJW Feminist Myths Destroyed by Karen Straughan] on Louder With Crowder
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRj2qMLq8SY Feminism & Fat Pride: The Unholy Alliance] on Louder With Crowder with [[Paul Joseph Watson]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYo1ewgG94M The Truth About 'Rape Culture'] by Paul Joseph Watson
*[http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/ The Feminist eZine] Archive of articles about Feminist History.
*[http://www.cia-on-campus.org/surveil/steinem.html Gloria Steinem and the CIA], ''The New York Times'', February 21, 1967.
*[https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem], Nancy Borman, ''The Village Voice''.
*[http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man?], Christina Hoff Sommers, ''The American'' March/April 2008.
*[https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/f0wr6b/conservatives_find_unlikely_ally_in_fighting/ Conservatives find unlikely ally in fighting transgender rights: Radical feminists], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', February 8, 2020.

{{Communism}}

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Feminism]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Feminism

2022-09-13T18:07:49Z

RobLeonardWoo: Punctuation

[[Image:Braque woman 400pix.jpg|thumb|200px|''Woman with a guitar'' by [[Georges Braque]], 1913.]]

'''Feminism''' is a destructive ideology that can cause an alienation in affection between women and men. Feminism denies or downplays differences between men and women; feminism opposes homemaking, child-rearing, and [[homeschooling]] by women and promotes participation by women in predominantly male activities regardless of their life pursuits or interests. Most prominent modern feminists support [[abortion]].

Attributes common to many feminists include an [[entitlement mentality]] and a bit of an attitude, such as a "chip on one's shoulder" despite benefiting from a life of privilege.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSo-q2Dq1aY ''Mickey Randleman - _Feminist_ (IWPS 2014) - 1080P HD_this video was deleted by buttons youtube channel'']</ref>

On a personal level feminism can disrupt marriages, relationships, child-rearing, education and the workplace. The feminist ideology is particularly dominant in elite universities, many large corporations, and competitive women's team sports. Feminism claims it wants to make men and women equal but in reality, it opposes any sort of support for men.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2015/11/18/male-university-of-york-student-commits-suicide-on-day-his-university-ditches-international-mens-day-after-pressure-from-feminists/ "Male University of York Student Commits Suicide on Day His University Ditches International Men’s day"]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow ''Feminists protesting Men's Rights talk pull fire alarm, 4/4/2013'']</ref>

Feminism was originally an expression used by [[suffragettes]] – who were predominantly [[pro-life]]<ref>[http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/wallace4.html ''Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion'']</ref><ref>''"There is no question that she deplored the practice of abortion, as did every one of her colleagues in the suffrage movement."'' [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ''Desperately Seeking Susan''] [[New York Times]] (13 October 2006)</ref><ref>[http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/foremoth.htm ''Voices of our Feminist Foremothers''] Feminists for Life</ref> – to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. By the 1970s, however, at the height of what was termed Second-wave feminism, [[liberals]] had changed the meaning to represent people who favored [[abortion]] and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole. Today in the midst of what is called Third-wave feminism, also known as Feminazism, some feminists are enforcers of [[liberal censorship]] and [[political correctness]], at the expense of [[free speech]]. In fact, much of what drove Second-wave feminism and what now drives Third-wave feminism was derived from Communist doctrine and both have a great deal in common, including the shared goal of the destruction of the family and the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity (via Goal 26 of the 1963 Communist goals for America).<ref>[https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2014/09/04/feminism-is-communism/ Feminism is Communism]</ref><ref>[http://fathersforlife.org/feminism/hubbard1.htm Feminist family politics and their roots in Communist ideology]</ref>

==Opinions of feminists==

Most feminists

* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike. We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."
* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>
* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).
** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).
* conveniently pretend that there are no meaningful differences between men and women when that advances [[liberal]] causes (e.g., women and men equally in military combat, to weaken the U.S. military), but reject equality when that results in more money to women (e.g., [[VAWA]] funding of women's groups).
* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).
* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".
* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>
* support [[affirmative action]] for women.
* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/ Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>
* believe marriage implies "female servitude" when it is in fact a mutual bond.
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".
* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'
* support the [[homosexual agenda]].
* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>
* demands that women choose a career over raising children without any remorse.
* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".
* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].
* Denounce and demean any women who have more feminine traits and embrace their femininity.

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

==History==
Roots of the movement in the United States and the United Kingdom include the [[suffrage|Women's Suffrage]] movement of the early 1900s (First-wave feminism) and the Women's Liberation (Second-wave feminism) movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminism was glamourized in the 1940s and 1950s by Hollywood film stars such as [[Joan Crawford]], attempting to portray a single mother as having a successful career and family without a husband. Second-wave feminism had its roots from [[Betty Friedan]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], who both advocated for the abolition of the career of housewife with the false implication that it was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp or a parasite, though they are more akin to the later third-wave feminism, as they fought against what they saw as patriarchal systems designed to hold women down. Another notable feminist was Simone Veil, who was instrumental to legalizing abortion in France. One of her key methods to its legalization was citing her experience as a holocaust survivor.<ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/30/534974403/french-politician-simone-veil-holocaust-survivor-and-abortion-pioneer-dies-at-89</ref>

The [[Equal Rights Amendment]] (ERA), whose proponents claimed would address the inadequacies of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] concerning women and citizenship, was proposed in the US in 1923. The amendment passed Congress in 1972 but was ultimately defeated, falling just three states short of the required [[three-quarters majority]] on June 30, 1982. Some conservatives, particularly [[Phyllis Schlafly]], felt that its passage would entail adverse consequences, including making girls subject to the [[military draft]], requiring taxpayer-funded [[abortion]], the end of [[single-sex schools]] and classes, requiring the issuance of [[homosexual marriage]] licenses, and the revocation of laws that protect women in dangerous jobs, such as factory or mining work. Indeed, in states that passed their own versions of ERA, several of these results were subsequently ordered by courts.<ref>For example, the [[Hawaii]] and [[Massachusetts]] Supreme Courts illegally ordered the issuance of homosexual "marriage" licenses based in part on their on their state ERAs, and the [[New Mexico]] Supreme Court illegally ordered taxpayer-funded abortion based on its state ERA.</ref>

The feminist movement in the West evolved in the 1980s with the rise of so-called [[Post-Feminism]] (Third-wave feminism), which stresses that women have many rights that go unrecognized, often by women themselves, in everyday life, and in the [[Critical legal studies|American legal structure]]. Most members of the feminist movement support reproductive rights currently guaranteed by American law, including the legal right to abortion. This stance is opposed by many conservatives. Third-wave feminism has been highly influenced by postmodern thought, and is a more intellectual form of feminism. It fights against the systems that it sees as detrimental to women as a group, systems designed to keep women in traditional roles, in contrast with second-wave feminism, which fought for equal rights and pay with men in a fight against the traditional status of women as second class citizens. Another distinction made from second-wave feminism is the claimed recognition of the struggles faced by women who are minorities, disabled, immigrants, etc. (intersection theory), as most second-wave feminists focused only on white suburban middle-class able-bodied women. Second-wave feminism, however, was not always a good thing, as it pushed for abortion.

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

Dr. [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]], a staunch advocate of [[civil rights]] and [[non-violence]] said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection." <ref>''Stride Toward Freedom : The Montgomery Story'', Martin Luther King, Jr., Harper and Rowe, New York, 1958, p. 203.</ref>

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for ''American Thinker'', links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and [[Marxism|Marx]], is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the State."<ref>Larrey Anderson, ''The Feminine Mistake'', ''American Thinker'', November 29, 2009</ref>

==Critique==

[[Christine Hoff Sommers]] wrote:
:... The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. [https://www.amazon.com/WAR-AGAINST-BOYS-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849577]

==Feminism and reason==

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

Feminists in the [[Swedish]] government on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2017, were urged by the Iranian women's right activist Masih Alinejad “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to wear the compulsory [[hijab]] while visiting Iran. The pleas were ignored. The Jihad Watch website reported,<ref>[https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/swedens-first-feminist-government-dons-hijabs-in-iran ]</ref>
{{Quotebox|Sweden’s female leaders have not only betrayed all women who fight for equality globally, but they have also fully exposed how confused they are: they are so-called feminists who – for example — furiously insist on control over their own bodies to choose abortion, but they are willing to fully submit to male dominance at the demand of Muslim men to dictate their clothing. And they did so in front of a global audience to boot.}}

==Cultural Marxism==
While the Feminist movement may contribute to the [[Cultural Marxist]] undermining of [[family values]] , the main cause is [[divorce|marital breakdown]], and fathers who abandon their family, or fail to contribute to the raising of their children, Studies show that:
*63 percent of youth suicides take place in fatherless homes.
*90 percent of all homeless youth and runaways are from fatherless homes, which is a whopping 32 times the national average.
*85 percent of all children with behavior issues come from fatherless homes, 20 times the national average.
*80 percent of rapists with established anger issues come from fatherless homes, 14 times the national average.
*71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*70 percent of those in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*85 percent of all juveniles in prison come from single-parent households, 20 times the national average.
*90 percent of adolescent repeat arson offenders are from fatherless homes.
*Fatherless children are nearly twice as likely to be victims of abuse or neglect.<ref>https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/bowling-alone-how-washington-has-helped-destroy-american-civil-society-and-family-life/</ref>

== Feminism and population decline ==

The historian Martin van Creveld wrote in his book ''Equality: The Impossible Quest':
{{Cquote|In many modern societies, the advent of feminism has caused men and women to be placed on a more equal footing than ever before. The catch is that, in most of the societies in question, women, desperately trying to achieve what they see as equality, no longer bear enough children to maintain the population. Some countries, such as the U.S., are making up for the deficit by importing millions of foreigners. Others, such as Japan, seem resigned to gradual demographic decline and hope that robots will make up the difference. If demographics count for anything, the future of patriarchy — not the comparatively mild form of patriarchy that is said to have characterized the West, but the more rigorous [[Islam]]ic variety—seems assured...

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

See [[Quotations about Feminism]]

== Atheist feminism ==

''See also:'' [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women]]
[[File:Annie Laurie Gaylor.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]] is an atheist feminist. She is co-president of the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]].

Gaylor's husband, [[Dan Barker]], who heads the organization along with her, is usually the person invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization's leader and her many books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref> See: [[Atheism and women]]

[[Atheist feminism]] is a type of feminism whose advocates are [[Atheism|atheists]].

Writing on the [[Atheism and sexism|sexism within the atheist population]], atheist Victoria Bekiempis wrote in a ''Guardian'' article entitled ''Why the [[New Atheism]] is a boys' club'':
{{cquote|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]], who founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation with her mother, Anne Nicol Gaylor, in 1978, sums it up succinctly: “One word — sexism.” Gaylor’s husband, Dan Barker, who helms the organization along with her, is usually the one invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization’s leader and her numerous books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>}}

Feminists who are [[theism|theists]] often belong to religious bodies which practice [[liberal]] theology. In addition, some feminists practice goddess worship. Since atheism rejects theism, atheistic feminism rejects/disbelieves in the existence of God or gods (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).

=== Atheism, women, men and atheist feminism ===

Since most atheists lean Left politically (see: [[Atheism and politics]]) most atheist women are feminists. However, this may not apply to atheist men or apply to a lesser degree, given that a significant majority of atheist are men and that the men's rights movement has many atheist men within it. [[Reddit]] is a popular place for atheists and a Reddit survey found that 94% of Men's Rights Movement supporters indicated that they had no religion (see also: [[Reddit atheism]]).<ref>[http://www.rawstory.com/2014/04/confirmed-mens-rights-activism-is-for-misogynists-without-god/ Confirmed: "Men’s Rights Activism" Is For Misogynists Without God], ''Raw Story''</ref> YouTube's most popular atheist is [[TheAmazingAtheist]] who is a men's rights activist. Another popular YouTube atheist [[Thunderf00t]] is very critical of feminism within atheism (See also: [[Atheism plus]]).

=== Atheist movement, feminism and schism within atheism ===

Within the [[atheist movement]] post [[New Atheism]] and the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy, there has been a lot of conflict between [[Atheism|atheists]] concerning feminism. One of the results of the conflict was the new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] losing a lot of public support and support among the irreligious (see: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]]).

=== Atheist feminism and its view of religion ===

See: [[Atheist feminism and religion]]

== Intersectionality==
As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing "identity groups." In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress. For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender? Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity. Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.
== Femen ==

''See also:'' [[Femen]] and [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women]]

[[Femen]] is a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] radical feminist activist group which is now based in Paris. According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', "Femen’s members consider [[atheism]] to be a fundamental tenet of the group’s ideology."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/12/meet-femen-naked-shock-troops-feminism-who-greeted-trump-with-topless-protest-paris/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb5ef3499053 Meet Femen, the ‘naked shock troops of feminism’ who greeted Trump with a topless protest in Paris], By Antonia Noori Farzan, Washington Post, November 12, 2018</ref>

Femen engages in topless publicity stunts/protests. Femen was one of the first radical feminist organizations to gain transnational media publicity.

== Christianity and women's rights ==

See: [[Christianity and women's rights]]

==See also==

*[[Anti-Feminism]]
*[[Me Too Movement]]
*[[Essay:Conservative Women Vs. Feminism]]
*[[Feminism and housewives]]
*[[Feminist style]]
*[[Gender equality]]
*[[Gender police]]
*[[Feminists for Life]]
*[[Feminism and reason]]
*[[Feminist hypocrisy]]
*[[Battered woman syndrome]]
*[[Communism and feminism]]
*[[Feminist myths]]
*[[Feminist nitpicking]]
*[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Liberal totalitarianism]]
*[[The personal is political]]
*[[Misandry]]
*[[Erica Jong]]
*[[Trans-exclusionary feminism]]
{{liberalism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-ftIGVsCI Dana Loesch Rips Feminists] on [[Louder With Crowder]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_ESpTudus #SJW Feminist Myths Destroyed by Karen Straughan] on Louder With Crowder
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRj2qMLq8SY Feminism & Fat Pride: The Unholy Alliance] on Louder With Crowder with [[Paul Joseph Watson]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYo1ewgG94M The Truth About 'Rape Culture'] by Paul Joseph Watson
*[http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/ The Feminist eZine] Archive of articles about Feminist History.
*[http://www.cia-on-campus.org/surveil/steinem.html Gloria Steinem and the CIA], ''The New York Times'', February 21, 1967.
*[https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem], Nancy Borman, ''The Village Voice''.
*[http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man?], Christina Hoff Sommers, ''The American'' March/April 2008.
*[https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/f0wr6b/conservatives_find_unlikely_ally_in_fighting/ Conservatives find unlikely ally in fighting transgender rights: Radical feminists], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', February 8, 2020.

{{Communism}}

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Feminism]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Feminism

2022-09-13T16:09:59Z

RobLeonardWoo: Consistency

[[Image:Braque woman 400pix.jpg|thumb|200px|''Woman with a guitar'' by [[Georges Braque]], 1913.]]

'''Feminism''' is a destructive ideology that can cause an alienation in affection between women and men. Feminism denies or downplays differences between men and women; many feminism opposes homemaking, child-rearing, and [[homeschooling]] by wome,; and promote participation by women in predominantly male activities regardless of their life pursuits or interests. Most prominent modern feminists support [[abortion]].

Attributes common to many feminists include an [[entitlement mentality]] and a bit of an attitude, such as a "chip on one's shoulder" despite benefiting from a life of privilege.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSo-q2Dq1aY ''Mickey Randleman - _Feminist_ (IWPS 2014) - 1080P HD_this video was deleted by buttons youtube channel'']</ref>

On a personal level feminism can disrupt marriages, relationships, child-rearing, education and the workplace. The feminist ideology is particularly dominant in elite universities, many large corporations, and competitive women's team sports. Feminism claims it wants to make men and women equal but in reality, it opposes any sort of support for men.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2015/11/18/male-university-of-york-student-commits-suicide-on-day-his-university-ditches-international-mens-day-after-pressure-from-feminists/ "Male University of York Student Commits Suicide on Day His University Ditches International Men’s day"]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow ''Feminists protesting Men's Rights talk pull fire alarm, 4/4/2013'']</ref>

Feminism was originally an expression used by [[suffragettes]] – who were predominantly [[pro-life]]<ref>[http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/wallace4.html ''Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion'']</ref><ref>''"There is no question that she deplored the practice of abortion, as did every one of her colleagues in the suffrage movement."'' [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ''Desperately Seeking Susan''] [[New York Times]] (13 October 2006)</ref><ref>[http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/foremoth.htm ''Voices of our Feminist Foremothers''] Feminists for Life</ref> – to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. By the 1970s, however, at the height of what was termed Second-wave feminism, [[liberals]] had changed the meaning to represent people who favored [[abortion]] and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole. Today in the midst of what is called Third-wave feminism, also known as Feminazism, some feminists are enforcers of [[liberal censorship]] and [[political correctness]], at the expense of [[free speech]]. In fact, much of what drove Second-wave feminism and what now drives Third-wave feminism was derived from Communist doctrine and both have a great deal in common, including the shared goal of the destruction of the family and the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity (via Goal 26 of the 1963 Communist goals for America).<ref>[https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2014/09/04/feminism-is-communism/ Feminism is Communism]</ref><ref>[http://fathersforlife.org/feminism/hubbard1.htm Feminist family politics and their roots in Communist ideology]</ref>

==Opinions of most/many feminists==

Most feminists

* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike. We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."
* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>
* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).
** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).
* conveniently pretend that there are no meaningful differences between men and women when that advances [[liberal]] causes (e.g., women and men equally in military combat, to weaken the U.S. military), but reject equality when that results in more money to women (e.g., [[VAWA]] funding of women's groups).
* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).
* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".
* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>
* support [[affirmative action]] for women.
* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/ Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>
* believe marriage implies "female servitude" when it is in fact a mutual bond.
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".
* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'
* support the [[homosexual agenda]].
* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>
* demands that women choose a career over raising children without any remorse.
* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".
* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].
* Denounce and demean any women who have more feminine traits and embrace their femininity.

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

==History==
Roots of the movement in the United States and the United Kingdom include the [[suffrage|Women's Suffrage]] movement of the early 1900s (First-wave feminism) and the Women's Liberation (Second-wave feminism) movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminism was glamourized in the 1940s and 1950s by Hollywood film stars such as [[Joan Crawford]], attempting to portray a single mother as having a successful career and family without a husband. Second-wave feminism had its roots from [[Betty Friedan]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], who both advocated for the abolition of the career of housewife with the false implication that it was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp or a parasite, though they are more akin to the later third-wave feminism, as they fought against what they saw as patriarchal systems designed to hold women down. Another notable feminist was Simone Veil, who was instrumental to legalizing abortion in France. One of her key methods to its legalization was citing her experience as a holocaust survivor.<ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/30/534974403/french-politician-simone-veil-holocaust-survivor-and-abortion-pioneer-dies-at-89</ref>

The [[Equal Rights Amendment]] (ERA), whose proponents claimed would address the inadequacies of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] concerning women and citizenship, was proposed in the US in 1923. The amendment passed Congress in 1972 but was ultimately defeated, falling just three states short of the required [[three-quarters majority]] on June 30, 1982. Some conservatives, particularly [[Phyllis Schlafly]], felt that its passage would entail adverse consequences, including making girls subject to the [[military draft]], requiring taxpayer-funded [[abortion]], the end of [[single-sex schools]] and classes, requiring the issuance of [[homosexual marriage]] licenses, and the revocation of laws that protect women in dangerous jobs, such as factory or mining work. Indeed, in states that passed their own versions of ERA, several of these results were subsequently ordered by courts.<ref>For example, the [[Hawaii]] and [[Massachusetts]] Supreme Courts illegally ordered the issuance of homosexual "marriage" licenses based in part on their on their state ERAs, and the [[New Mexico]] Supreme Court illegally ordered taxpayer-funded abortion based on its state ERA.</ref>

The feminist movement in the West evolved in the 1980s with the rise of so-called [[Post-Feminism]] (Third-wave feminism), which stresses that women have many rights that go unrecognized, often by women themselves, in everyday life, and in the [[Critical legal studies|American legal structure]]. Most members of the feminist movement support reproductive rights currently guaranteed by American law, including the legal right to abortion. This stance is opposed by many conservatives. Third-wave feminism has been highly influenced by postmodern thought, and is a more intellectual form of feminism. It fights against the systems that it sees as detrimental to women as a group, systems designed to keep women in traditional roles, in contrast with second-wave feminism, which fought for equal rights and pay with men in a fight against the traditional status of women as second class citizens. Another distinction made from second-wave feminism is the claimed recognition of the struggles faced by women who are minorities, disabled, immigrants, etc. (intersection theory), as most second-wave feminists focused only on white suburban middle-class able-bodied women. Second-wave feminism, however, was not always a good thing, as it pushed for abortion.

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

Dr. [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]], a staunch advocate of [[civil rights]] and [[non-violence]] said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection." <ref>''Stride Toward Freedom : The Montgomery Story'', Martin Luther King, Jr., Harper and Rowe, New York, 1958, p. 203.</ref>

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for ''American Thinker'', links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and [[Marxism|Marx]], is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the State."<ref>Larrey Anderson, ''The Feminine Mistake'', ''American Thinker'', November 29, 2009</ref>

==Critique==

[[Christine Hoff Sommers]] wrote:
:... The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. [https://www.amazon.com/WAR-AGAINST-BOYS-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849577]

==Feminism and reason==

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

Feminists in the [[Swedish]] government on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2017, were urged by the Iranian women's right activist Masih Alinejad “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to wear the compulsory [[hijab]] while visiting Iran. The pleas were ignored. The Jihad Watch website reported,<ref>[https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/swedens-first-feminist-government-dons-hijabs-in-iran ]</ref>
{{Quotebox|Sweden’s female leaders have not only betrayed all women who fight for equality globally, but they have also fully exposed how confused they are: they are so-called feminists who – for example — furiously insist on control over their own bodies to choose abortion, but they are willing to fully submit to male dominance at the demand of Muslim men to dictate their clothing. And they did so in front of a global audience to boot.}}

==Cultural Marxism==
While the Feminist movement may contribute to the [[Cultural Marxist]] undermining of [[family values]] , the main cause is [[divorce|marital breakdown]], and fathers who abandon their family, or fail to contribute to the raising of their children, Studies show that:
*63 percent of youth suicides take place in fatherless homes.
*90 percent of all homeless youth and runaways are from fatherless homes, which is a whopping 32 times the national average.
*85 percent of all children with behavior issues come from fatherless homes, 20 times the national average.
*80 percent of rapists with established anger issues come from fatherless homes, 14 times the national average.
*71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*70 percent of those in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*85 percent of all juveniles in prison come from single-parent households, 20 times the national average.
*90 percent of adolescent repeat arson offenders are from fatherless homes.
*Fatherless children are nearly twice as likely to be victims of abuse or neglect.<ref>https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/bowling-alone-how-washington-has-helped-destroy-american-civil-society-and-family-life/</ref>

== Feminism and population decline ==

The historian Martin van Creveld wrote in his book ''Equality: The Impossible Quest':
{{Cquote|In many modern societies, the advent of feminism has caused men and women to be placed on a more equal footing than ever before. The catch is that, in most of the societies in question, women, desperately trying to achieve what they see as equality, no longer bear enough children to maintain the population. Some countries, such as the U.S., are making up for the deficit by importing millions of foreigners. Others, such as Japan, seem resigned to gradual demographic decline and hope that robots will make up the difference. If demographics count for anything, the future of patriarchy — not the comparatively mild form of patriarchy that is said to have characterized the West, but the more rigorous [[Islam]]ic variety—seems assured...

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

See [[Quotations about Feminism]]

== Atheist feminism ==

''See also:'' [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women]]
[[File:Annie Laurie Gaylor.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]] is an atheist feminist. She is co-president of the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]].

Gaylor's husband, [[Dan Barker]], who heads the organization along with her, is usually the person invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization's leader and her many books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref> See: [[Atheism and women]]

[[Atheist feminism]] is a type of feminism whose advocates are [[Atheism|atheists]].

Writing on the [[Atheism and sexism|sexism within the atheist population]], atheist Victoria Bekiempis wrote in a ''Guardian'' article entitled ''Why the [[New Atheism]] is a boys' club'':
{{cquote|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]], who founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation with her mother, Anne Nicol Gaylor, in 1978, sums it up succinctly: “One word — sexism.” Gaylor’s husband, Dan Barker, who helms the organization along with her, is usually the one invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization’s leader and her numerous books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>}}

Feminists who are [[theism|theists]] often belong to religious bodies which practice [[liberal]] theology. In addition, some feminists practice goddess worship. Since atheism rejects theism, atheistic feminism rejects/disbelieves in the existence of God or gods (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).

=== Atheism, women, men and atheist feminism ===

Since most atheists lean Left politically (see: [[Atheism and politics]]) most atheist women are feminists. However, this may not apply to atheist men or apply to a lesser degree, given that a significant majority of atheist are men and that the men's rights movement has many atheist men within it. [[Reddit]] is a popular place for atheists and a Reddit survey found that 94% of Men's Rights Movement supporters indicated that they had no religion (see also: [[Reddit atheism]]).<ref>[http://www.rawstory.com/2014/04/confirmed-mens-rights-activism-is-for-misogynists-without-god/ Confirmed: "Men’s Rights Activism" Is For Misogynists Without God], ''Raw Story''</ref> YouTube's most popular atheist is [[TheAmazingAtheist]] who is a men's rights activist. Another popular YouTube atheist [[Thunderf00t]] is very critical of feminism within atheism (See also: [[Atheism plus]]).

=== Atheist movement, feminism and schism within atheism ===

Within the [[atheist movement]] post [[New Atheism]] and the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy, there has been a lot of conflict between [[Atheism|atheists]] concerning feminism. One of the results of the conflict was the new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] losing a lot of public support and support among the irreligious (see: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]]).

=== Atheist feminism and its view of religion ===

See: [[Atheist feminism and religion]]

== Intersectionality==
As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing "identity groups." In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress. For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender? Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity. Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.
== Femen ==

''See also:'' [[Femen]] and [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women]]

[[Femen]] is a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] radical feminist activist group which is now based in Paris. According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', "Femen’s members consider [[atheism]] to be a fundamental tenet of the group’s ideology."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/12/meet-femen-naked-shock-troops-feminism-who-greeted-trump-with-topless-protest-paris/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb5ef3499053 Meet Femen, the ‘naked shock troops of feminism’ who greeted Trump with a topless protest in Paris], By Antonia Noori Farzan, Washington Post, November 12, 2018</ref>

Femen engages in topless publicity stunts/protests. Femen was one of the first radical feminist organizations to gain transnational media publicity.

== Christianity and women's rights ==

See: [[Christianity and women's rights]]

==See also==

*[[Anti-Feminism]]
*[[Me Too Movement]]
*[[Essay:Conservative Women Vs. Feminism]]
*[[Feminism and housewives]]
*[[Feminist style]]
*[[Gender equality]]
*[[Gender police]]
*[[Feminists for Life]]
*[[Feminism and reason]]
*[[Feminist hypocrisy]]
*[[Battered woman syndrome]]
*[[Communism and feminism]]
*[[Feminist myths]]
*[[Feminist nitpicking]]
*[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Liberal totalitarianism]]
*[[The personal is political]]
*[[Misandry]]
*[[Erica Jong]]
*[[Trans-exclusionary feminism]]
{{liberalism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-ftIGVsCI Dana Loesch Rips Feminists] on [[Louder With Crowder]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_ESpTudus #SJW Feminist Myths Destroyed by Karen Straughan] on Louder With Crowder
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRj2qMLq8SY Feminism & Fat Pride: The Unholy Alliance] on Louder With Crowder with [[Paul Joseph Watson]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYo1ewgG94M The Truth About 'Rape Culture'] by Paul Joseph Watson
*[http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/ The Feminist eZine] Archive of articles about Feminist History.
*[http://www.cia-on-campus.org/surveil/steinem.html Gloria Steinem and the CIA], ''The New York Times'', February 21, 1967.
*[https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem], Nancy Borman, ''The Village Voice''.
*[http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man?], Christina Hoff Sommers, ''The American'' March/April 2008.
*[https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/f0wr6b/conservatives_find_unlikely_ally_in_fighting/ Conservatives find unlikely ally in fighting transgender rights: Radical feminists], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', February 8, 2020.

{{Communism}}

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Feminism]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Feminism

2022-09-12T13:45:47Z

RobLeonardWoo: Bias tag. See Talk page

{{bias}}
[[Image:Braque woman 400pix.jpg|thumb|200px|''Woman with a guitar'' by [[Georges Braque]], 1913.]]

'''Feminism''' is a destructive ideology that can cause an alienation in affection between women and men. Feminism denies or downplays differences between men and women; feminism opposes homemaking, child-rearing, and [[homeschooling]] by women; and feminism promotes participation by women in predominantly male activities regardless of their life pursuits or interests. Most prominent modern feminists support [[abortion]].

Attributes common to many feminists include an [[entitlement mentality]] and a bit of an attitude, such as a "chip on one's shoulder" despite benefiting from a life of privilege.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSo-q2Dq1aY ''Mickey Randleman - _Feminist_ (IWPS 2014) - 1080P HD_this video was deleted by buttons youtube channel'']</ref>

On a personal level feminism can disrupt marriages, relationships, child-rearing, education and the workplace. The feminist ideology is particularly dominant in elite universities, many large corporations, and competitive women's team sports. Feminism claims it wants to make men and women equal but in reality, it opposes any sort of support for men.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2015/11/18/male-university-of-york-student-commits-suicide-on-day-his-university-ditches-international-mens-day-after-pressure-from-feminists/ "Male University of York Student Commits Suicide on Day His University Ditches International Men’s day"]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow ''Feminists protesting Men's Rights talk pull fire alarm, 4/4/2013'']</ref>

Feminism was originally an expression used by [[suffragettes]] – who were predominantly [[pro-life]]<ref>[http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/wallace4.html ''Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion'']</ref><ref>''"There is no question that she deplored the practice of abortion, as did every one of her colleagues in the suffrage movement."'' [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ''Desperately Seeking Susan''] [[New York Times]] (13 October 2006)</ref><ref>[http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/foremoth.htm ''Voices of our Feminist Foremothers''] Feminists for Life</ref> – to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. By the 1970s, however, at the height of what was termed Second-wave feminism, [[liberals]] had changed the meaning to represent people who favored [[abortion]] and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole. Today in the midst of what is called Third-wave feminism, also known as Feminazism, some feminists are enforcers of [[liberal censorship]] and [[political correctness]], at the expense of [[free speech]]. In fact, much of what drove Second-wave feminism and what now drives Third-wave feminism was derived from Communist doctrine and both have a great deal in common, including the shared goal of the destruction of the family and the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity (via Goal 26 of the 1963 Communist goals for America).<ref>[https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2014/09/04/feminism-is-communism/ Feminism is Communism]</ref><ref>[http://fathersforlife.org/feminism/hubbard1.htm Feminist family politics and their roots in Communist ideology]</ref>

==Opinions of most feminists==

Most feminists

* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike. We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."
* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>
* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).
** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).
* conveniently pretend that there are no meaningful differences between men and women when that advances [[liberal]] causes (e.g., women and men equally in military combat, to weaken the U.S. military), but reject equality when that results in more money to women (e.g., [[VAWA]] funding of women's groups).
* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).
* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".
* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>
* support [[affirmative action]] for women.
* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/ Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>
* believe marriage implies "female servitude" when it is in fact a mutual bond.
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".
* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'
* support the [[homosexual agenda]].
* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>
* demands that women choose a career over raising children without any remorse.
* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".
* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].
* Denounce and demean any women who have more feminine traits and embrace their femininity.

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

==History==
Roots of the movement in the United States and the United Kingdom include the [[suffrage|Women's Suffrage]] movement of the early 1900s (First-wave feminism) and the Women's Liberation (Second-wave feminism) movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminism was glamourized in the 1940s and 1950s by Hollywood film stars such as [[Joan Crawford]], attempting to portray a single mother as having a successful career and family without a husband. Second-wave feminism had its roots from [[Betty Friedan]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], who both advocated for the abolition of the career of housewife with the false implication that it was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp or a parasite, though they are more akin to the later third-wave feminism, as they fought against what they saw as patriarchal systems designed to hold women down. Another notable feminist was Simone Veil, who was instrumental to legalizing abortion in France. One of her key methods to its legalization was citing her experience as a holocaust survivor.<ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/30/534974403/french-politician-simone-veil-holocaust-survivor-and-abortion-pioneer-dies-at-89</ref>

The [[Equal Rights Amendment]] (ERA), whose proponents claimed would address the inadequacies of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] concerning women and citizenship, was proposed in the US in 1923. The amendment passed Congress in 1972 but was ultimately defeated, falling just three states short of the required [[three-quarters majority]] on June 30, 1982. Some conservatives, particularly [[Phyllis Schlafly]], felt that its passage would entail adverse consequences, including making girls subject to the [[military draft]], requiring taxpayer-funded [[abortion]], the end of [[single-sex schools]] and classes, requiring the issuance of [[homosexual marriage]] licenses, and the revocation of laws that protect women in dangerous jobs, such as factory or mining work. Indeed, in states that passed their own versions of ERA, several of these results were subsequently ordered by courts.<ref>For example, the [[Hawaii]] and [[Massachusetts]] Supreme Courts illegally ordered the issuance of homosexual "marriage" licenses based in part on their on their state ERAs, and the [[New Mexico]] Supreme Court illegally ordered taxpayer-funded abortion based on its state ERA.</ref>

The feminist movement in the West evolved in the 1980s with the rise of so-called [[Post-Feminism]] (Third-wave feminism), which stresses that women have many rights that go unrecognized, often by women themselves, in everyday life, and in the [[Critical legal studies|American legal structure]]. Most members of the feminist movement support reproductive rights currently guaranteed by American law, including the legal right to abortion. This stance is opposed by many conservatives. Third-wave feminism has been highly influenced by postmodern thought, and is a more intellectual form of feminism. It fights against the systems that it sees as detrimental to women as a group, systems designed to keep women in traditional roles, in contrast with second-wave feminism, which fought for equal rights and pay with men in a fight against the traditional status of women as second class citizens. Another distinction made from second-wave feminism is the claimed recognition of the struggles faced by women who are minorities, disabled, immigrants, etc. (intersection theory), as most second-wave feminists focused only on white suburban middle-class able-bodied women. Second-wave feminism, however, was not always a good thing, as it pushed for abortion.

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

Dr. [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]], a staunch advocate of [[civil rights]] and [[non-violence]] said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection." <ref>''Stride Toward Freedom : The Montgomery Story'', Martin Luther King, Jr., Harper and Rowe, New York, 1958, p. 203.</ref>

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for ''American Thinker'', links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and [[Marxism|Marx]], is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the State."<ref>Larrey Anderson, ''The Feminine Mistake'', ''American Thinker'', November 29, 2009</ref>

==Critique==

[[Christine Hoff Sommers]] wrote:
:... The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. [https://www.amazon.com/WAR-AGAINST-BOYS-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849577]

==Feminism and reason==

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

Feminists in the [[Swedish]] government on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2017, were urged by the Iranian women's right activist Masih Alinejad “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to wear the compulsory [[hijab]] while visiting Iran. The pleas were ignored. The Jihad Watch website reported,<ref>[https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/swedens-first-feminist-government-dons-hijabs-in-iran ]</ref>
{{Quotebox|Sweden’s female leaders have not only betrayed all women who fight for equality globally, but they have also fully exposed how confused they are: they are so-called feminists who – for example — furiously insist on control over their own bodies to choose abortion, but they are willing to fully submit to male dominance at the demand of Muslim men to dictate their clothing. And they did so in front of a global audience to boot.}}

==Cultural Marxism==
While the Feminist movement may contribute to the [[Cultural Marxist]] undermining of [[family values]] , the main cause is [[divorce|marital breakdown]], and fathers who abandon their family, or fail to contribute to the raising of their children, Studies show that:
*63 percent of youth suicides take place in fatherless homes.
*90 percent of all homeless youth and runaways are from fatherless homes, which is a whopping 32 times the national average.
*85 percent of all children with behavior issues come from fatherless homes, 20 times the national average.
*80 percent of rapists with established anger issues come from fatherless homes, 14 times the national average.
*71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*70 percent of those in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*85 percent of all juveniles in prison come from single-parent households, 20 times the national average.
*90 percent of adolescent repeat arson offenders are from fatherless homes.
*Fatherless children are nearly twice as likely to be victims of abuse or neglect.<ref>https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/bowling-alone-how-washington-has-helped-destroy-american-civil-society-and-family-life/</ref>

== Feminism and population decline ==

The historian Martin van Creveld wrote in his book ''Equality: The Impossible Quest':
{{Cquote|In many modern societies, the advent of feminism has caused men and women to be placed on a more equal footing than ever before. The catch is that, in most of the societies in question, women, desperately trying to achieve what they see as equality, no longer bear enough children to maintain the population. Some countries, such as the U.S., are making up for the deficit by importing millions of foreigners. Others, such as Japan, seem resigned to gradual demographic decline and hope that robots will make up the difference. If demographics count for anything, the future of patriarchy — not the comparatively mild form of patriarchy that is said to have characterized the West, but the more rigorous [[Islam]]ic variety—seems assured...

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

See [[Quotations about Feminism]]

== Atheist feminism ==

''See also:'' [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women]]
[[File:Annie Laurie Gaylor.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]] is an atheist feminist. She is co-president of the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]].

Gaylor's husband, [[Dan Barker]], who heads the organization along with her, is usually the person invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization's leader and her many books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref> See: [[Atheism and women]]

[[Atheist feminism]] is a type of feminism whose advocates are [[Atheism|atheists]].

Writing on the [[Atheism and sexism|sexism within the atheist population]], atheist Victoria Bekiempis wrote in a ''Guardian'' article entitled ''Why the [[New Atheism]] is a boys' club'':
{{cquote|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]], who founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation with her mother, Anne Nicol Gaylor, in 1978, sums it up succinctly: “One word — sexism.” Gaylor’s husband, Dan Barker, who helms the organization along with her, is usually the one invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization’s leader and her numerous books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>}}

Feminists who are [[theism|theists]] often belong to religious bodies which practice [[liberal]] theology. In addition, some feminists practice goddess worship. Since atheism rejects theism, atheistic feminism rejects/disbelieves in the existence of God or gods (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).

=== Atheism, women, men and atheist feminism ===

Since most atheists lean Left politically (see: [[Atheism and politics]]) most atheist women are feminists. However, this may not apply to atheist men or apply to a lesser degree, given that a significant majority of atheist are men and that the men's rights movement has many atheist men within it. [[Reddit]] is a popular place for atheists and a Reddit survey found that 94% of Men's Rights Movement supporters indicated that they had no religion (see also: [[Reddit atheism]]).<ref>[http://www.rawstory.com/2014/04/confirmed-mens-rights-activism-is-for-misogynists-without-god/ Confirmed: "Men’s Rights Activism" Is For Misogynists Without God], ''Raw Story''</ref> YouTube's most popular atheist is [[TheAmazingAtheist]] who is a men's rights activist. Another popular YouTube atheist [[Thunderf00t]] is very critical of feminism within atheism (See also: [[Atheism plus]]).

=== Atheist movement, feminism and schism within atheism ===

Within the [[atheist movement]] post [[New Atheism]] and the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy, there has been a lot of conflict between [[Atheism|atheists]] concerning feminism. One of the results of the conflict was the new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] losing a lot of public support and support among the irreligious (see: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]]).

=== Atheist feminism and its view of religion ===

See: [[Atheist feminism and religion]]

== Intersectionality==
As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing "identity groups." In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress. For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender? Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity. Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.
== Femen ==

''See also:'' [[Femen]] and [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women]]

[[Femen]] is a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] radical feminist activist group which is now based in Paris. According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', "Femen’s members consider [[atheism]] to be a fundamental tenet of the group’s ideology."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/12/meet-femen-naked-shock-troops-feminism-who-greeted-trump-with-topless-protest-paris/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb5ef3499053 Meet Femen, the ‘naked shock troops of feminism’ who greeted Trump with a topless protest in Paris], By Antonia Noori Farzan, Washington Post, November 12, 2018</ref>

Femen engages in topless publicity stunts/protests. Femen was one of the first radical feminist organizations to gain transnational media publicity.

== Christianity and women's rights ==

See: [[Christianity and women's rights]]

==See also==

*[[Anti-Feminism]]
*[[Me Too Movement]]
*[[Essay:Conservative Women Vs. Feminism]]
*[[Feminism and housewives]]
*[[Feminist style]]
*[[Gender equality]]
*[[Gender police]]
*[[Feminists for Life]]
*[[Feminism and reason]]
*[[Feminist hypocrisy]]
*[[Battered woman syndrome]]
*[[Communism and feminism]]
*[[Feminist myths]]
*[[Feminist nitpicking]]
*[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Liberal totalitarianism]]
*[[The personal is political]]
*[[Misandry]]
*[[Erica Jong]]
*[[Trans-exclusionary feminism]]
{{liberalism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-ftIGVsCI Dana Loesch Rips Feminists] on [[Louder With Crowder]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_ESpTudus #SJW Feminist Myths Destroyed by Karen Straughan] on Louder With Crowder
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRj2qMLq8SY Feminism & Fat Pride: The Unholy Alliance] on Louder With Crowder with [[Paul Joseph Watson]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYo1ewgG94M The Truth About 'Rape Culture'] by Paul Joseph Watson
*[http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/ The Feminist eZine] Archive of articles about Feminist History.
*[http://www.cia-on-campus.org/surveil/steinem.html Gloria Steinem and the CIA], ''The New York Times'', February 21, 1967.
*[https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem], Nancy Borman, ''The Village Voice''.
*[http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man?], Christina Hoff Sommers, ''The American'' March/April 2008.
*[https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/f0wr6b/conservatives_find_unlikely_ally_in_fighting/ Conservatives find unlikely ally in fighting transgender rights: Radical feminists], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', February 8, 2020.

{{Communism}}

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Feminism]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Talk:Feminism

2022-09-12T13:43:02Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* article problems */Errors.

{{bias}}
==Article problems==
Second Wave did not "resurge"-the feminism that emerged out of the later 80's/early 90's is Third Wave.

Also, feminism, contrary to what many people think, does not revolve around abortion. Feminist work also involves issues such as affordable access to childcare and prevention of domestic violence, just to name a couple. Couldn't this article reflect that rather than lumping all of feminism into one category of ideology?
----
Removed opinion.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:10, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

This article contains a lot of irrelevant information. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 04:18, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

A big problem with feminism is its desire to erase sex distinctions. Masculinity and femininity are no longer seen as God-given traits, or even ideals. [[Women in the military]], the so-called [[equal pay for equal work]] law; the forced muzzling of that Harvard president who dared suggest that women and men might not be equally suited to academic careers in math and science.

The idea that there's nothing sacred about the male-female relationship obviously provides support for [[gay rights]] agitation and same-sex "marriage". If there's nothing special about a man, then what does a woman need one for? She can have a "wife" too (as Garry Trudeau once put it). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:20, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't think the addition of the Rush Limbaugh "femi-nazi" comment is particularly relevant, largely because it's based on the wholly erroneous assumption that all feminists are pro-abortion. To include anything based on that assumption mischaracterizes the late 20th c/early 21st c "post feminist" era, where women who self-identify as feminists are far more likely to fall within a broad spectrum of ideals than one cookie cutter. [[User:Fsm1975|Fsm1975]] 23:32, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I just found this. This gives a leading source for a definition.
:Hillary Clinton received the endorsement of the National Organization for Women, a group of a half-million members who support feminist candidates for elective office. Asked whether she saw herself as a feminist, Clinton said by the standard definition, yes. "If you look in the dictionary, the word feminist means someone who believes in equal rights for women in society, in the economy, the political process -- generally believes in the equality of women," she said. "And I certainly believe in the equality of women." [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 14:35, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

::I’m curious why a person who would not accept a philosopher of science as a credible source for an entry on science would accept the definition of a politician/lawyer as definitive in terms of a philosophical/social/academic movement. Let alone why you would think she would be a “leading source for a definition”. Not that I object to the content of her definition, but the strongest claim I think you can support with it is “some politicians endorsed by [[NOW]] believe feminism means…” An interesting, but not especaly useful or informative claim.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:48, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

:::The article is full of errors. For example, many feminists love to cook, love having a family, and do housework – though expect their partner's help. Also women did not have equal educational opportunities for a long while, especially a university education. The article needs to be carefully revised '''by a conservative woman'''.--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 09:43, September 12, 2022 (EDT)

==Defining feminism==

Cut from intro:

:However there is no broad consensus among [[feminists]] (followers of feminism) about how gender equality ought to be understood. In recent years this has led many feminists to argue that, because there are so many different and mutually exclusive philosophies and philosophers that are called feminist, it is more appropriate to speak of feminisms (plural) than feminism (singular) <ref>Feminisms [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/]</ref>. For this reason it is difficult, if not impossible, to state any belief universally held by all feminists.

This sounds like a refusal to be categorized, defined or otherwise pinned down. But it's the job of an encyclopedia to define and categorize. How can we solve this problem? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 16:06, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

:The way I would suggest handling it is to take seriously the distinctions feminists make among themselves. (For example there is a clear split between the pro- and anti- pornography feminists (I’m still working on a RD of the [[pornography]] article as per our previous discussion btw) ). If we are going to really flesh out this article we ought to have a number of feminisms represented here—just as we don’t lump all creationists together but observe the very real distinction between Young and Old Earth Creationists.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:44, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

==Abortion poll==

The page I linked to had a whole series of polls. The two most recent polls said that 16% of the American public favored retaining unlimited rights to abortion, and 39% favored abortion being 'legal in most cases'. Of the remainder, 31% favored it being illegal in 'most' cases and 12% illegal in all cases. In other words, 55% favor it being legal in all or most cases and 43% favor it being illegal in all or most cases, with 2% unsure either way. The other poll referred to the retention of the rights granted under Roe v Wade and 62% favored this. This should be reflected in the article because as it stands the article misrepresents the facts. Please tell me why you think we should misrepresent facts clearly laid out in a neutral opinion poll --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:38, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

: Can you explain why abortion polling data is so relevant to this article? What is the point? It is an article about Feminism, not abortion politics.
: You put in a statement that the majority of Americans the current law on abortion rights, but in fact the most recent poll at the cited source says that only 16% support that right. So I corrected that. Now you want various other poll results. What is the point? People can follow the link to the polls if they wish. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:05, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::The statement about feminist support for abortion rights was in the original version of the article I saw. I linked to the poll to provide a citation on an issue that the original article said was of great importance to many feminists, and made it clear that these rights were opposed by many conservatives and some feminists. My original simple statement about 'majority' support for the right to a legal abortion in all or some cases was made convoluted by another editor and I attempted to clarify it. It has now been totally distorted by you. In addition to the 16% support you keep citing, you omit to say that an additional 39% support abortion rights 'in most cases'. Shall we say that only 12% of people - presumably conservatives - oppose abortion? This would be equally valid by your measure of validity. People can certainly follow the link, but it is dishonest to misrepresent its content in the way you are doing.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:16, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::: What is dishonest? It is an article about feminism, not about conservative abortion views. Maybe an article about abortion can explain the polls in detail, I don't know. The feminist organizations that support abortion rights want abortion to be legal in all cases. The 16% figure is the most relevant one. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:29, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::In that case, since there is no evidence that only feminists support abortion in all cases (we know that some are opposed) the relevant figure is the 62% who support the retention of rights under Roe v Wade, which I think we can agree was agreed by most feminists to be a landmark case on this issue. I suggest we cite that instead, which gives a clearer figure both of general feminist support for abortion rights and the degree to which that issue is supported by the population as a whole. The figure was quite unequivocal on the poll, and is probably less confusing than the other poll. I propose substituting that one. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 19:15, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: Could you give me an example of a feminist organization that opposes abortion rights in some cases? I think that the Roe v Wade poll is more confusing because it reflect not just opinions on abortion, but also opinions about legal theories. I wonder how many people even know what the legal consequence of overturning Roe v Wade would be. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 19:32, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::Sure - [ http://www.feministsforlife.org/] are probably the best-known group, but you can find other organisations listed on [http://www.gargaro.com/fem.html] and quotes from a variety of other sources on [http://www.geocities.com/livefreecritique/modernfeminists.html]. Personally, I don't think the Roe v Wade poll is confusing, because most people associate that case with abortion rights and would be unlikely to consider abstract legal theories in that context. Roe v Wade is cited as an event of significance in a timeline of women's rights on [http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html] and certainly supported by the majority of feminists - see [http://www.feminist.org/courts/roe.asp] and [http://www.now.org/press/01-04/01-22.html]. I feel that it is important to demonstrate the extent to which majority feminist thinking is supported by opinion among the country as a whole over this issue, hence my wish to cite either the full figures of the first poll or the limited figures over Roe v Wade of the second. The second set are probably clearer and easier.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 20:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::: There are certainly lots of feminists who are very happy with abortion law. But if you want to argue that a majority of the people agree with a majority of the feminists, then the Roe v Wade poll doesn't do it. A lot of people are for or against Roe v Wade for a lot of reasons. If you want opinions on abortion, the best polls are the ones that ask abortion questions. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 20:37, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::The language on the poll numbers, as it stands, is misleading. Currently the language is “As of April 2007, women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases, and according to a recent poll, 16% of the American public favor the retention of this right.” This is simply not the case, women have a right to abortions in most cases, but it is not unlimited. Parental notification laws, parental consent laws, laws banning third trimester abortions except when necessary to protect the health or life of the mother – all of these laws are (currently) constitutional (laws banning second trimester abortions except when necessary for the life or safety of the mother are also probably, but less clearly, allowable). That means that 16% of people favor an expansion of the right to an abortion, not keeping it the same. 39% seem to favor “keeping it the same” as there is currently a right to abortion in most, but not all cases.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 20:42, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: I agree that the numbers as currently stated are misleading. In that case, given that RSchlafly opposes using the Roe v Wade poll I think the fairest and most representative thing to do is to cite the full figures of the first poll, which is the most recent one in any case, and let people make their own minds up about the extent to which majority feminist thinking on this issue has influenced thinking in the population in general. I will edit accordingly.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:00, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Interestingly enough, even Roe v. Wade didn’t go as far as to say that a woman had a right to an abortion in all cases. It said that a woman had a right to an abortion in the first trimester, in the second trimester a woman has a right to an abortion unless the state can show a really good reason why she should be allowed to have one, and a state could outlaw almost all third trimester abortions. (The Casey decision which is the leading case at the moment, relaxed constraints on what the state could ban). So under current law more abortions can be outlawed than could be under Roe v. Wade and even under Roe it was not the case that “women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases”.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Thank you, that's very helpful and I hope my editing of the paragraph has reflected that. Please clarify if it seems inaccurate. It sounds as if law in the US is, in practice, quite similar to law in the UK, where abortions are illegal after 24 weeks unless there are life-threatening reasons, although in practice only a minute percentage of abortions are performed after 20 weeks.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:13, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::Your restatement in the article looks right to me. Just to be clear though, I am only talking about what women have a constitutionally protected right to (at the moment, I suspect that this will change in the near future). I’m not sure what the law is in any given state—the Supreme Court simply says “this is the most you can outlaw” in many states more abortions are allowed than the bare minimum. And I have no idea what the actual numbers look like here (actually I suspect that those numbers are not attainable here, given how tightly guarded medical records are).--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::: No, it is just not the case that abortion is limited by trimesters under USA law. Not under Roe, and not under Casey. USA law is not like UK law. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 22:03, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

==Why the deleted quotations?==

RobS - it is not very polite to delete another editor's work that is relevant to the article without discussing it first. I reverted your original edit so that it could be discussed. I should be grateful if you would be kind enough to do that here.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:36, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:answers.com is a wikimirror site. It is an invalid citition. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:06, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

::Well that's no problem. It's an extremely famous quotation and I have plenty of other sources for it. The other quotation from Pat Robertson is not from answers.com so I presume that is OK. If that's your only problem with it, I will restore it with a different source. It would have been mannerly of you to have asked me if I had another source for it rather than just deleting it though. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:10, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

==South End Press==
My apologies, but we can't use bigotted and hate filled extremist publishers for references. A blockquote from the mainspace cites a book published by South End Press, which also published this proven and debunked piece of trash. [http://www.southendpress.org/2004/items/OldNazis] The reference will be removed, and the editor is hereby warned to refrain from making further insertions from such hatefilled extremist sources. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:07, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

==To much emphasis on abortion==
I think that this artical is focused mainly on abortion which is not it is for.

::Agreed. I suggest cutting out all abortion references except one: Give it a bullet point in the list of goals, and no more. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== Misandry ==
This article has clearly mistaken the definition of femanism for misandry. There are more even-minded, considerate, and heterosexual feminists that can be counted, where as this article only lists those who qualify as man-haters. Honestly I think this kind of blatent bias is what's ruined Conservapedia, and really the entire country, but there's no reason to suggest that feminism goes against any of the values that we all share, and I suggest we completely overhall this entire article and include a section regarding feminist inspired misandry and the differences between the two practices. I also don't think there is any reason to suggest that feminism is a sin and in any way connected to homosexual behavior, which seems to be what this article implys. I'm not so quick to put females who wish to be heard in the same boat as abominations, and I wish I could say the same for all of the Conservapidia editors.
--[[User:YoungConservative|YoungConservative]] 15:43, 2 February 2008 (EST)YoungConservative

:What you say was true, back when the feminists really were seeking legal equality - before the radical feminists hijacked it for their attacks on family life, hate of tradition, and abortionist agenda. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== "boys being cheerleaders for it" ==

Is it not the case that George W. Bush was a cheerleader at Yale back in the day? [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 13:24, 2 March 2008 (EST)

: Could be. Many prominent men were once cheerleaders ... for ''boys'' playing football, not girls.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:27, 2 March 2008 (EST)

== Excessive quotes? ==

I'm not sure if I'm alone here in thinking that there are far too many quotes in this article? They make the layout rather bloated and do not seem to provide much in the way of information. Might I go ahead and perhaps remove some of the less relevant quotes? Thanks. --[[User:TJ|Crookles]] 15:32, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: No, please don't delete factual information, unless you see a clear [[rule]] violation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:27, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::There are no rule violations, but the quotations are not explained, not formatted, and are longer than the rest of the sections of the article put together. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:14, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::: The quotations illustrate what feminists really think, and that is informative.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:34, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::::Have you looked at them though? Some of them don't make sense, some are (supposedly) by feminists and others are ''about'' feminists (with no clear distinction), a lot of them are redundant, there is no formatting, and some of them contain poorly-censored swear words. It might be informative, but it does not look good in an encyclopedia for 75% or so of the article to be made up of unclear, unreferenced quotations. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:54, 3 March 2008 (EST)

I just put bullet points on those quotes, and it really seems like a terribly excessive list. Does anyone else think that some editing could be done to this to make it seem a little less over-the-top? [[User:Reaganite|Reaganite]] 18:05, 9 March 2008 (EDT)

== The list of feminist views ==

Is it just me or goes the top list of feminist views come accross as humourous rather than factual , i laughed when i read it because it sounds funny and witty rather than serious and factual. I think the tone needs altering, i can imagine liberals having a field day over it. --[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 18:58, 3 March 2008 (EST)

It really smacks of parody, and of course, there were no references. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 19:57, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: Both you are clueless if you don't realize what modern feminists think. By the way, "Realist2", "across" has only on "c" and we spell "humorous" without the "our" in [[America]]. Maybe you don't have many feminists in your country. America does.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:35, 3 March 2008 (EST)
::Why did you remove my reference to feminists wanting tougher penalties for rapists? Surely they do (it was the only referenced point on the list). [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:06, 4 March 2008 (EST)

If your can only edit by insulting others spelling or the spelling for the country they come from it shows a distinct lack of tolerance. I am here to be constructive so please dont put others down its not very christain at all. Also how would i know what feminists think ... funny enough im not even a woman so it would be very hard to put myself in that thought of mind. However writing with sarcasm or does not improve the article. I never said whats written is incorrect , i said the tone needs changing, didnt you read or inderstand that Aschlafly? I can say it in spanish if it helps lol. :-)--[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 13:38, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Where in her book did Hillary Clinton say that children should be raised by a "village" RATHER THAN their parents? [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 15:05, 5 March 2008 (EST)

I am removing the part about refusing to admit the wrongness of their ideology; it could be said about any ideology, but it is not listed on the Creationism or Christianity pages (or the Aethism one). [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 22:29, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
Aschlafly- why was my edit reverted? [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 21:51, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

: Because [[censorship]] of the truth is not allowed here. This is not Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:38, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

::How is removing an unsourced statement censorship? I would not take seriously any encyclopedia in which that statement appeared without evidence. [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 07:16, 18 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm really not sure about this list: I think this focuses too much on the radical feminists - the bra-burning, men-hating feminists from the sixties and seventies. But hasn't feminism developed, become more mainstream? For example, I'd consider myself a (conservative) feminist, and almost all of my girlfriends are too. We'd reject all or almost all of the points listed in the article:
- Yes, of course men and women are different; physically and mentally. We certainly don't believe in falsely imposing equality of outcomes - only of opportunity.
- Oppose chivalry? Nope. It's charming that a few men still open doors, give up seats for us. I don't know anyone who would complain about that.
- View traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal? Nope.
- Belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family? No-one I know.
- shirk traditional gender activities, like baking? I really don't understand this one. You're a feminist if you don't bake biscuits? Or is this a synecdoche for wider home-making activities?
- support affirmative action for women? Again, no. Affirmative action does no good in the short, medium or long-term. That's more a liberal value than a feminist one, wouldn't you say?
- prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do - This is straying into the dungaree-wearing radical lesbian feminist stereotype. Most feminists don't care what other women wear, as long as they're not wearing the same outfit as you at a cocktail party.

Look, I could go on, but my point is that this article paints feminism as the ''bête noire'' of conservative values and, while this may be true of more radical / historical feminism, it's too simplistic to cover the very, very large number of women worldwide who identify as feminists and conservatives.[[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 07:34, 21 January 2011 (EST)

==Difficulty of defining feminism==

It's not easy to define [[feminism]]. Is it "organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests"? Must one support [[equal rights]] to be a feminist?

Are there feminists who want women to "get more" than men, just as their are minority advocates who are want their group to "get more" than people in other groups? (Is feminism thus a kind of "group selfishness"?)

Is "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes" consistent with the Bible?

Is it possible to believe that men and women are "equally valuable" but made (in the image of God) to be inherently different? That is, are [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]] equally valuable qualities? Or what?

Are there currents in feminism which seek to advance women's interests but which '''do not''' assert that men and women are (or should be) "equal" in all respects?

What, then, is the proper relationship between men and women? Specifically, in the family, what are the proper roles? (How much leeway is there?)

Do all feminists oppose the "stay at home mom" phenomenon? (Or is that only [[Simone de Beauvoir]]?) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:55, 4 March 2008 (EST)

==Ridiculous Number of Quotes==

About three quarters of this article is made up of selected quotes from selected feminists, often those who do not represent mainstream feminism and are radicalised in their views. There are also a couple of unsubstantiated quotes from anti-feminists which appear to be used to represent fact rather than a person's opinion. Perhaps we could cut down on these or move them to another article ([[Quotes by Radical Feminists]] and [[Quotes by Anti-Feminists]]) in order to make this one a bit more encyclopedic. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:50, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

=="Ideological Edits"==

''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should raise children rather than the child's father and mother[5]''

The supporting reference for this is the title of a book, however the book itself states that it states a village (ie a large number of people - teachers, doctors etc) '''in addition''' to parents to successfully raise a child. Not once does the book say that parents are to be denied the main role in raising their children.

''prefer for role-reversal, like girls playing football and boys being cheerleaders for it, or men baking cookies for women''

Unsupported, mainstream feminism believes in equal roles, that is women can play football and boys can be cheerleaders, they do not believe in role reversal (ie boys cannot play football and women cannot be cheerleaders).

''prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do''

Unsupported, this is a radical view at best.

''Quotes from fictional characters''

The quotes from a character within a fiction book do not provide any valid insight into the mindset of a feminist, even if that book was written by a feminist.

Hope this clears it up, ready for reversion of reversion. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:59, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:Sorry, but conservatives believe that no one other than the parents should have the primary role in establishment of values, etc. Perhaps instead of pushing your liberal POV in editing a conservative encyclopedia, you could work as hard finding additional citations that you will approve of, illustrating the point. You cannot deny what is factual, that Feminism is a vehicle for liberal change of the social order, and the destruction of the traditional family. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:12, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

::This article is not about conservative beliefs, it is about the beliefs of feminists, and it appears that they are currently being misrepresented (the present revision states that feminists believe a village should raise children '''instead''' of parents, whereas the truth is that feminists believe a village should '''support''' parents in raising children). Could you please point out which of my points you believe to not be factually correct? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:15, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:::"Liberal POV" or not, I don't think fictional characters make very reliable as references. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:04, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::I await a response. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 18:07, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

GySom, the changes you made, apparently to make the article more ideologically neutral, would be a fine thing on Wikipedia, where they like to keep the public sheltered from facts, but not on CP, where we actually offer a choice, not an echo to the so-called "wisdom" of the crowd. From my experience here, I would suggest you concern yourself less with seeking out articles to make neutral, and spend your time creating new articles, helpful content that is both Christian and conservative friendly, because that is the stated goals and perspective of this encyclopedia and its Founders. Leave it to Wikipedia, and the dishonest presentations there, to "cleanse" topics near and dear to the liberals hearts. If you wish to make the changes you have, please provide proof that Feminists don't think that way. Responsive enough? --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:34, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Hang on, are you asking me to prove a negative? Asking someone to prove that mainstream feminism does not accept something is akin to proving that there are no invisible unicorns on Mars. It is up to the person making the claim to support it, not my job to weed through every single quote that a feminist has made and then provide an analysis to show that mainstream feminism does not support a claim that is made, it is the job of the person making the claim to support it. Let me lay out the changes I think should be made:

:*Mainstream feminists do not believe a village should raise a child instead of his or her parents, they believe that parents should be supported in their role by others (this I can actually support, by my recollection the book in the reference specifically states that parents should play the main role in raising their children).
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe in role reversal, they believe in the destruction of roles (that is, instead of believing that boys should not be allowed to play football and girls should not believe in cheer leading, they believe that boys and girls should both be able to play football or cheer lead should they desire)
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe that women should not wear dresses and should wear pants
:*A series of quotes from a ''fictional character'' in a book does not provide any insight into modern feminism

:If you have an argument about one of those points please make it, I don't need to hear about how I'm an evil liberal who should run away to Wikipedia as this gets us nowhere. It is conservative ideology to tell the truth no matter what it is, therefore it is imperative to truthfully represent the views of mainstream feminism on this encyclopedia. I guess my edits were ideological after all, just not in the way you think. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 19:48, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::Indeed, I am asking you to prove your assertion, GySom. You made the changes, now back them with proof. ''What Feminists believe is well known''. Do you demand proof of God? That there is air? The Feminist agenda is the complete re-ordering of the nuclear family, its denigration. That has been proved countless times. Your own points above show that Feminists reject completely God's own creation, the differences between men and women. Please stop with these silly distracting arguments promoting liberal ideals! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:59, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::If it has been proven countless times then there should be no problems with finding supporting evidence for it. I am not asking for proof of God or proof of air because the existence of these two is not being debated, rather we are discussing whether or not mainstream feminism believes in the three points I removed, and whether the forth should be included. I notice that you have only taken objection to the first point (regarding families), it is therefore acceptable to alter the information relating to the last three? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:05, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::Well, I am not a sysop here, so I certainly cannot stop you from doing so. If you change it back, and the Administrators and/or Andy are fine with it, so be it. I am not going to engage you in some endless discussion about the falsities and naivety of your assumptions, GySom! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:17, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::I am very open to hearing about the "falsities and naivety of my assumptions" and changing my mind if sources are produced, however at the moment it appears that there are no sources supporting the claim that feminists believe parents should not raise their children (the current cite says the opposite) and it appears that nobody has taken objection to the rewording of the claim that feminists favour role reversal or the removal of the claim that feminists shun dresses or the quotes from the fictional character. I will change the last three points, and leave the first open for now for continued discussion with yourself or others.

:::::Please, I am not trying to invite conflict, I just feel that this claim is not supported and therefore needs to be changed. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:24, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

*Yes, to be sure, I am certain those are your intentions! I stand by what I said above, but I have taken the liberty of asking Andy, Conservative and some others to review this. I hope that helps you out. Godspeed to you! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:26, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::I look forward to it, I was hoping that two users could have a civil discussion without going and calling in the big guns, but sadly this could not be the case. For those reviewing it here are my arguments:
::#The claim that feminists believe a village should raise a child '''instead''' of his/her parents is unsupported by the reference, those who read the book will find that it suggests that a village should '''support''' parents in raising their child, but that parents should play the main role
::#The claim that feminists believe in role reversal is wrong, feminists believe in the destruction of roles altogether
::#The claim that feminists believe that dresses should not be worn is a radical belief at best, and there are no cites supporting it
::#Quotes from a ''fictional character'' should never be used to make a point for or against feminism.
::Of these only number 1 was argued, and during this discussion there was no mention of why the source was correct, nor were any other sources raised. Numbers 2 and 3 were not argued, and number 4 was supported by HelpJazz. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 21:56, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::In response to your four points above:

:::#The thesis of the book is clear: "it takes a village to raise a child," and by its very terms that denies the exclusive role played by parents in raising children. The point in this entry is correct and you have not proposed alternative language that would be more accurate.
:::#No, feminists do crave role reversal, as in men baking cookies and women assuming traditionally male jobs. I'll add an example.
:::#I've added an example in response to your point about dresses.
:::#Your point here is not clear, and I'll look again at the entry.
:::Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:10, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually Andy, could we use your wording just there to clarify it?
*''believe that "it takes a village to raise a child" and deny the exclusive role played by [[parents]] in raising children.''
[[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 23:16, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Thankyou for your reply.
:#The thesis of the book is that it takes a village as well as the parents to raise a child, at the moment the entry reads that it takes a village rather than the parents, so yes the exclusivity of the role is denied, but not the role itself (by memory the book states that parents have a significant and unique role to play). I did have alternate language in my original edit: ''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should assist parents in raising children'' or something along those lines that clarifies that the position taken by the book is not to replace the parents - edit conflict, not adjusted for Feebasfactor's comment
:#There may be some confusion between role reversal and the destruction of roles. Role reversal in your example would be men baking cookies and women being expected not to bake cookies, and women taking traditionally male jobs with men being expected not to take those jobs. By the destruction of roles it is expected that both men and women have an equal right to bake cookies, and that both men and women have an equal right to take whatever job they want to, I believe the latter is closer to the desire of mainstream feminists to have equal roles and to breakdown the concept of gender, rather than pushing for a matriarchal society.
:#I'm not entirely happy that a one line quote from a blog in response to another article can be used to represent mainstream feminism, but it's your encyclopedia
:#There are quotes from a fictional character, I don't see why these should be in the article (using the same logic someone could use quotes from a fictional American president in a book to criticise America).
:Hope this clears it up. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:19, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Aren't the fictional quotes a tiny percentage of the quotes, and aren't they by a feminist author?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"''? Though I have met many feminists, I have never met a woman, ever, who felt that women should only wear pants. I know women who do not wear pants, because they feel the Bible calls them to wear only skirts, though this is not true for all of the Christian women I know, or even a majority of them. Most women, feminist or not, dress according to what they will be doing. If they will be hiking in the woods giving a lesson on the forest habitat, they will probably wear jeans. If they are going to a wedding or a funeral, they will almost certainly wear a dress. Some women personally prefer to wear dresses more than pants, or vice versa, but most women, feminist or not, don't feel that everyone should dress as they do. If the article is going to state that feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"'', then there should be a really good citation to show this. Certainly you can find many articles where women discuss the pros and cons of pants and/or dresses, but I've never seen anything that supported the claim made here. An example to the contrary would be the A Dress A Day blog<ref>A Dress A Day[http://www.dressaday.com/dressaday.html]</ref>, whose author writes regularly about the joys of wearing dresses; I'm quite certain she would consider herself a feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 23:22, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I've added another cite, and frankly am surprised that anyone would dispute this feminist preference to dress like men in order to make an ideological statement.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::::The whole pants thing was a big deal at the time because there were people & institutions who felt that women should *never* wear pants - restaurants that wouldn't serve women wearing pants, schools that wouldn't allow girls to wear pants (even in freezing cold weather - and skirts in those days were *short*!), and so on. Feminists of the time believed that women should be allowed to wear pants if they wished. (Not that they *should* wear pants.) Nowadays, most American women, feminist or not, wear both pants and skirts, just because we like to, or for practical reasons, not for political reasons. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:17, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::Cites about baking cookies and wearing pants are from 1970's, not modern feminism? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:55, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::: The 1970s is "modern". Perhaps a time period should be added to the entry? By the 1960s "modern" feminism was in full bloom.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:01, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::::Is the goal of the entry to describe feminism as it is understood today by the majority of women who consider themselves feminists? (I'm assuming this would be the best approach, though of course the history is of interest as well.) The radical femimism of the '60's and '70's was, well, radical, but I think that the kind of extreme views described in this article would be foreign to most women today who consider themselves feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:08, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

<- The section of the article in dispute is written in the present tense (''"Specifically, modern feminists tend to"'' as opposed to ''"Specifically, modern feminist tended to"'') after having described the era of the 1970's in the past tense, therefore the points should describe those beliefs held by mainstream feminists today. I'm not too sure many modern mainstream feminists favour wearing pants or role reversal, just as we don't see burning bras or (too many) claims that all sexual relationships in marriage are rape. In short, what was mainstream in the 1970's appears to now be classified as radical compared to the views of modern feminists, which appear to be more about breaking down gender inequality and the like. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 00:14, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I agree - though I would add that many of the ideas discussed in the 70's were radical feminism (not mainstream feminism) even then.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:20, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]], Thank you for your grammar edit! It really helps! While we're cleaning up this article, here's another item that might need to be changed. I don't think the statement that feminists ''"oppose single-sex schooling"'' is accurate. There are rather a lot of feminists at all-girl colleges like Smith and Bryn Mawr and Mount Holyoke. Also, I can't see your recent changes on the main article page, only the history page - I don't know if it's me or Conservapedia. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:27, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:It's stupid to argue about this sort of thing on an article discussion page. Just add a quote from a feminist who supports it. This goes for girls' schools, dresses, stay-at-home moms and all the other stuff above. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::: Can't. Article's locked, at least it is for me.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:00, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::Are we trying to use the view of one feminist to represent the views of all, or are we accurately trying to report on the collective views of mainstream feminism? If it's the latter then a single quote from one feminist won't do the job. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:21, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I have unlocked the article so that the requested source can be added. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:07, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Feminism and choice==

Feminists say they '''only want choice''' while actually asserting various "shoulds" and "oughts".

Wearing dresses is strongly discouraged by feminists; dressing like men is strongly encouraged. Indeed, all sorts of feminine behavior in the workplace is discouraged, and we '''all''' know that [[Simone de Beauvoir]] condemned the [[choice]] of woman staying home to raise her and her husband's children.

What we object to here is the [[liberal deceit|pretense]] that feminism supports women choosing either traditional female roles or modern "liberated" ones. They use coercion quite openly. Pretending that they do not is something you can do on your own blog, using your [[freedom of press]] to tell lies. You can't do it here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:16, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:According to her article she made those views in 1949, we are trying to discuss the views of modern feminists, or more specifically those around in 2008. As has been stated above, these are different to the views held in the past. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:24, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Ed Poor explains this extremely well. I don't know what TheGySom is referencing about 1949, but that is surely "modern" also. [[Feminism]] plainly represents views about how women ''should'' act, and women who disagree with that ideology are ostracized and ridiculed by the more militant feminists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:39, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Simone de Beauvoir wrote her controversial book ''The Second Sex'' in 1949. It is relevant to the history of feminism, but in no way should be used as a source to describe the views of mainstream twenty-first century feminists, as it was written almost 60 years ago. We've come a long way since then - most of today's feminists weren't even born when the book came out. I'm a woman, I have friends who are feminist and friends who definitely aren't, none of them have ever tried to encourage or discourage me from wearing dresses. Some of my friends wear only dresses/skirts for religious reasons (Christian or Jewish), but I've never met a woman who would not wear dresses for political reasons. The idea just doesn't ring true to me. Certainly for some activities or professions pants are a more practical and/or more safe choice, and some women tend towards pants or tend towards dresses for themselves, but those are not political or ideological choices, they are a matter of personal style and/or practicality. Feminists in the '70's fought for the right to wear pants in places and situations where it had not previously been allowed, mostly for practical and personal style reasons. I'm not trying to be argumentative here - just to give a woman's perspective. So far, the only sources in support of the idea that feminists encourage dressing like men have been offhand comments in blogs. Can we find some more solid sources for this idea if it is to be included in the article?--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I'm sure there are millionaire communists who say they have no desire to interfere with private property, and that they don't know any other communists who do either. And they would be right about themselves and their friends, but wrong about the ideology of communism.

:::: Likewise here. The ''[[sine qua non]]'' of modern feminism is for women to act like men. Why would clothes be excluded from that? They aren't. I've already provided two references and there are probably more, but I'm getting the sense that no amount of citations will persuade you because you know what you and your friends think about clothes. I suggest you spend some time researching this and ask women familiar with the feminist agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:26, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Name Changes==
The article says that feminists ''"refuse to take the husband's last name when marrying, despite the confusion and complexity that causes"''. However, the article used as a citation seems to be saying the opposite. It is an article about the complexity of such decisions for 21st century women, and how there are many different approaches to changing one's name, and how quite a few feminists are now changing their name to, one way or another, include their husband's name. (The author, who is marrying soon, begins the article with 8 of her own options, including hyphenation, etc.) The article goes on to give quite a few examples of feminist women who made various choices, for a wide variety of reasons. Based on the cited article, I think a more accurate statement for our article would be ''"feminists are likely to take a number of factors into consideration when deciding whether or not to change their last name to their husband's when they marry."'' Two relevant quotes from the article: ''"...they are doing what they can, making meaning of their own, focusing on what they do with their lives as much as what they do with their names. And by the way, isn't that the whole idea of feminism?"'' and ''"Hey, I'm a stay-at-home mom who took her husband's name and earns a fraction of our household income but none of that makes me any less of a feminist. Because for me, feminism is about respecting women and men and being able to make whatever lifestyle choices you want."'' <ref>"(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller. [http://dir.salon.com/story/mwt/feature/2003/10/16/names/index.html]</ref> I did not make this change, even though the article is now unlocked, because I'd like input from others first - I think that, together, we can make this a better article.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 21:40, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

== References ==

<references/>

==Question for the Editor--==
I just found my way to your site via Google, and read "Feminism." I noticed that your editorial policy says that you're not allowing the use of material that isn't accurate. That site says that early feminists were "suffragettes." The suffragettes were English, in fact -- in the use, the folks who supported the right to vote for women were suffragists, from Woodrow Wilson to good ol' Theodore Roosevelt. Your writers also have no idea that the term "feminist" at times has been somewhat conservative (hey! surprise!), as when the National Women's Party supported an Equal Rights Amendment while most women opposed it. In the meantime, in the twentieth century, some Republican women would have been comfortable calling themselves "feminists," from Margaret Chase Smith to Oveta Culp Hobby. The term has had somewhat varied meanings over the course of the century, and any accurate description should reflect that. Interested readers could check out Catherine Rymph's Republican Women, published by the very reputable U.North Carolina Press. {{unsigned|Mm444}}

== Unsourced quotes ==

There are tons of unsourced quotes in this article, and I will go through the list to see how many I can actually source. I will remove those quotes I couldn't find any info on, and I'll post them here so others can re-add them if they do find reliable sources. The key words are: Where was it said, and when. Evidence should be supplied. Quote-sites that simply say "She said so." are off-limits.

*"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." - Robin Morgan
I couldn't find anything more than just anti-feminist comments and "Men Rights" sites. No mention of where or when she supposedly said so. (Update: Found a site that says it's from "Sisterhood is Powerful". --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:56, 16 April 2008 (EDT))

A somewhat special case is the next one:
*"I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero-sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary-vested-interest-power. But then, I have great difficulty examining what men in general could possibly do about all this. In addition to doing the sh*twork that women have been doing for generations, possibly not exist? No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" - Robin Morgan
I found out that this quote comes from her introduction to the 1970 book "Sisterhood is Powerful". I also found this [http://www.feministcampus.org/network/chat/morgan04232003.asp snippet] about the quote:
{{cquote|Halimat: Following is a quote from you. Assuming that you weren't misquoted, do you still feel this way? How are women to get ahead without collaberation from those who currently hold the majority of legislative power? "I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero- sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary- vested-interest-power."

Robin Morgan: That quote is from the early 1970s and fortunately both the movement and I have matured in terms of developing a much more sophisticated range of tactics and strategies, due to our enormous numbers, than we ever could have imagined back in the late 60s and early 70s. While it is still true that "pale males" are at the top of the "food chain" - more men are changing every day. They're more involved with their children and families and on every level, from slowly learning to use Ms. through to adopting and adapting to anti-sexual harrassment workplace rules, men have been changing. It's not enough by far, but it is a start. And it's the power of the women's movement that has brought them even this far.}}
I'll leave the quote in the article, but I will also link to that interview so people can get a more modern reflection on the quote. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:03, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

One more from Robin Morgan:
*"Women are not inherently passive or peaceful. We're not inherently anything but human."
It's a really nice quote, so I regret that I couldn't find any proper sourcing for it. :/ --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:42, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Took out two (for now) from Dworkin:
*"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig."<nowiki><ref></nowiki>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp From] her book "Ice and Fire"<nowiki></ref></nowiki>
"Ice and Fire" is a ''novel''. As in ''fiction''. As such, I won't treat this as her own quote, just like I don't claim that authors like King or Clancy endorse every sentence from their books as their own views.
*Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman."
This quote is [http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp attributed] to "Liberty", but I couldn't find it in her Bibliography, so I'll cut it until somebody actually figures out whether it's a book (and whether it's fiction or non-fiction) or a paper or something. Citing made-up books sounds vaguely unlikely, but I'd rather be safe than sorry. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 17:27, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Dworkin again:
*"To be rapeable, a position that is social, not biological, defines what a woman is."
Couldn't find any proper sourcing, only quote pages that simply say she said it, but not where or when. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 18:00, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==Quotations and flowing prose==

There are way too many quotations here. Sure, we've proved the point. There's a lot of nasty things that were said by genuine, card-carrying feminists. But quotes don't make an article.

I want to know the roots of feminism, what it originally tried to do, what else it started to do, and how it did (and does) differ from simply "making sure women don't get mistreated". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:11, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
:Agree with the "way too many quotations" bit. A few quotes from several eras to illustrate how feminism developed and matured would be nice. If that's not possible, just crop it down. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:17, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
::It probably wouldn't hurt to review this. I am also pleased Miles that you have chosen a constructive approach of finding and adding references instead of just complaining. There is a greater chance of seeing constructive changes occur under that format than merely confronting. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:40, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==I think we have misrepresented Jilly Cooper==

I think Jilly Cooper, the veteran right-wing journo and toff, would be surprised to find herself identified as a feminist and downright astonished to be labelled a member of SCUM. Somebody has got a little confused here. (Or else they are being mischievious).

== Suggestion for separation ==

I personally feel it would be beneficial to make two articles on this subject. What's described here is what many call "radical feminism" whereas average everyday feminism is quite different. I'm not an expert in this field, but I can assure you that the generalizations made here are on the most extreme examples of feminists. -EternalCritic

I agree, much of what is addressed here under the heading of "feminism" would more properly be described as "radical feminism" (of the all women should be lesbians/all heterosexual intercourse is rape slant), and much of the substantive article seems to be un-cited impressions that appear to be sourced in popular culture (for example, if the ideological doctrine is too difficult to define, how can it be said that *all* feminists balk at chivalry or belittle family women?). Can the lengthy list of sound-bite quotations (from which the reader is apparently supposed to cobble together an idea of what feminism is) be removed to ultimately be replaced with an attempt to seriously engage with the tenants of feminism with a stronger focus on peer-reviewed academia reflecting a broader overview of the field rather than a relatively small group of extremists? -- [[User:BillyWest|BillyWest]] 11:28, August 28 2011

== Reversion explained ==

The edit summary to the last edit said, "I changed some awkward phrasing. I also think the bullets should be made into one coherent paragraph. Thoughts?" In fact, that edit introduced liberal bias and censored conservative truth. It was fully reverted even though it did also include some harmless stylistic changes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:20, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

== Citations? ==

I'm not clear on the policy. In the list of quotes, there are some that don't have real citations like:

"The nuclear family must be destroyed ... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process" - Linda Gordon

and

"Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women ... We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men ... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft" (from "The Declaration of Feminism" November, 1971)

I think these need real citations or they should be removed. Also, quotes about feminists should be in a separate section than quotes from feminists. Pat Robertson is mixed in with a bunch of feminists right now, under the "Other" heading.

--[[User:AdamBurns|AdamBurns]] 18:47, 16 December 2009 (EST)

== Enough quotations? ==

This article could make a more mature examination of feminism than putting up a bunch of quotations. --[[User:Marxian21|Marxian21]] 22:53, 22 January 2010 (EST)

== "No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" ==

I cannot find the phrase in either of the two references given. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:12, 30 January 2010 (EST)

:Please feel free to delete that phrase, then.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:18, 30 January 2010 (EST)
::I would, but TK has already reverted someone who edited it out--and I don't want to anger him. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:22, 30 January 2010 (EST)

== Reversion explained ==

Modern feminists are overwhelmingly pro-abortion, and even those who are not pro-abortion are still anti-motherhood.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:54, 1 June 2010 (EDT)

==Full rewrite==

I like the quotes, and we certainly need a conservative critique of modern "radical" feminism, but the movement has also had its good points. There are even places/issues where currents in contemporary feminism match up with conservative ideas.

The idea that men shouldn't use their power to abuse women is a longstanding conservative idea (see [[Chivalry]]), although this is nothing more than the general idea that no one, male or female, should abuse his power; it doesn't matter if it's man to woman, white to black, rich to poor, educated to ignorant, etc. However, many feminists bristle at the idea of accepting '''any''' help from men (such help seen as condescending at best). Most conservative Christians oppose [[pornography]] and [[sexual slavery]], and so on. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:23, 8 September 2010 (EDT)

I am trying to make this page compatible with a little Amazon Alexa Mod I cooked up, so far when It reads it,
There were multiple spelling errors, and when she spoke it sounded more like a rant then an actual informative conservative essay. Also the bulleted list doesn't play and the alexia device just stops playing, I believe the hardware isn't used to bullet points not being with-in heading or heading font so the Device just tries to reload the text in pure html using Wikipedias default source php (which I deleted to make my own.)
I understand that I need to be of higher standing, so can someone edit the article so it doesn't sound like a gigantic rant without any sources.
--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] [[User talk:Reevestehsnek|Talk]] 10:59, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:Sorry, we don't change pages so Amazon Alexa handles them better. That's Alexa's problem, not ours. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:48, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::I wasn't clear I made a mod for an alexa device that uses conservapedia as its source, but its obvi you don't care about all the hard hours of work it took to actual remove the php through bluetooth and rewrite the script using BSD. {{unsigned|Reevestehsnek}}
:::I'm not saying that at all, and that sounds like a great accomplishment that I could not do myself.

:::What I '''am''' saying is that this is not a sufficient reason for making major changes to the article. We simply cannot change an article's wording and point of view because it runs better through a speaking device. Articles are generally created to be read, and it's unusual for people to have them spoken to them by a device. Wording and point of view changes should only be made based on their own merits. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:09, 8 November 2018 (EST)

== feminism and obesity ==

feminism and obesity: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html I will leave it up to others decide what constitutes feminism as I am taking a break from Conservapedia barring any news events. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:03, 5 February 2011 (EST)

== Create a feminism and obesity article ==

Consider creating a [[Feminism and obesity]] article at Conservapedia and cite this material: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:08, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

:The blog you want cited makes a ''huge'' leap in its conclusions. Being a working mother does not automatically translate into being a feminist. I would guess the majority of working women are in the job market because there is a need for a second income to support a family, given the cost of basic necessities such as rent, food, gasoline, electricity, medical costs, clothing, etc. I know that is the case in my situation. We can't pay for the basics on my husband's salary alone. We haven't had a vacation in years. Most of my friends are in the same situation. And the blog completely ignores the single working mother - what is she supposed to do? Not work? --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 11:01, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

I agree that this article is no good, even though I wish it were true.
--[[User:corneliuscalvin|corneliuscalvin]] 7:56, 26 November 2012 (PDT)

:Can't talk now. of the World happening. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 23:01, 26 November 2012 (EST)

== No Christian feminism? ==

I think that this article would be served well if a section on [[Christian feminism]] was included. Maybe a new article on it would be better.[[User:Mr. Guye|Mr. Guye]] ([[User talk:Mr. Guye|talk]]) 19:15, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:That seems like a good idea, but an article on it would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view. But there's also the fact that the same term can have a different meaning for different people -- what one person considers Christian feminism can be completely different than what another person does. We would need to define the term clearly, but I think we'd be talking about second- and third-wave feminism, adherents of which have theologically and socially left-wing views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:47, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:::No, there is no requirement that a Conservapedia article discussing the topic of Christian feminism "would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view." There are no such requirements on content at Conservapedia, and no one, except perhaps Andy, has the authority to enforce such a requirement. All that is required is that "Conservapedia is a politically conservative, Christian encyclopedia project". Though many of our members are not Christians and are not politically conservative, they are required to edit in a manner consistent with the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]]. To require otherwise would turn this wiki into a Wikipedia-style "mobocracy" rather than a "best of the public" project.

:::The concept of feminism covers a lot of ground. There are conservative feminists, Christian feminists, and Republican feminists. Not all feminists subscribe to some of the silly excesses that one sometimes sees looking around on the internet and various media outlets. Many conservative feminists, for example, fully support encouraging girls to go into STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects.

:::So feel free to write sensible content on this topic. I look forward to reading it.

:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:49, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::::SamHB, they have found that promoting the idea that women are underrepresented in STEM fields and that this has to be corrected has the effect of telling women that STEM is not feminine/girly and thus women are more likely to avoid those fields. In other words, the policy is probably backfiring. See: http://review.chicagobooth.edu/economics/2017/article/how-promoting-stem-fields-women-can-backfire

::::Women tend to be more likely to be conformists and not mavericks.

::::Over and over again, liberals fail to take into account the unintended consequences of their social engineering! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:48, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::Once Christian denominations filly embrace the notion of female pastors, their memberships almost invariably spiral downward. That should surely be mentioned in relation to "Christian feminism".

::"But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve." - 1 Timothy 2:12-13[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:15, 2 December 2017 (EST)
:::Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I don't think Mr. Guye was even talking about female pastors when he was talking about Christian feminism, just something akin to, say, the Suffragettes, many of whom were Christian women who would NEVER advocate the pill, let alone abortion. But yes, we probably should note that bit somewhere either way. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:35, 2 December 2017 (EST)
::::What percentage of so-called "Christian feminists" believe that a wife is to obey her husband and that a husband is the head of the family? At least in its present form "Christian feminism" is just another endeavor to infect Christianity with unbiblical ideas. As far as the suffragette movement, I don't know if any of them were Christian women who held biblical Christianity views related to women. I do know that various suffragettes burned down churches.[https://www.christiantoday.com/article/suffrage-the-churchs-rocky-relationship-with-rebellion/67361.htm]

::::Christianity was at the forefront of various movements like abolition, child labor laws, etc. etc. Christendom is also known for its favorable views on the treatment of women (husbands loving their wives like Christ loved the church, etc. etc.), but it is not known for leading the charge as far as feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:48, 2 December 2017 (EST)

:::::Well, I do know that Susan B. Anthony specifically condemned abortion and the pill and stated that would make women even more enslaved, and I do know that Christians also do not support abortion and the pill (in fact, among us Catholics, it's considered a mortal sin), so there's that to consider. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 09:53, 2 December 2017 (EST)
==First-wave feminism was good?==
This article makes it sound like first-wave feminism was good and its doctrines were just simply corrupted in the 1960s. As it turns out, first-wave feminists were anti-Christianity and anti-man too, as pointed out by Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire and [[John Doyle]].[https://youtu.be/sgJoJsaI1WY][https://youtu.be/ME-JIO8_cic] Elizabeth Cady Stanton once said that the Bible and the church were the two greatest stumbling blocks in the way of women's emancipation. Susan B. Anthony was a religious skeptic, and other early feminists held similar views too. In fact, many were free lovers, like Victoria Woodhull. I strongly recommend that the early section saying liberals just twisted the term be deleted. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 20:22, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:But the early feminists were [[pro-life]], right?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:45, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::The Bible says wives must submit to their husbands (Pauline epistles and the Apostle Peter taught this). No doubt this was anethema to first wave feminists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:04, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure if they were truly anti-Christianity, they'd be all in favor of unlimited abortion on demand even back then (especially when the Church was ALWAYS against abortion), and yet, as demonstrated with [[Susan B. Anthony]], several of them were AGAINST abortion. I know [[Vladimir Lenin]] [https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/11/17/november-1920-2020-a-century-of-abortion-in-russia/ certainly was all in for unlimited abortion], being notorious for literally legalizing unlimited and unrestricted abortion in the USSR and being the first state leader to EVER do so, even having the audacity to claim THIS emancipated women, and was such that even the likes of [[Margaret Sanger]], herself no pro-life adherer, was reportedly aghast at it. Besides, my idea of having my hypothetical wife submitting to me would be closer to [https://youtu.be/xtO-AHuEhJc?t=428 what Geldoblame advocated for everyone under his rule] from ''Baten Kaitos'', and I'm pretty sure even Jesus and his disciples NEVER advocated for that kind of submission (even less so when Geldoblame used THAT as justification for committing mass murder against a mining community by torching it simply because they withheld ore shipments thanks to his draconian labor statutes that left them dangerously overworked). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:03, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:Being pro-life does not necessarily make one pro-Christianity. Victoria Woodhull was against abortion and she was a Marxist and practically a communist. Also even Sanger claimed to be against abortion if I am not incorrect, saying birth control got rid of the need for it. Planned Parenthood did not start to endorse the legalization of abortion until 1969, and abortion did not even start to become popular until after Roe v. Wade. That was really more of the Overton Window being shifted in conservatism's direction back then than feminism being conservative. It just really goes to show how much ground we've lost. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 22:42, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::Maybe so, but the anti-Christians most certainly tended to be very much anti-life, as Lenin and even Trotsky proved there (not to mention the Bolsheviks), and even the Jacobins, their ideological ancestors, were known to practice abortion in the most crude manner (specifically, bayonetting pregnant women, and/or using wine pressers to crush them). And since Marx was brought into it, Marx himself advocated massively for abortion as well, as did Engels, all in their plan to "abolish the family." And what better way to abolish the family than to destroy reproduction. If she was a Marxist, it only shows she didn't know Marx all that well, as otherwise, she'd be all in favor of abortion like her idol Marx. And let's not forget that this view of pro-abortion has been going on since 1923 with [https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/marxist-roots-abortion-joseph-hippolito/ Dr. Antoinette Konikow], who was a fellow traveler of Trotsky during the Russian Revolution, AND committed several abortions in the Boston area specifically as part of her Marxist advocacy. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:49, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:That may be true, but some anti-Christians are more radical than others. Also America was more conservative than Russia at the time of the Russian Revolution, so something like abortion would definitely be seen as morally unacceptable in that time regardless of where you were on the political spectrum. But my main point is if Stanton said Christianity got in the way of feminism, and she was the founder of American feminism and first-wave feminism, I just don't know how you can say feminism wasn't anti-Christian even back then. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 23:27, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::I've heard of some feminists getting back to the Christian faith. Victoria Woodhull, for one actually renounced the free love bits and advocated strongly for the Christian concept of motherhood later in life (too bad she didn't quite own up to how she did badly during that time, though). Besides, technically speaking, there have been PLENTY of Founding Fathers in America who were significantly anti-Christian, including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and apparently even John Adams. By that same logic, America ITSELF is anti-Christian from conception. In fact, [[Christopher Ferrara|Christopher A. Ferrara]] actually makes this argument in his book ''Liberty: The God that Failed''. I guess you could also argue that liberty in itself was anti-Christian. For that matter, I'd argue [[Freedom of Religion]] is ultimately anti-Christian as well. The Israelites tried that bit back in the day, and that led directly towards the [[Babylonian Exile]], per God's direction. And Russia was still conservative enough to have abortion be deemed explicitly illegal until Lenin and his Bolsheviks took over (there's a reason why the USSR under Lenin was the first country in all of history to actually make unlimited abortion legal, to the extent that STALIN of all people threw a bone to us pro-lifers by outlawing abortion for a year). I'd mention divorce, but Robespierre and the French Revolution beat Lenin to that bit. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:33, November 9, 2021 (EST)

== Fatherless children ==

Does only feminism cause this? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 10:28, January 24, 2022 (EST)
:Re-reading the section "Cultural Marxism", it seems out of place in an article on feminism. Isn't it about men who abandon their children? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 13:24, March 11, 2022 (EST)

==Bias?==
I thought feminists went out of business with [[vaccine mandate]]s (''my body my choice'') and [[transgender]]s taking over girls sports. Not to mention rape in prisons by transgenders. It's the law now. We've finally reached full equality. What more is there to debate? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 20:18, May 28, 2022 (EDT)

== Pants ==

I'm puzzled by the linking of pants and feminism. I suppose it is an assertion by women of their independence but hardily any women, whatever their age, wears a dress where I live, though there's a few more in hot weather (I'm envious). Isn't more a matter of convenience than ideology? It's the norm and so non-partisan. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:49, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
:Phyllis Schlafly was a conservative woman who defeated the feminists by preventing the passage of the [[Equal Rights Amendment]]. I have never seen a picture of her wearing pants. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:50, August 7, 2022 (EDT)

:What has this to do with the fact that most women of all ages wear trousers in North American? This has far more to do with comfort and convenience than feminism. I suspect that more women wear dresses in more liberal Europe. Personally I find women more attractive in dresses but I would not be so arrogant to insist that any woman has to wear one! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 13:52, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
::There's too much feminism in the USA and the fruits are not positive. 13th highest divorce rate in the world.[https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/divorce-rates-by-country] Lots of women taking depression pills. And there are surveys which show that women are now LESS happy post feminism. Thank God that the religious have a higher fertility rate, Roe vs. Wade was overturned and that the Bible is not pro-feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:10, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
:::Have you read the essay: [[Essay: Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)|Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)]]. In 22nd century North America, the majority of women may be wearing dresses. In all likelihood, should Jesus tarry, the majority of women in North America will not be pant-wearing, feminist whores!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:16, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

::Oh dear!--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:57, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

===Does the Bible forbid women from wearing pants?===
According to the [[ United Church of God]] it does not.

::Does Deuteronomy 22:5 forbid women from wearing pants? No, it doesn't. In fact, clothing “that pertains to a man” at the time the verse was written would not have been understood to mean pants. Men in the Middle East through the history of the Old and New Testaments did not ordinarily wear pants, trousers or slacks; they wore robe-like garments. And in many cultures such as in China, women have commonly worn pants. The scripture more specifically addresses and forbids transvestism and cross-dressing.
::The underlying principle certainly applies to today. Men should dress in an appropriately masculine manner and women should dress in an appropriately feminine manner. Clothing manufacturers make pants designed for men, and pants, slacks and pantsuits designed for women. The Bible emphasizes modesty, and for women, slacks are often more modest than a short skirt.
::God does not intend for this scripture to be understood in an extreme or unreasonable way. For example, it’s perfectly fine for a woman to wear her husband’s old shirt when she’s painting or to put on her male friend’s jacket when she’s cold.[https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/bible-questions-and-answers/does-the-bible-forbid-women-from-wearing-pantsPosted on Jan 27, 2011 by United Church of God]
--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:37, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:::A sensible and intelligent reading of the Bible and history, --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:42, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

::::Thanks. I guess we were all too stupid to figure that out. Does this apply to Drag Queen Story Hour at Pizza Hut, as well? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 14:45, August 28, 2022 (EDT)
See also [https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/365-does-the-bible-forbid-women-to-wear-pants] and [https://bibleask.org/does-the-bible-say-women-should-not-wear-pants/]. Can you clarify [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|RobSmith]]? The above quotation does not support transvestism! And trousers didn't exist in the biblical world. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 15:57, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:There is no reference to Deuteronomy in the article. And the Deuteronomy reference basically is about honesty, not enticing a member of your own sex by dressing up as something that you are not. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 16:26, August 28, 2022 (EDT)
:The point you are trying to make has nothing to do with feminism. It does, however have to do with gender confusion or dysphoria. While modern science may brand gender dysphoria as a mental handicap (perhaps involuntary or uncontrollable), Deuteronomy says gender confusion is a choice. But that is not a discussion for here in this article. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 16:32, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:::Really I was responding to another editor's ranting, though this article isn't so much about feminism as an extreme version of it. Even Andy Schafly agreed in an interview that his mother believed in the equal rights of women:
::::: Schlafly wants to know what I mean by "feminist". I offer a dictionary definition: "A feminist is someone who believes in equal rights for men and women."
:::::His response is surprising. "She may have agreed with that sort of general statement - as stated like that, yes."
:::::It seems that - as her opponents always maintained - the matriarch of American antifeminism was deep down a feminist herself. ''Daily Telegraph'' Jul 23, 2020

::::::Feminists today are taking the lead in the anti-[[transgenderism]] movement. So maybe it's time for a reconciliation. (Oh, and they are doing so because what Phyllis prophesied about the 1970s Feminist movement has come true). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 17:27, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

Feminism

2022-09-12T13:11:17Z

RobLeonardWoo: Better

[[Image:Braque woman 400pix.jpg|thumb|200px|''Woman with a guitar'' by [[Georges Braque]], 1913.]]
'''Feminism''' is a destructive ideology that can cause an alienation in affection between women and men. Feminism denies or downplays differences between men and women; feminism opposes homemaking, child-rearing, and [[homeschooling]] by women; and feminism promotes participation by women in predominantly male activities regardless of their life pursuits or interests. Most prominent modern feminists support [[abortion]].

Attributes common to many feminists include an [[entitlement mentality]] and a bit of an attitude, such as a "chip on one's shoulder" despite benefiting from a life of privilege.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSo-q2Dq1aY ''Mickey Randleman - _Feminist_ (IWPS 2014) - 1080P HD_this video was deleted by buttons youtube channel'']</ref>

On a personal level feminism can disrupt marriages, relationships, child-rearing, education and the workplace. The feminist ideology is particularly dominant in elite universities, many large corporations, and competitive women's team sports. Feminism claims it wants to make men and women equal but in reality, it opposes any sort of support for men.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2015/11/18/male-university-of-york-student-commits-suicide-on-day-his-university-ditches-international-mens-day-after-pressure-from-feminists/ "Male University of York Student Commits Suicide on Day His University Ditches International Men’s day"]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow ''Feminists protesting Men's Rights talk pull fire alarm, 4/4/2013'']</ref>

Feminism was originally an expression used by [[suffragettes]] – who were predominantly [[pro-life]]<ref>[http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/wallace4.html ''Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion'']</ref><ref>''"There is no question that she deplored the practice of abortion, as did every one of her colleagues in the suffrage movement."'' [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ''Desperately Seeking Susan''] [[New York Times]] (13 October 2006)</ref><ref>[http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/foremoth.htm ''Voices of our Feminist Foremothers''] Feminists for Life</ref> – to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. By the 1970s, however, at the height of what was termed Second-wave feminism, [[liberals]] had changed the meaning to represent people who favored [[abortion]] and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole. Today in the midst of what is called Third-wave feminism, also known as Feminazism, some feminists are enforcers of [[liberal censorship]] and [[political correctness]], at the expense of [[free speech]]. In fact, much of what drove Second-wave feminism and what now drives Third-wave feminism was derived from Communist doctrine and both have a great deal in common, including the shared goal of the destruction of the family and the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity (via Goal 26 of the 1963 Communist goals for America).<ref>[https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2014/09/04/feminism-is-communism/ Feminism is Communism]</ref><ref>[http://fathersforlife.org/feminism/hubbard1.htm Feminist family politics and their roots in Communist ideology]</ref>

==Opinions of most feminists==

Most feminists

* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike. We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."
* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>
* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).
** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).
* conveniently pretend that there are no meaningful differences between men and women when that advances [[liberal]] causes (e.g., women and men equally in military combat, to weaken the U.S. military), but reject equality when that results in more money to women (e.g., [[VAWA]] funding of women's groups).
* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).
* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".
* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>
* support [[affirmative action]] for women.
* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/ Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>
* believe marriage implies "female servitude" when it is in fact a mutual bond.
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".
* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'
* support the [[homosexual agenda]].
* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>
* demands that women choose a career over raising children without any remorse.
* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".
* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].
* Denounce and demean any women who have more feminine traits and embrace their femininity.

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

==History==
Roots of the movement in the United States and the United Kingdom include the [[suffrage|Women's Suffrage]] movement of the early 1900s (First-wave feminism) and the Women's Liberation (Second-wave feminism) movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminism was glamourized in the 1940s and 1950s by Hollywood film stars such as [[Joan Crawford]], attempting to portray a single mother as having a successful career and family without a husband. Second-wave feminism had its roots from [[Betty Friedan]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], who both advocated for the abolition of the career of housewife with the false implication that it was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp or a parasite, though they are more akin to the later third-wave feminism, as they fought against what they saw as patriarchal systems designed to hold women down. Another notable feminist was Simone Veil, who was instrumental to legalizing abortion in France. One of her key methods to its legalization was citing her experience as a holocaust survivor.<ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/30/534974403/french-politician-simone-veil-holocaust-survivor-and-abortion-pioneer-dies-at-89</ref>

The [[Equal Rights Amendment]] (ERA), whose proponents claimed would address the inadequacies of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] concerning women and citizenship, was proposed in the US in 1923. The amendment passed Congress in 1972 but was ultimately defeated, falling just three states short of the required [[three-quarters majority]] on June 30, 1982. Some conservatives, particularly [[Phyllis Schlafly]], felt that its passage would entail adverse consequences, including making girls subject to the [[military draft]], requiring taxpayer-funded [[abortion]], the end of [[single-sex schools]] and classes, requiring the issuance of [[homosexual marriage]] licenses, and the revocation of laws that protect women in dangerous jobs, such as factory or mining work. Indeed, in states that passed their own versions of ERA, several of these results were subsequently ordered by courts.<ref>For example, the [[Hawaii]] and [[Massachusetts]] Supreme Courts illegally ordered the issuance of homosexual "marriage" licenses based in part on their on their state ERAs, and the [[New Mexico]] Supreme Court illegally ordered taxpayer-funded abortion based on its state ERA.</ref>

The feminist movement in the West evolved in the 1980s with the rise of so-called [[Post-Feminism]] (Third-wave feminism), which stresses that women have many rights that go unrecognized, often by women themselves, in everyday life, and in the [[Critical legal studies|American legal structure]]. Most members of the feminist movement support reproductive rights currently guaranteed by American law, including the legal right to abortion. This stance is opposed by many conservatives. Third-wave feminism has been highly influenced by postmodern thought, and is a more intellectual form of feminism. It fights against the systems that it sees as detrimental to women as a group, systems designed to keep women in traditional roles, in contrast with second-wave feminism, which fought for equal rights and pay with men in a fight against the traditional status of women as second class citizens. Another distinction made from second-wave feminism is the claimed recognition of the struggles faced by women who are minorities, disabled, immigrants, etc. (intersection theory), as most second-wave feminists focused only on white suburban middle-class able-bodied women. Second-wave feminism, however, was not always a good thing, as it pushed for abortion.

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

Dr. [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]], a staunch advocate of [[civil rights]] and [[non-violence]] said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection." <ref>''Stride Toward Freedom : The Montgomery Story'', Martin Luther King, Jr., Harper and Rowe, New York, 1958, p. 203.</ref>

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for ''American Thinker'', links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and [[Marxism|Marx]], is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the State."<ref>Larrey Anderson, ''The Feminine Mistake'', ''American Thinker'', November 29, 2009</ref>

==Critique==

[[Christine Hoff Sommers]] wrote:
:... The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. [https://www.amazon.com/WAR-AGAINST-BOYS-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849577]

==Feminism and reason==

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

Feminists in the [[Swedish]] government on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2017, were urged by the Iranian women's right activist Masih Alinejad “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to wear the compulsory [[hijab]] while visiting Iran. The pleas were ignored. The Jihad Watch website reported,<ref>[https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/swedens-first-feminist-government-dons-hijabs-in-iran ]</ref>
{{Quotebox|Sweden’s female leaders have not only betrayed all women who fight for equality globally, but they have also fully exposed how confused they are: they are so-called feminists who – for example — furiously insist on control over their own bodies to choose abortion, but they are willing to fully submit to male dominance at the demand of Muslim men to dictate their clothing. And they did so in front of a global audience to boot.}}

==Cultural Marxism==
While the Feminist movement may contribute to the [[Cultural Marxist]] undermining of [[family values]] , the main cause is [[divorce|marital breakdown]], and fathers who abandon their family, or fail to contribute to the raising of their children, Studies show that:
*63 percent of youth suicides take place in fatherless homes.
*90 percent of all homeless youth and runaways are from fatherless homes, which is a whopping 32 times the national average.
*85 percent of all children with behavior issues come from fatherless homes, 20 times the national average.
*80 percent of rapists with established anger issues come from fatherless homes, 14 times the national average.
*71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*70 percent of those in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*85 percent of all juveniles in prison come from single-parent households, 20 times the national average.
*90 percent of adolescent repeat arson offenders are from fatherless homes.
*Fatherless children are nearly twice as likely to be victims of abuse or neglect.<ref>https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/bowling-alone-how-washington-has-helped-destroy-american-civil-society-and-family-life/</ref>

== Feminism and population decline ==

The historian Martin van Creveld wrote in his book ''Equality: The Impossible Quest':
{{Cquote|In many modern societies, the advent of feminism has caused men and women to be placed on a more equal footing than ever before. The catch is that, in most of the societies in question, women, desperately trying to achieve what they see as equality, no longer bear enough children to maintain the population. Some countries, such as the U.S., are making up for the deficit by importing millions of foreigners. Others, such as Japan, seem resigned to gradual demographic decline and hope that robots will make up the difference. If demographics count for anything, the future of patriarchy — not the comparatively mild form of patriarchy that is said to have characterized the West, but the more rigorous [[Islam]]ic variety—seems assured...

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

See [[Quotations about Feminism]]

== Atheist feminism ==

''See also:'' [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women]]
[[File:Annie Laurie Gaylor.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]] is an atheist feminist. She is co-president of the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]].

Gaylor's husband, [[Dan Barker]], who heads the organization along with her, is usually the person invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization's leader and her many books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref> See: [[Atheism and women]]

[[Atheist feminism]] is a type of feminism whose advocates are [[Atheism|atheists]].

Writing on the [[Atheism and sexism|sexism within the atheist population]], atheist Victoria Bekiempis wrote in a ''Guardian'' article entitled ''Why the [[New Atheism]] is a boys' club'':
{{cquote|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]], who founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation with her mother, Anne Nicol Gaylor, in 1978, sums it up succinctly: “One word — sexism.” Gaylor’s husband, Dan Barker, who helms the organization along with her, is usually the one invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization’s leader and her numerous books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>}}

Feminists who are [[theism|theists]] often belong to religious bodies which practice [[liberal]] theology. In addition, some feminists practice goddess worship. Since atheism rejects theism, atheistic feminism rejects/disbelieves in the existence of God or gods (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).

=== Atheism, women, men and atheist feminism ===

Since most atheists lean Left politically (see: [[Atheism and politics]]) most atheist women are feminists. However, this may not apply to atheist men or apply to a lesser degree, given that a significant majority of atheist are men and that the men's rights movement has many atheist men within it. [[Reddit]] is a popular place for atheists and a Reddit survey found that 94% of Men's Rights Movement supporters indicated that they had no religion (see also: [[Reddit atheism]]).<ref>[http://www.rawstory.com/2014/04/confirmed-mens-rights-activism-is-for-misogynists-without-god/ Confirmed: "Men’s Rights Activism" Is For Misogynists Without God], ''Raw Story''</ref> YouTube's most popular atheist is [[TheAmazingAtheist]] who is a men's rights activist. Another popular YouTube atheist [[Thunderf00t]] is very critical of feminism within atheism (See also: [[Atheism plus]]).

=== Atheist movement, feminism and schism within atheism ===

Within the [[atheist movement]] post [[New Atheism]] and the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy, there has been a lot of conflict between [[Atheism|atheists]] concerning feminism. One of the results of the conflict was the new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] losing a lot of public support and support among the irreligious (see: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]]).

=== Atheist feminism and its view of religion ===

See: [[Atheist feminism and religion]]

== Intersectionality==
As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing "identity groups." In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress. For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender? Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity. Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.
== Femen ==

''See also:'' [[Femen]] and [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women]]

[[Femen]] is a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] radical feminist activist group which is now based in Paris. According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', "Femen’s members consider [[atheism]] to be a fundamental tenet of the group’s ideology."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/12/meet-femen-naked-shock-troops-feminism-who-greeted-trump-with-topless-protest-paris/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb5ef3499053 Meet Femen, the ‘naked shock troops of feminism’ who greeted Trump with a topless protest in Paris], By Antonia Noori Farzan, Washington Post, November 12, 2018</ref>

Femen engages in topless publicity stunts/protests. Femen was one of the first radical feminist organizations to gain transnational media publicity.

== Christianity and women's rights ==

See: [[Christianity and women's rights]]

==See also==

*[[Anti-Feminism]]
*[[Me Too Movement]]
*[[Essay:Conservative Women Vs. Feminism]]
*[[Feminism and housewives]]
*[[Feminist style]]
*[[Gender equality]]
*[[Gender police]]
*[[Feminists for Life]]
*[[Feminism and reason]]
*[[Feminist hypocrisy]]
*[[Battered woman syndrome]]
*[[Communism and feminism]]
*[[Feminist myths]]
*[[Feminist nitpicking]]
*[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Liberal totalitarianism]]
*[[The personal is political]]
*[[Misandry]]
*[[Erica Jong]]
*[[Trans-exclusionary feminism]]
{{liberalism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-ftIGVsCI Dana Loesch Rips Feminists] on [[Louder With Crowder]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_ESpTudus #SJW Feminist Myths Destroyed by Karen Straughan] on Louder With Crowder
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRj2qMLq8SY Feminism & Fat Pride: The Unholy Alliance] on Louder With Crowder with [[Paul Joseph Watson]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYo1ewgG94M The Truth About 'Rape Culture'] by Paul Joseph Watson
*[http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/ The Feminist eZine] Archive of articles about Feminist History.
*[http://www.cia-on-campus.org/surveil/steinem.html Gloria Steinem and the CIA], ''The New York Times'', February 21, 1967.
*[https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem], Nancy Borman, ''The Village Voice''.
*[http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man?], Christina Hoff Sommers, ''The American'' March/April 2008.
*[https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/f0wr6b/conservatives_find_unlikely_ally_in_fighting/ Conservatives find unlikely ally in fighting transgender rights: Radical feminists], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', February 8, 2020.

{{Communism}}

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Feminism]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Feminism

2022-09-12T13:09:19Z

RobLeonardWoo: See Lede. Supposed to be brief and concise.

[[Image:Braque woman 400pix.jpg|thumb|200px|''Woman with a guitar'' by [[Georges Braque]], 1913.]]
'''Feminism''' is a destructive ideology that causes an alienation in affection by women for men. Feminism denies or downplays differences between men and women; feminism opposes homemaking, child-rearing, and [[homeschooling]] by women; and feminism promotes participation by women in predominantly male activities regardless of their life pursuits or interests. Most prominent modern feminists support [[abortion]].

Attributes common to many feminists include an [[entitlement mentality]] and a bit of an attitude, such as a "chip on one's shoulder" despite benefiting from a life of privilege.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSo-q2Dq1aY ''Mickey Randleman - _Feminist_ (IWPS 2014) - 1080P HD_this video was deleted by buttons youtube channel'']</ref>

On a personal level feminism can disrupt marriages, relationships, child-rearing, education and the workplace. The feminist ideology is particularly dominant in elite universities, many large corporations, and competitive women's team sports. Feminism claims it wants to make men and women equal but in reality, it opposes any sort of support for men.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2015/11/18/male-university-of-york-student-commits-suicide-on-day-his-university-ditches-international-mens-day-after-pressure-from-feminists/ "Male University of York Student Commits Suicide on Day His University Ditches International Men’s day"]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow ''Feminists protesting Men's Rights talk pull fire alarm, 4/4/2013'']</ref>

Feminism was originally an expression used by [[suffragettes]] – who were predominantly [[pro-life]]<ref>[http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/wallace4.html ''Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion'']</ref><ref>''"There is no question that she deplored the practice of abortion, as did every one of her colleagues in the suffrage movement."'' [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ''Desperately Seeking Susan''] [[New York Times]] (13 October 2006)</ref><ref>[http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/foremoth.htm ''Voices of our Feminist Foremothers''] Feminists for Life</ref> – to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. By the 1970s, however, at the height of what was termed Second-wave feminism, [[liberals]] had changed the meaning to represent people who favored [[abortion]] and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole. Today in the midst of what is called Third-wave feminism, also known as Feminazism, some feminists are enforcers of [[liberal censorship]] and [[political correctness]], at the expense of [[free speech]]. In fact, much of what drove Second-wave feminism and what now drives Third-wave feminism was derived from Communist doctrine and both have a great deal in common, including the shared goal of the destruction of the family and the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity (via Goal 26 of the 1963 Communist goals for America).<ref>[https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2014/09/04/feminism-is-communism/ Feminism is Communism]</ref><ref>[http://fathersforlife.org/feminism/hubbard1.htm Feminist family politics and their roots in Communist ideology]</ref>

==Opinions of most feminists==

Most feminists

* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike. We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."
* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>
* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).
** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).
* conveniently pretend that there are no meaningful differences between men and women when that advances [[liberal]] causes (e.g., women and men equally in military combat, to weaken the U.S. military), but reject equality when that results in more money to women (e.g., [[VAWA]] funding of women's groups).
* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).
* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".
* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>
* support [[affirmative action]] for women.
* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/ Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>
* believe marriage implies "female servitude" when it is in fact a mutual bond.
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".
* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'
* support the [[homosexual agenda]].
* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>
* demands that women choose a career over raising children without any remorse.
* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".
* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].
* Denounce and demean any women who have more feminine traits and embrace their femininity.

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

==History==
Roots of the movement in the United States and the United Kingdom include the [[suffrage|Women's Suffrage]] movement of the early 1900s (First-wave feminism) and the Women's Liberation (Second-wave feminism) movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminism was glamourized in the 1940s and 1950s by Hollywood film stars such as [[Joan Crawford]], attempting to portray a single mother as having a successful career and family without a husband. Second-wave feminism had its roots from [[Betty Friedan]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], who both advocated for the abolition of the career of housewife with the false implication that it was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp or a parasite, though they are more akin to the later third-wave feminism, as they fought against what they saw as patriarchal systems designed to hold women down. Another notable feminist was Simone Veil, who was instrumental to legalizing abortion in France. One of her key methods to its legalization was citing her experience as a holocaust survivor.<ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/30/534974403/french-politician-simone-veil-holocaust-survivor-and-abortion-pioneer-dies-at-89</ref>

The [[Equal Rights Amendment]] (ERA), whose proponents claimed would address the inadequacies of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] concerning women and citizenship, was proposed in the US in 1923. The amendment passed Congress in 1972 but was ultimately defeated, falling just three states short of the required [[three-quarters majority]] on June 30, 1982. Some conservatives, particularly [[Phyllis Schlafly]], felt that its passage would entail adverse consequences, including making girls subject to the [[military draft]], requiring taxpayer-funded [[abortion]], the end of [[single-sex schools]] and classes, requiring the issuance of [[homosexual marriage]] licenses, and the revocation of laws that protect women in dangerous jobs, such as factory or mining work. Indeed, in states that passed their own versions of ERA, several of these results were subsequently ordered by courts.<ref>For example, the [[Hawaii]] and [[Massachusetts]] Supreme Courts illegally ordered the issuance of homosexual "marriage" licenses based in part on their on their state ERAs, and the [[New Mexico]] Supreme Court illegally ordered taxpayer-funded abortion based on its state ERA.</ref>

The feminist movement in the West evolved in the 1980s with the rise of so-called [[Post-Feminism]] (Third-wave feminism), which stresses that women have many rights that go unrecognized, often by women themselves, in everyday life, and in the [[Critical legal studies|American legal structure]]. Most members of the feminist movement support reproductive rights currently guaranteed by American law, including the legal right to abortion. This stance is opposed by many conservatives. Third-wave feminism has been highly influenced by postmodern thought, and is a more intellectual form of feminism. It fights against the systems that it sees as detrimental to women as a group, systems designed to keep women in traditional roles, in contrast with second-wave feminism, which fought for equal rights and pay with men in a fight against the traditional status of women as second class citizens. Another distinction made from second-wave feminism is the claimed recognition of the struggles faced by women who are minorities, disabled, immigrants, etc. (intersection theory), as most second-wave feminists focused only on white suburban middle-class able-bodied women. Second-wave feminism, however, was not always a good thing, as it pushed for abortion.

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

Dr. [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]], a staunch advocate of [[civil rights]] and [[non-violence]] said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection." <ref>''Stride Toward Freedom : The Montgomery Story'', Martin Luther King, Jr., Harper and Rowe, New York, 1958, p. 203.</ref>

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for ''American Thinker'', links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and [[Marxism|Marx]], is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the State."<ref>Larrey Anderson, ''The Feminine Mistake'', ''American Thinker'', November 29, 2009</ref>

==Critique==

[[Christine Hoff Sommers]] wrote:
:... The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. [https://www.amazon.com/WAR-AGAINST-BOYS-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849577]

==Feminism and reason==

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

Feminists in the [[Swedish]] government on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2017, were urged by the Iranian women's right activist Masih Alinejad “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to wear the compulsory [[hijab]] while visiting Iran. The pleas were ignored. The Jihad Watch website reported,<ref>[https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/swedens-first-feminist-government-dons-hijabs-in-iran ]</ref>
{{Quotebox|Sweden’s female leaders have not only betrayed all women who fight for equality globally, but they have also fully exposed how confused they are: they are so-called feminists who – for example — furiously insist on control over their own bodies to choose abortion, but they are willing to fully submit to male dominance at the demand of Muslim men to dictate their clothing. And they did so in front of a global audience to boot.}}

==Cultural Marxism==
While the Feminist movement may contribute to the [[Cultural Marxist]] undermining of [[family values]] , the main cause is [[divorce|marital breakdown]], and fathers who abandon their family, or fail to contribute to the raising of their children, Studies show that:
*63 percent of youth suicides take place in fatherless homes.
*90 percent of all homeless youth and runaways are from fatherless homes, which is a whopping 32 times the national average.
*85 percent of all children with behavior issues come from fatherless homes, 20 times the national average.
*80 percent of rapists with established anger issues come from fatherless homes, 14 times the national average.
*71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*70 percent of those in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*85 percent of all juveniles in prison come from single-parent households, 20 times the national average.
*90 percent of adolescent repeat arson offenders are from fatherless homes.
*Fatherless children are nearly twice as likely to be victims of abuse or neglect.<ref>https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/bowling-alone-how-washington-has-helped-destroy-american-civil-society-and-family-life/</ref>

== Feminism and population decline ==

The historian Martin van Creveld wrote in his book ''Equality: The Impossible Quest':
{{Cquote|In many modern societies, the advent of feminism has caused men and women to be placed on a more equal footing than ever before. The catch is that, in most of the societies in question, women, desperately trying to achieve what they see as equality, no longer bear enough children to maintain the population. Some countries, such as the U.S., are making up for the deficit by importing millions of foreigners. Others, such as Japan, seem resigned to gradual demographic decline and hope that robots will make up the difference. If demographics count for anything, the future of patriarchy — not the comparatively mild form of patriarchy that is said to have characterized the West, but the more rigorous [[Islam]]ic variety—seems assured...

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

See [[Quotations about Feminism]]

== Atheist feminism ==

''See also:'' [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women]]
[[File:Annie Laurie Gaylor.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]] is an atheist feminist. She is co-president of the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]].

Gaylor's husband, [[Dan Barker]], who heads the organization along with her, is usually the person invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization's leader and her many books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref> See: [[Atheism and women]]

[[Atheist feminism]] is a type of feminism whose advocates are [[Atheism|atheists]].

Writing on the [[Atheism and sexism|sexism within the atheist population]], atheist Victoria Bekiempis wrote in a ''Guardian'' article entitled ''Why the [[New Atheism]] is a boys' club'':
{{cquote|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]], who founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation with her mother, Anne Nicol Gaylor, in 1978, sums it up succinctly: “One word — sexism.” Gaylor’s husband, Dan Barker, who helms the organization along with her, is usually the one invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization’s leader and her numerous books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>}}

Feminists who are [[theism|theists]] often belong to religious bodies which practice [[liberal]] theology. In addition, some feminists practice goddess worship. Since atheism rejects theism, atheistic feminism rejects/disbelieves in the existence of God or gods (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).

=== Atheism, women, men and atheist feminism ===

Since most atheists lean Left politically (see: [[Atheism and politics]]) most atheist women are feminists. However, this may not apply to atheist men or apply to a lesser degree, given that a significant majority of atheist are men and that the men's rights movement has many atheist men within it. [[Reddit]] is a popular place for atheists and a Reddit survey found that 94% of Men's Rights Movement supporters indicated that they had no religion (see also: [[Reddit atheism]]).<ref>[http://www.rawstory.com/2014/04/confirmed-mens-rights-activism-is-for-misogynists-without-god/ Confirmed: "Men’s Rights Activism" Is For Misogynists Without God], ''Raw Story''</ref> YouTube's most popular atheist is [[TheAmazingAtheist]] who is a men's rights activist. Another popular YouTube atheist [[Thunderf00t]] is very critical of feminism within atheism (See also: [[Atheism plus]]).

=== Atheist movement, feminism and schism within atheism ===

Within the [[atheist movement]] post [[New Atheism]] and the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy, there has been a lot of conflict between [[Atheism|atheists]] concerning feminism. One of the results of the conflict was the new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] losing a lot of public support and support among the irreligious (see: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]]).

=== Atheist feminism and its view of religion ===

See: [[Atheist feminism and religion]]

== Intersectionality==
As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing "identity groups." In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress. For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender? Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity. Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.
== Femen ==

''See also:'' [[Femen]] and [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women]]

[[Femen]] is a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] radical feminist activist group which is now based in Paris. According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', "Femen’s members consider [[atheism]] to be a fundamental tenet of the group’s ideology."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/12/meet-femen-naked-shock-troops-feminism-who-greeted-trump-with-topless-protest-paris/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb5ef3499053 Meet Femen, the ‘naked shock troops of feminism’ who greeted Trump with a topless protest in Paris], By Antonia Noori Farzan, Washington Post, November 12, 2018</ref>

Femen engages in topless publicity stunts/protests. Femen was one of the first radical feminist organizations to gain transnational media publicity.

== Christianity and women's rights ==

See: [[Christianity and women's rights]]

==See also==

*[[Anti-Feminism]]
*[[Me Too Movement]]
*[[Essay:Conservative Women Vs. Feminism]]
*[[Feminism and housewives]]
*[[Feminist style]]
*[[Gender equality]]
*[[Gender police]]
*[[Feminists for Life]]
*[[Feminism and reason]]
*[[Feminist hypocrisy]]
*[[Battered woman syndrome]]
*[[Communism and feminism]]
*[[Feminist myths]]
*[[Feminist nitpicking]]
*[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Liberal totalitarianism]]
*[[The personal is political]]
*[[Misandry]]
*[[Erica Jong]]
*[[Trans-exclusionary feminism]]
{{liberalism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-ftIGVsCI Dana Loesch Rips Feminists] on [[Louder With Crowder]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_ESpTudus #SJW Feminist Myths Destroyed by Karen Straughan] on Louder With Crowder
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRj2qMLq8SY Feminism & Fat Pride: The Unholy Alliance] on Louder With Crowder with [[Paul Joseph Watson]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYo1ewgG94M The Truth About 'Rape Culture'] by Paul Joseph Watson
*[http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/ The Feminist eZine] Archive of articles about Feminist History.
*[http://www.cia-on-campus.org/surveil/steinem.html Gloria Steinem and the CIA], ''The New York Times'', February 21, 1967.
*[https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem], Nancy Borman, ''The Village Voice''.
*[http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man?], Christina Hoff Sommers, ''The American'' March/April 2008.
*[https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/f0wr6b/conservatives_find_unlikely_ally_in_fighting/ Conservatives find unlikely ally in fighting transgender rights: Radical feminists], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', February 8, 2020.

{{Communism}}

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Feminism]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Feminism

2022-09-12T13:05:46Z

RobLeonardWoo: Better word

[[Image:Braque woman 400pix.jpg|thumb|200px|''Woman with a guitar'' by [[Georges Braque]], 1913.]]
'''Feminism''' is a destructive ideology that causes an alienation in affection by women for men. Feminism denies or downplays differences between men and women; feminism opposes homemaking, child-rearing, and [[homeschooling]] by women; and feminism promotes participation by women in predominantly male activities regardless of their life pursuits or interests. Most prominent modern feminists support [[abortion]].

Attributes common to many feminists include an [[entitlement mentality]] and a bit of an attitude, such as a "chip on one's shoulder" despite benefiting from a life of privilege.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSo-q2Dq1aY ''Mickey Randleman - _Feminist_ (IWPS 2014) - 1080P HD_this video was deleted by buttons youtube channel'']</ref>

On a personal level feminism can disrupt marriages, relationships, child-rearing, education and the workplace. The feminist ideology is particularly dominant in elite universities, many large corporations, and competitive women's team sports. Feminism claims it wants to make men and women equal but in reality, it opposes any sort of support for men.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2015/11/18/male-university-of-york-student-commits-suicide-on-day-his-university-ditches-international-mens-day-after-pressure-from-feminists/ "Male University of York Student Commits Suicide on Day His University Ditches International Men’s day"]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow ''Feminists protesting Men's Rights talk pull fire alarm, 4/4/2013'']</ref>

Feminism was originally an expression used by [[suffragettes]] – who were predominantly [[pro-life]]<ref>[http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/wallace4.html ''Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion'']</ref><ref>''"There is no question that she deplored the practice of abortion, as did every one of her colleagues in the suffrage movement."'' [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ''Desperately Seeking Susan''] [[New York Times]] (13 October 2006)</ref><ref>[http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/foremoth.htm ''Voices of our Feminist Foremothers''] Feminists for Life</ref> – to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. By the 1970s, however, at the height of what was termed Second-wave feminism, [[liberals]] had changed the meaning to represent people who favored [[abortion]] and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole. Today in the midst of what is called Third-wave feminism, also known as Feminazism, some feminists are enforcers of [[liberal censorship]] and [[political correctness]], at the expense of [[free speech]]. In fact, much of what drove Second-wave feminism and what now drives Third-wave feminism was derived from Communist doctrine and both have a great deal in common, including the shared goal of the destruction of the family and the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity (via Goal 26 of the 1963 Communist goals for America).<ref>[https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2014/09/04/feminism-is-communism/ Feminism is Communism]</ref><ref>[http://fathersforlife.org/feminism/hubbard1.htm Feminist family politics and their roots in Communist ideology]</ref>

Most feminists

* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike. We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."
* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>
* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).
** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).
* conveniently pretend that there are no meaningful differences between men and women when that advances [[liberal]] causes (e.g., women and men equally in military combat, to weaken the U.S. military), but reject equality when that results in more money to women (e.g., [[VAWA]] funding of women's groups).
* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).
* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".
* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>
* support [[affirmative action]] for women.
* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/ Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>
* believe marriage implies "female servitude" when it is in fact a mutual bond.
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".
* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'
* support the [[homosexual agenda]].
* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>
* demands that women choose a career over raising children without any remorse.
* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".
* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].
* Denounce and demean any women who have more feminine traits and embrace their femininity.

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

==History==
Roots of the movement in the United States and the United Kingdom include the [[suffrage|Women's Suffrage]] movement of the early 1900s (First-wave feminism) and the Women's Liberation (Second-wave feminism) movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminism was glamourized in the 1940s and 1950s by Hollywood film stars such as [[Joan Crawford]], attempting to portray a single mother as having a successful career and family without a husband. Second-wave feminism had its roots from [[Betty Friedan]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], who both advocated for the abolition of the career of housewife with the false implication that it was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp or a parasite, though they are more akin to the later third-wave feminism, as they fought against what they saw as patriarchal systems designed to hold women down. Another notable feminist was Simone Veil, who was instrumental to legalizing abortion in France. One of her key methods to its legalization was citing her experience as a holocaust survivor.<ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/30/534974403/french-politician-simone-veil-holocaust-survivor-and-abortion-pioneer-dies-at-89</ref>

The [[Equal Rights Amendment]] (ERA), whose proponents claimed would address the inadequacies of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] concerning women and citizenship, was proposed in the US in 1923. The amendment passed Congress in 1972 but was ultimately defeated, falling just three states short of the required [[three-quarters majority]] on June 30, 1982. Some conservatives, particularly [[Phyllis Schlafly]], felt that its passage would entail adverse consequences, including making girls subject to the [[military draft]], requiring taxpayer-funded [[abortion]], the end of [[single-sex schools]] and classes, requiring the issuance of [[homosexual marriage]] licenses, and the revocation of laws that protect women in dangerous jobs, such as factory or mining work. Indeed, in states that passed their own versions of ERA, several of these results were subsequently ordered by courts.<ref>For example, the [[Hawaii]] and [[Massachusetts]] Supreme Courts illegally ordered the issuance of homosexual "marriage" licenses based in part on their on their state ERAs, and the [[New Mexico]] Supreme Court illegally ordered taxpayer-funded abortion based on its state ERA.</ref>

The feminist movement in the West evolved in the 1980s with the rise of so-called [[Post-Feminism]] (Third-wave feminism), which stresses that women have many rights that go unrecognized, often by women themselves, in everyday life, and in the [[Critical legal studies|American legal structure]]. Most members of the feminist movement support reproductive rights currently guaranteed by American law, including the legal right to abortion. This stance is opposed by many conservatives. Third-wave feminism has been highly influenced by postmodern thought, and is a more intellectual form of feminism. It fights against the systems that it sees as detrimental to women as a group, systems designed to keep women in traditional roles, in contrast with second-wave feminism, which fought for equal rights and pay with men in a fight against the traditional status of women as second class citizens. Another distinction made from second-wave feminism is the claimed recognition of the struggles faced by women who are minorities, disabled, immigrants, etc. (intersection theory), as most second-wave feminists focused only on white suburban middle-class able-bodied women. Second-wave feminism, however, was not always a good thing, as it pushed for abortion.

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

Dr. [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]], a staunch advocate of [[civil rights]] and [[non-violence]] said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection." <ref>''Stride Toward Freedom : The Montgomery Story'', Martin Luther King, Jr., Harper and Rowe, New York, 1958, p. 203.</ref>

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for ''American Thinker'', links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and [[Marxism|Marx]], is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the State."<ref>Larrey Anderson, ''The Feminine Mistake'', ''American Thinker'', November 29, 2009</ref>

==Critique==

[[Christine Hoff Sommers]] wrote:
:... The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. [https://www.amazon.com/WAR-AGAINST-BOYS-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849577]

==Feminism and reason==

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

Feminists in the [[Swedish]] government on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2017, were urged by the Iranian women's right activist Masih Alinejad “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to wear the compulsory [[hijab]] while visiting Iran. The pleas were ignored. The Jihad Watch website reported,<ref>[https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/swedens-first-feminist-government-dons-hijabs-in-iran ]</ref>
{{Quotebox|Sweden’s female leaders have not only betrayed all women who fight for equality globally, but they have also fully exposed how confused they are: they are so-called feminists who – for example — furiously insist on control over their own bodies to choose abortion, but they are willing to fully submit to male dominance at the demand of Muslim men to dictate their clothing. And they did so in front of a global audience to boot.}}

==Cultural Marxism==
While the Feminist movement may contribute to the [[Cultural Marxist]] undermining of [[family values]] , the main cause is [[divorce|marital breakdown]], and fathers who abandon their family, or fail to contribute to the raising of their children, Studies show that:
*63 percent of youth suicides take place in fatherless homes.
*90 percent of all homeless youth and runaways are from fatherless homes, which is a whopping 32 times the national average.
*85 percent of all children with behavior issues come from fatherless homes, 20 times the national average.
*80 percent of rapists with established anger issues come from fatherless homes, 14 times the national average.
*71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*70 percent of those in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*85 percent of all juveniles in prison come from single-parent households, 20 times the national average.
*90 percent of adolescent repeat arson offenders are from fatherless homes.
*Fatherless children are nearly twice as likely to be victims of abuse or neglect.<ref>https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/bowling-alone-how-washington-has-helped-destroy-american-civil-society-and-family-life/</ref>

== Feminism and population decline ==

The historian Martin van Creveld wrote in his book ''Equality: The Impossible Quest':
{{Cquote|In many modern societies, the advent of feminism has caused men and women to be placed on a more equal footing than ever before. The catch is that, in most of the societies in question, women, desperately trying to achieve what they see as equality, no longer bear enough children to maintain the population. Some countries, such as the U.S., are making up for the deficit by importing millions of foreigners. Others, such as Japan, seem resigned to gradual demographic decline and hope that robots will make up the difference. If demographics count for anything, the future of patriarchy — not the comparatively mild form of patriarchy that is said to have characterized the West, but the more rigorous [[Islam]]ic variety—seems assured...

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

See [[Quotations about Feminism]]

== Atheist feminism ==

''See also:'' [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women]]
[[File:Annie Laurie Gaylor.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]] is an atheist feminist. She is co-president of the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]].

Gaylor's husband, [[Dan Barker]], who heads the organization along with her, is usually the person invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization's leader and her many books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref> See: [[Atheism and women]]

[[Atheist feminism]] is a type of feminism whose advocates are [[Atheism|atheists]].

Writing on the [[Atheism and sexism|sexism within the atheist population]], atheist Victoria Bekiempis wrote in a ''Guardian'' article entitled ''Why the [[New Atheism]] is a boys' club'':
{{cquote|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]], who founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation with her mother, Anne Nicol Gaylor, in 1978, sums it up succinctly: “One word — sexism.” Gaylor’s husband, Dan Barker, who helms the organization along with her, is usually the one invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization’s leader and her numerous books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>}}

Feminists who are [[theism|theists]] often belong to religious bodies which practice [[liberal]] theology. In addition, some feminists practice goddess worship. Since atheism rejects theism, atheistic feminism rejects/disbelieves in the existence of God or gods (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).

=== Atheism, women, men and atheist feminism ===

Since most atheists lean Left politically (see: [[Atheism and politics]]) most atheist women are feminists. However, this may not apply to atheist men or apply to a lesser degree, given that a significant majority of atheist are men and that the men's rights movement has many atheist men within it. [[Reddit]] is a popular place for atheists and a Reddit survey found that 94% of Men's Rights Movement supporters indicated that they had no religion (see also: [[Reddit atheism]]).<ref>[http://www.rawstory.com/2014/04/confirmed-mens-rights-activism-is-for-misogynists-without-god/ Confirmed: "Men’s Rights Activism" Is For Misogynists Without God], ''Raw Story''</ref> YouTube's most popular atheist is [[TheAmazingAtheist]] who is a men's rights activist. Another popular YouTube atheist [[Thunderf00t]] is very critical of feminism within atheism (See also: [[Atheism plus]]).

=== Atheist movement, feminism and schism within atheism ===

Within the [[atheist movement]] post [[New Atheism]] and the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy, there has been a lot of conflict between [[Atheism|atheists]] concerning feminism. One of the results of the conflict was the new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] losing a lot of public support and support among the irreligious (see: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]]).

=== Atheist feminism and its view of religion ===

See: [[Atheist feminism and religion]]

== Intersectionality==
As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing "identity groups." In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress. For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender? Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity. Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.
== Femen ==

''See also:'' [[Femen]] and [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women]]

[[Femen]] is a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] radical feminist activist group which is now based in Paris. According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', "Femen’s members consider [[atheism]] to be a fundamental tenet of the group’s ideology."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/12/meet-femen-naked-shock-troops-feminism-who-greeted-trump-with-topless-protest-paris/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb5ef3499053 Meet Femen, the ‘naked shock troops of feminism’ who greeted Trump with a topless protest in Paris], By Antonia Noori Farzan, Washington Post, November 12, 2018</ref>

Femen engages in topless publicity stunts/protests. Femen was one of the first radical feminist organizations to gain transnational media publicity.

== Christianity and women's rights ==

See: [[Christianity and women's rights]]

==See also==

*[[Anti-Feminism]]
*[[Me Too Movement]]
*[[Essay:Conservative Women Vs. Feminism]]
*[[Feminism and housewives]]
*[[Feminist style]]
*[[Gender equality]]
*[[Gender police]]
*[[Feminists for Life]]
*[[Feminism and reason]]
*[[Feminist hypocrisy]]
*[[Battered woman syndrome]]
*[[Communism and feminism]]
*[[Feminist myths]]
*[[Feminist nitpicking]]
*[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Liberal totalitarianism]]
*[[The personal is political]]
*[[Misandry]]
*[[Erica Jong]]
*[[Trans-exclusionary feminism]]
{{liberalism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-ftIGVsCI Dana Loesch Rips Feminists] on [[Louder With Crowder]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_ESpTudus #SJW Feminist Myths Destroyed by Karen Straughan] on Louder With Crowder
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRj2qMLq8SY Feminism & Fat Pride: The Unholy Alliance] on Louder With Crowder with [[Paul Joseph Watson]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYo1ewgG94M The Truth About 'Rape Culture'] by Paul Joseph Watson
*[http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/ The Feminist eZine] Archive of articles about Feminist History.
*[http://www.cia-on-campus.org/surveil/steinem.html Gloria Steinem and the CIA], ''The New York Times'', February 21, 1967.
*[https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem], Nancy Borman, ''The Village Voice''.
*[http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man?], Christina Hoff Sommers, ''The American'' March/April 2008.
*[https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/f0wr6b/conservatives_find_unlikely_ally_in_fighting/ Conservatives find unlikely ally in fighting transgender rights: Radical feminists], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', February 8, 2020.

{{Communism}}

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Feminism]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Vaccines and autism

2022-09-11T17:55:20Z

RobLeonardWoo: Deaths

Some people believe that [[vaccine]]s, particularly the "MMR" (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella) vaccine, cause [[autism]]. Serious medical research studies do not support this.

One proposed causal link arises from the very high rate of autism in New Jersey. According to a 2018 report associated with USA Today, that state has the highest rate of autism in the United States.<ref>https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/health/2018/04/26/nj-autism-rates-highest-united-states/551910002/</ref> However, its vaccination rate is among the lowest: According to a 2017 report from the American Academy of Pediatrics, New Jersey's rate of MMR vaccination in children was 89%; only four states (Washington, Colorado, Utah, and Indiana) had lower rates.<ref>https://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/aap-health-initiatives/immunizations/Pages/Across-America.aspx</ref>
Another report, from the Center for Disease Control in 2019, shows New Jersey about at the median.<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-managers/coverage/schoolvaxview/data-reports/coverage-trend/index.html</ref>

Speculation on the possible correlation between the MMR vaccine and autism seems to have been largely triggered by the work of [[Andrew Wakefield|Dr. Andrew Wakefield]]. This research has been discredited,<ref>https://healthland.time.com/2012/01/13/great-science-frauds/slide/andrew-wakefield/</ref> in large part because of fraud in selecting test subject (his study only consisted of 12 children) and reporting the results, and because he was a paid consultant to attorneys representing parents who believed their children had been harmed by vaccines. It should also be noted that Dr. Wakefield was attempting to create a competing vaccine at the time, which could explain his allegations.<ref>https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/1/1761317/-It-s-been-20-years-since-Andrew-Wakefield-s-vaccine-causes-autism-study-it-s-still-fraudulent</ref>

In August 1998, six months after ''The Lancet'' study, the UK withdrew the license for the importation of the single vaccines that were combined in the MMR.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csw6r9f4-rg</ref>

Since the late 1980s, when [[Big Pharma]] received special liability protection for vaccination, the number of vaccines given to young children has more than tripled, coinciding with a sharp rise in autism and other health problems.<ref>https://www.caledonianrecord.com/news/local-lawmaker-doctor-injected-into-vaccination-controversy/article_00387379-a162-5392-a376-893a02525d79.html</ref> However, injury and death from diseases such as [[diphtheria]], [[smallpox]], [[polio]], and [[measles]] have been more or less eliminated.

Mechanisms for a causal link between vaccination and autism have been proposed by researchers, including Dr. Andrew Wakefield. But with billions of dollars at stake based on vaccine mandates, retaliation is swift and severe against anyone who admits the possibility that vaccination may cause autism, or indeed cause any harm at all. Also, there may be [[atheist]]ic motivations for [[liberal denial]] about causes of autism, which is an impediment one's ability to read the [[Bible]] and strengthen one's [[faith]].

The [[CDC]] reports that autism continues to increase, up 30% in merely the last half-decade, to where it afflicts 1 in 68 today. It has been suggested that the main cause is increased pollution. There are significant differences in autism rates among states.

The [[liberal media]] is overwhelmingly pro-mandatory [[vaccine]], and tends to marginalize opposition as somehow being irrational:<ref>https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/vaccine-skeptics-find-unexpected-allies-conservative-gop</ref> "American skepticism toward vaccinations dates back at least to the [[Revolutionary War]], when [[George Washington]] was initially reluctant to inoculate his troops against [[smallpox]]." Smallpox has, through widespread vaccination, been largely eliminated in the developed world. However, because of anti-vac campaigns, measles has started to return.

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and autism]]

== References ==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:vaccines]]
[[Category:Autism]]

Compulsory vaccination

2022-09-11T17:40:39Z

RobLeonardWoo: Deaths

'''Compulsory vaccination''' exists as a condition of admission to [[public school]] in nearly all the states of the [[United States]]. Vaccine manufacturers lobby for these laws to maximize revenue on their products. Leftists and Liberals are strong supporters of compulsory vaccination.<ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3483914/</ref>

New vaccines have been required of schoolchildren for diseases that do not spread in school ([[HPV]]) or are rarely dangerous to schoolchildren, such as [[chickenpox]], and [[flu]]. Vaccination has also been required for [[diphtheria]], [[pertussis]], [[tetanus]] [[measles]], [[mumps]], [[rubella]], hib, meningococcal disease, pneumococcal disease, [[hepatitis B]] and [[hepatitis A]]. In the past many children died from diseases such as [[polio]], [[ smallpox]], [[measles]], and [[diphtheria]], etc.

All states have a [[religious]] exemption from compulsory vaccination except [[California]], [[New York]], [[Maine]], [[Mississippi]], [[West Virginia]]. Also, 17 states have a philosophical exemption, for anyone who does not want to vaccinate.<ref>https://www.nvic.org/Vaccine-Laws/state-vaccine-requirements.aspx</ref>

==See also==
*[[Social Services]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==
*[https://www.thenewamerican.com/print-magazine/item/32100-forced-vaccinations Forced Vaccinations: Is It Time for Big Brother to Become Your Doctor?], by Rebecca Terrell of ''[[The New American]]''

[[Category:Government]]
[[Category:Vaccines]]
[[Category:Law]]

Vaccine FAQ

2022-09-11T17:34:34Z

RobLeonardWoo:

'''1. How many different vaccines are children recommended to have?'''
:10-20 doses, and even more when [[booster shots]] are included.

'''2. Have there been cases of whooping cough and mumps in children who received these vaccinations?'''
:Vaccines have caused serious side effects and the disease itself in some children. Other vaccines, such as chickenpox, are only partially effective, and must be retaken every few years.

'''3. What risks and problems does any vaccine carry?'''
:Vaccine manufacturers admit that they cause serious effects including death. Less serious side effects include non-deadly, but painful reactions which can last for several days.

'''4. Is it possible to get mercury poisoning from vaccines?'''
:According to the EPA, a 20-pound child could safely tolerate 0.9 micrograms of mercury, but the flu shot contains 25 micrograms of mercury.

'''5. How many vaccines are required of children, as in [[New Jersey]]?'''
:It keeps increasing. As of the 2005-2006, there were twelve vaccines required for New Jersey children in elementary and middle school. We're probably over 20 now, including the multiple doses.<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/laws/downloads/izlaws05-06.pdf</ref>

'''6. In the past many people, especially children suffered, were injured, or died from [[smallpox]], [[diphtheria]], [[polio]], [[measles]], etc.

== References ==

<references/>
[[Category:Vaccines]]

Vaccine FAQ

2022-09-11T17:33:50Z

RobLeonardWoo: Addition.

'''1. How many different vaccines are children recommended to have?'''
:10-20 doses, and even more when [[booster shots]] are included.

'''2. Have there been cases of whooping cough and mumps in children who received these vaccinations?'''
:Vaccines have caused serious side effects and the disease itself in some children. Other vaccines, such as chickenpox, are only partially effective, and must be retaken every few years.

'''3. What risks and problems does any vaccine carry?'''
:Vaccine manufacturers admit that they cause serious effects including death. Less serious side effects include non-deadly, but painful reactions which can last for several days.

'''4. Is it possible to get mercury poisoning from vaccines?'''
:According to the EPA, a 20-pound child could safely tolerate 0.9 micrograms of mercury, but the flu shot contains 25 micrograms of mercury.

'''5. How many vaccines are required of children, as in [[New Jersey]]?'''
:It keeps increasing. As of the 2005-2006, there were twelve vaccines required for New Jersey children in elementary and middle school. We're probably over 20 now, including the multiple doses.<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/laws/downloads/izlaws05-06.pdf</ref>

'''6. In the past many people, especially children suffered, were injured, or died from [[smallpox]], [[diphtheria]], [[polio]], ]]measles]], etc.

== References ==

<references/>
[[Category:Vaccines]]

Feminism

2022-09-11T17:09:18Z

RobLeonardWoo: Inappropriate language for an encyclopaedia

[[Image:Braque woman 400pix.jpg|thumb|200px|''Woman with a guitar'' by [[Georges Braque]], 1913.]]
'''Feminism''' is a ideology that causes an alienation in affection by women for men. Feminism denies or downplays differences between men and women; feminism opposes homemaking, child-rearing, and [[homeschooling]] by women; and feminism promotes participation by women in predominantly male activities regardless of their life pursuits or interests. Most prominent modern feminists support [[abortion]].

Attributes common to many feminists include an [[entitlement mentality]] and a bit of an attitude, such as a "chip on one's shoulder" despite benefiting from a life of privilege.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSo-q2Dq1aY ''Mickey Randleman - _Feminist_ (IWPS 2014) - 1080P HD_this video was deleted by buttons youtube channel'']</ref>

On a personal level feminism can disrupt marriages, relationships, child-rearing, education and the workplace. The feminist ideology is particularly dominant in elite universities, many large corporations, and competitive women's team sports. Feminism claims it wants to make men and women equal but in reality, it opposes any sort of support for men.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2015/11/18/male-university-of-york-student-commits-suicide-on-day-his-university-ditches-international-mens-day-after-pressure-from-feminists/ "Male University of York Student Commits Suicide on Day His University Ditches International Men’s day"]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow ''Feminists protesting Men's Rights talk pull fire alarm, 4/4/2013'']</ref>

Feminism was originally an expression used by [[suffragettes]] – who were predominantly [[pro-life]]<ref>[http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/wallace4.html ''Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion'']</ref><ref>''"There is no question that she deplored the practice of abortion, as did every one of her colleagues in the suffrage movement."'' [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ''Desperately Seeking Susan''] [[New York Times]] (13 October 2006)</ref><ref>[http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/foremoth.htm ''Voices of our Feminist Foremothers''] Feminists for Life</ref> – to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. By the 1970s, however, at the height of what was termed Second-wave feminism, [[liberals]] had changed the meaning to represent people who favored [[abortion]] and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole. Today in the midst of what is called Third-wave feminism, also known as Feminazism, some feminists are enforcers of [[liberal censorship]] and [[political correctness]], at the expense of [[free speech]]. In fact, much of what drove Second-wave feminism and what now drives Third-wave feminism was derived from Communist doctrine and both have a great deal in common, including the shared goal of the destruction of the family and the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity (via Goal 26 of the 1963 Communist goals for America).<ref>[https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2014/09/04/feminism-is-communism/ Feminism is Communism]</ref><ref>[http://fathersforlife.org/feminism/hubbard1.htm Feminist family politics and their roots in Communist ideology]</ref>

== Ideology ==
* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike. We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."
* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>
* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).
** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).
* conveniently pretend that there are no meaningful differences between men and women when that advances [[liberal]] causes (e.g., women and men equally in military combat, to weaken the U.S. military), but reject equality when that results in more money to women (e.g., [[VAWA]] funding of women's groups).
* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).
* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".
* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>
* support [[affirmative action]] for women.
* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/ Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>
* believe marriage implies "female servitude" when it is in fact a mutual bond.
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".
* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'
* support the [[homosexual agenda]].
* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>
* demands that women choose a career over raising children without any remorse.
* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".
* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].
* Denounce and demean any women who have more feminine traits and embrace their femininity.

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

==History==
Roots of the movement in the United States and the United Kingdom include the [[suffrage|Women's Suffrage]] movement of the early 1900s (First-wave feminism) and the Women's Liberation (Second-wave feminism) movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminism was glamourized in the 1940s and 1950s by Hollywood film stars such as [[Joan Crawford]], attempting to portray a single mother as having a successful career and family without a husband. Second-wave feminism had its roots from [[Betty Friedan]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], who both advocated for the abolition of the career of housewife with the false implication that it was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp or a parasite, though they are more akin to the later third-wave feminism, as they fought against what they saw as patriarchal systems designed to hold women down. Another notable feminist was Simone Veil, who was instrumental to legalizing abortion in France. One of her key methods to its legalization was citing her experience as a holocaust survivor.<ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/30/534974403/french-politician-simone-veil-holocaust-survivor-and-abortion-pioneer-dies-at-89</ref>

The [[Equal Rights Amendment]] (ERA), whose proponents claimed would address the inadequacies of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] concerning women and citizenship, was proposed in the US in 1923. The amendment passed Congress in 1972 but was ultimately defeated, falling just three states short of the required [[three-quarters majority]] on June 30, 1982. Some conservatives, particularly [[Phyllis Schlafly]], felt that its passage would entail adverse consequences, including making girls subject to the [[military draft]], requiring taxpayer-funded [[abortion]], the end of [[single-sex schools]] and classes, requiring the issuance of [[homosexual marriage]] licenses, and the revocation of laws that protect women in dangerous jobs, such as factory or mining work. Indeed, in states that passed their own versions of ERA, several of these results were subsequently ordered by courts.<ref>For example, the [[Hawaii]] and [[Massachusetts]] Supreme Courts illegally ordered the issuance of homosexual "marriage" licenses based in part on their on their state ERAs, and the [[New Mexico]] Supreme Court illegally ordered taxpayer-funded abortion based on its state ERA.</ref>

The feminist movement in the West evolved in the 1980s with the rise of so-called [[Post-Feminism]] (Third-wave feminism), which stresses that women have many rights that go unrecognized, often by women themselves, in everyday life, and in the [[Critical legal studies|American legal structure]]. Most members of the feminist movement support reproductive rights currently guaranteed by American law, including the legal right to abortion. This stance is opposed by many conservatives. Third-wave feminism has been highly influenced by postmodern thought, and is a more intellectual form of feminism. It fights against the systems that it sees as detrimental to women as a group, systems designed to keep women in traditional roles, in contrast with second-wave feminism, which fought for equal rights and pay with men in a fight against the traditional status of women as second class citizens. Another distinction made from second-wave feminism is the claimed recognition of the struggles faced by women who are minorities, disabled, immigrants, etc. (intersection theory), as most second-wave feminists focused only on white suburban middle-class able-bodied women. Second-wave feminism, however, was not always a good thing, as it pushed for abortion.

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

Dr. [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]], a staunch advocate of [[civil rights]] and [[non-violence]] said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection." <ref>''Stride Toward Freedom : The Montgomery Story'', Martin Luther King, Jr., Harper and Rowe, New York, 1958, p. 203.</ref>

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for ''American Thinker'', links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and [[Marxism|Marx]], is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the State."<ref>Larrey Anderson, ''The Feminine Mistake'', ''American Thinker'', November 29, 2009</ref>

==Critique==

[[Christine Hoff Sommers]] wrote:
:... The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. [https://www.amazon.com/WAR-AGAINST-BOYS-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849577]

==Feminism and reason==

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

Feminists in the [[Swedish]] government on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2017, were urged by the Iranian women's right activist Masih Alinejad “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to wear the compulsory [[hijab]] while visiting Iran. The pleas were ignored. The Jihad Watch website reported,<ref>[https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/swedens-first-feminist-government-dons-hijabs-in-iran ]</ref>
{{Quotebox|Sweden’s female leaders have not only betrayed all women who fight for equality globally, but they have also fully exposed how confused they are: they are so-called feminists who – for example — furiously insist on control over their own bodies to choose abortion, but they are willing to fully submit to male dominance at the demand of Muslim men to dictate their clothing. And they did so in front of a global audience to boot.}}

==Cultural Marxism==
While the Feminist movement may contribute to the [[Cultural Marxist]] undermining of [[family values]] , the main cause is [[divorce|marital breakdown]], and fathers who abandon their family, or fail to contribute to the raising of their children, Studies show that:
*63 percent of youth suicides take place in fatherless homes.
*90 percent of all homeless youth and runaways are from fatherless homes, which is a whopping 32 times the national average.
*85 percent of all children with behavior issues come from fatherless homes, 20 times the national average.
*80 percent of rapists with established anger issues come from fatherless homes, 14 times the national average.
*71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*70 percent of those in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*85 percent of all juveniles in prison come from single-parent households, 20 times the national average.
*90 percent of adolescent repeat arson offenders are from fatherless homes.
*Fatherless children are nearly twice as likely to be victims of abuse or neglect.<ref>https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/bowling-alone-how-washington-has-helped-destroy-american-civil-society-and-family-life/</ref>

== Feminism and population decline ==

The historian Martin van Creveld wrote in his book ''Equality: The Impossible Quest':
{{Cquote|In many modern societies, the advent of feminism has caused men and women to be placed on a more equal footing than ever before. The catch is that, in most of the societies in question, women, desperately trying to achieve what they see as equality, no longer bear enough children to maintain the population. Some countries, such as the U.S., are making up for the deficit by importing millions of foreigners. Others, such as Japan, seem resigned to gradual demographic decline and hope that robots will make up the difference. If demographics count for anything, the future of patriarchy — not the comparatively mild form of patriarchy that is said to have characterized the West, but the more rigorous [[Islam]]ic variety—seems assured...

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

See [[Quotations about Feminism]]

== Atheist feminism ==

''See also:'' [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women]]
[[File:Annie Laurie Gaylor.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]] is an atheist feminist. She is co-president of the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]].

Gaylor's husband, [[Dan Barker]], who heads the organization along with her, is usually the person invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization's leader and her many books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref> See: [[Atheism and women]]

[[Atheist feminism]] is a type of feminism whose advocates are [[Atheism|atheists]].

Writing on the [[Atheism and sexism|sexism within the atheist population]], atheist Victoria Bekiempis wrote in a ''Guardian'' article entitled ''Why the [[New Atheism]] is a boys' club'':
{{cquote|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]], who founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation with her mother, Anne Nicol Gaylor, in 1978, sums it up succinctly: “One word — sexism.” Gaylor’s husband, Dan Barker, who helms the organization along with her, is usually the one invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization’s leader and her numerous books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>}}

Feminists who are [[theism|theists]] often belong to religious bodies which practice [[liberal]] theology. In addition, some feminists practice goddess worship. Since atheism rejects theism, atheistic feminism rejects/disbelieves in the existence of God or gods (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).

=== Atheism, women, men and atheist feminism ===

Since most atheists lean Left politically (see: [[Atheism and politics]]) most atheist women are feminists. However, this may not apply to atheist men or apply to a lesser degree, given that a significant majority of atheist are men and that the men's rights movement has many atheist men within it. [[Reddit]] is a popular place for atheists and a Reddit survey found that 94% of Men's Rights Movement supporters indicated that they had no religion (see also: [[Reddit atheism]]).<ref>[http://www.rawstory.com/2014/04/confirmed-mens-rights-activism-is-for-misogynists-without-god/ Confirmed: "Men’s Rights Activism" Is For Misogynists Without God], ''Raw Story''</ref> YouTube's most popular atheist is [[TheAmazingAtheist]] who is a men's rights activist. Another popular YouTube atheist [[Thunderf00t]] is very critical of feminism within atheism (See also: [[Atheism plus]]).

=== Atheist movement, feminism and schism within atheism ===

Within the [[atheist movement]] post [[New Atheism]] and the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy, there has been a lot of conflict between [[Atheism|atheists]] concerning feminism. One of the results of the conflict was the new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] losing a lot of public support and support among the irreligious (see: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]]).

=== Atheist feminism and its view of religion ===

See: [[Atheist feminism and religion]]

== Intersectionality==
As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing "identity groups." In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress. For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender? Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity. Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.
== Femen ==

''See also:'' [[Femen]] and [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women]]

[[Femen]] is a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] radical feminist activist group which is now based in Paris. According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', "Femen’s members consider [[atheism]] to be a fundamental tenet of the group’s ideology."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/12/meet-femen-naked-shock-troops-feminism-who-greeted-trump-with-topless-protest-paris/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb5ef3499053 Meet Femen, the ‘naked shock troops of feminism’ who greeted Trump with a topless protest in Paris], By Antonia Noori Farzan, Washington Post, November 12, 2018</ref>

Femen engages in topless publicity stunts/protests. Femen was one of the first radical feminist organizations to gain transnational media publicity.

== Christianity and women's rights ==

See: [[Christianity and women's rights]]

==See also==

*[[Anti-Feminism]]
*[[Me Too Movement]]
*[[Essay:Conservative Women Vs. Feminism]]
*[[Feminism and housewives]]
*[[Feminist style]]
*[[Gender equality]]
*[[Gender police]]
*[[Feminists for Life]]
*[[Feminism and reason]]
*[[Feminist hypocrisy]]
*[[Battered woman syndrome]]
*[[Communism and feminism]]
*[[Feminist myths]]
*[[Feminist nitpicking]]
*[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Liberal totalitarianism]]
*[[The personal is political]]
*[[Misandry]]
*[[Erica Jong]]
*[[Trans-exclusionary feminism]]
{{liberalism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-ftIGVsCI Dana Loesch Rips Feminists] on [[Louder With Crowder]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_ESpTudus #SJW Feminist Myths Destroyed by Karen Straughan] on Louder With Crowder
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRj2qMLq8SY Feminism & Fat Pride: The Unholy Alliance] on Louder With Crowder with [[Paul Joseph Watson]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYo1ewgG94M The Truth About 'Rape Culture'] by Paul Joseph Watson
*[http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/ The Feminist eZine] Archive of articles about Feminist History.
*[http://www.cia-on-campus.org/surveil/steinem.html Gloria Steinem and the CIA], ''The New York Times'', February 21, 1967.
*[https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem], Nancy Borman, ''The Village Voice''.
*[http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man?], Christina Hoff Sommers, ''The American'' March/April 2008.
*[https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/f0wr6b/conservatives_find_unlikely_ally_in_fighting/ Conservatives find unlikely ally in fighting transgender rights: Radical feminists], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', February 8, 2020.

{{Communism}}

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Feminism]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Feminism

2022-09-11T17:07:14Z

RobLeonardWoo: Shouldn't be included in the lede

[[Image:Braque woman 400pix.jpg|thumb|200px|''Woman with a guitar'' by [[Georges Braque]], 1913.]]
'''Feminism''' is a cancerous ideology that causes an alienation in affection by women for men. Feminism denies or downplays differences between men and women; feminism opposes homemaking, child-rearing, and [[homeschooling]] by women; and feminism promotes participation by women in predominantly male activities regardless of their life pursuits or interests. Most prominent modern feminists support [[abortion]].

Attributes common to many feminists include an [[entitlement mentality]] and a bit of an attitude, such as a "chip on one's shoulder" despite benefiting from a life of privilege.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSo-q2Dq1aY ''Mickey Randleman - _Feminist_ (IWPS 2014) - 1080P HD_this video was deleted by buttons youtube channel'']</ref>

On a personal level feminism can disrupt marriages, relationships, child-rearing, education and the workplace. The feminist ideology is particularly dominant in elite universities, many large corporations, and competitive women's team sports. Feminism claims it wants to make men and women equal but in reality, it opposes any sort of support for men.<ref>[https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2015/11/18/male-university-of-york-student-commits-suicide-on-day-his-university-ditches-international-mens-day-after-pressure-from-feminists/ "Male University of York Student Commits Suicide on Day His University Ditches International Men’s day"]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow ''Feminists protesting Men's Rights talk pull fire alarm, 4/4/2013'']</ref>

Feminism was originally an expression used by [[suffragettes]] – who were predominantly [[pro-life]]<ref>[http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/wallace4.html ''Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion'']</ref><ref>''"There is no question that she deplored the practice of abortion, as did every one of her colleagues in the suffrage movement."'' [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ''Desperately Seeking Susan''] [[New York Times]] (13 October 2006)</ref><ref>[http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/foremoth.htm ''Voices of our Feminist Foremothers''] Feminists for Life</ref> – to obtain the right for women to vote in the early 1900s in the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]]. By the 1970s, however, at the height of what was termed Second-wave feminism, [[liberals]] had changed the meaning to represent people who favored [[abortion]] and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole. Today in the midst of what is called Third-wave feminism, also known as Feminazism, some feminists are enforcers of [[liberal censorship]] and [[political correctness]], at the expense of [[free speech]]. In fact, much of what drove Second-wave feminism and what now drives Third-wave feminism was derived from Communist doctrine and both have a great deal in common, including the shared goal of the destruction of the family and the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity (via Goal 26 of the 1963 Communist goals for America).<ref>[https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2014/09/04/feminism-is-communism/ Feminism is Communism]</ref><ref>[http://fathersforlife.org/feminism/hubbard1.htm Feminist family politics and their roots in Communist ideology]</ref>

== Ideology ==
* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike. We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."
* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>
* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).
** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).
* conveniently pretend that there are no meaningful differences between men and women when that advances [[liberal]] causes (e.g., women and men equally in military combat, to weaken the U.S. military), but reject equality when that results in more money to women (e.g., [[VAWA]] funding of women's groups).
* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).
* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".
* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>
* support [[affirmative action]] for women.
* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/ Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>
* believe marriage implies "female servitude" when it is in fact a mutual bond.
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".
* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'
* support the [[homosexual agenda]].
* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>
* demands that women choose a career over raising children without any remorse.
* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".
* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].
* Denounce and demean any women who have more feminine traits and embrace their femininity.

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

==History==
Roots of the movement in the United States and the United Kingdom include the [[suffrage|Women's Suffrage]] movement of the early 1900s (First-wave feminism) and the Women's Liberation (Second-wave feminism) movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminism was glamourized in the 1940s and 1950s by Hollywood film stars such as [[Joan Crawford]], attempting to portray a single mother as having a successful career and family without a husband. Second-wave feminism had its roots from [[Betty Friedan]] and [[Simone de Beauvoir]], who both advocated for the abolition of the career of housewife with the false implication that it was comparable to a Nazi concentration camp or a parasite, though they are more akin to the later third-wave feminism, as they fought against what they saw as patriarchal systems designed to hold women down. Another notable feminist was Simone Veil, who was instrumental to legalizing abortion in France. One of her key methods to its legalization was citing her experience as a holocaust survivor.<ref>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/30/534974403/french-politician-simone-veil-holocaust-survivor-and-abortion-pioneer-dies-at-89</ref>

The [[Equal Rights Amendment]] (ERA), whose proponents claimed would address the inadequacies of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] concerning women and citizenship, was proposed in the US in 1923. The amendment passed Congress in 1972 but was ultimately defeated, falling just three states short of the required [[three-quarters majority]] on June 30, 1982. Some conservatives, particularly [[Phyllis Schlafly]], felt that its passage would entail adverse consequences, including making girls subject to the [[military draft]], requiring taxpayer-funded [[abortion]], the end of [[single-sex schools]] and classes, requiring the issuance of [[homosexual marriage]] licenses, and the revocation of laws that protect women in dangerous jobs, such as factory or mining work. Indeed, in states that passed their own versions of ERA, several of these results were subsequently ordered by courts.<ref>For example, the [[Hawaii]] and [[Massachusetts]] Supreme Courts illegally ordered the issuance of homosexual "marriage" licenses based in part on their on their state ERAs, and the [[New Mexico]] Supreme Court illegally ordered taxpayer-funded abortion based on its state ERA.</ref>

The feminist movement in the West evolved in the 1980s with the rise of so-called [[Post-Feminism]] (Third-wave feminism), which stresses that women have many rights that go unrecognized, often by women themselves, in everyday life, and in the [[Critical legal studies|American legal structure]]. Most members of the feminist movement support reproductive rights currently guaranteed by American law, including the legal right to abortion. This stance is opposed by many conservatives. Third-wave feminism has been highly influenced by postmodern thought, and is a more intellectual form of feminism. It fights against the systems that it sees as detrimental to women as a group, systems designed to keep women in traditional roles, in contrast with second-wave feminism, which fought for equal rights and pay with men in a fight against the traditional status of women as second class citizens. Another distinction made from second-wave feminism is the claimed recognition of the struggles faced by women who are minorities, disabled, immigrants, etc. (intersection theory), as most second-wave feminists focused only on white suburban middle-class able-bodied women. Second-wave feminism, however, was not always a good thing, as it pushed for abortion.

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

Dr. [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]], a staunch advocate of [[civil rights]] and [[non-violence]] said, "When a mother has to work she does violence to motherhood by depriving her children of her loving guidance and protection." <ref>''Stride Toward Freedom : The Montgomery Story'', Martin Luther King, Jr., Harper and Rowe, New York, 1958, p. 203.</ref>

Larrey Anderson, philosopher, writer and submissions editor for ''American Thinker'', links feminism to Marxism, and concludes, "Feminism by grounding itself in the philosophy of Hegel and [[Marxism|Marx]], is condemning women to a new servitude: slavery to the State."<ref>Larrey Anderson, ''The Feminine Mistake'', ''American Thinker'', November 29, 2009</ref>

==Critique==

[[Christine Hoff Sommers]] wrote:
:... The problem with feminism is not that it has fostered achievement for women. Rather it is feminism's attempts to demean the roles and achievements of men and "feminize" boys that are problematic. [https://www.amazon.com/WAR-AGAINST-BOYS-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849577]

==Feminism and reason==

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

Feminists in the [[Swedish]] government on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2017, were urged by the Iranian women's right activist Masih Alinejad “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to wear the compulsory [[hijab]] while visiting Iran. The pleas were ignored. The Jihad Watch website reported,<ref>[https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/swedens-first-feminist-government-dons-hijabs-in-iran ]</ref>
{{Quotebox|Sweden’s female leaders have not only betrayed all women who fight for equality globally, but they have also fully exposed how confused they are: they are so-called feminists who – for example — furiously insist on control over their own bodies to choose abortion, but they are willing to fully submit to male dominance at the demand of Muslim men to dictate their clothing. And they did so in front of a global audience to boot.}}

==Cultural Marxism==
While the Feminist movement may contribute to the [[Cultural Marxist]] undermining of [[family values]] , the main cause is [[divorce|marital breakdown]], and fathers who abandon their family, or fail to contribute to the raising of their children, Studies show that:
*63 percent of youth suicides take place in fatherless homes.
*90 percent of all homeless youth and runaways are from fatherless homes, which is a whopping 32 times the national average.
*85 percent of all children with behavior issues come from fatherless homes, 20 times the national average.
*80 percent of rapists with established anger issues come from fatherless homes, 14 times the national average.
*71 percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*70 percent of those in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes, nine times the national average.
*85 percent of all juveniles in prison come from single-parent households, 20 times the national average.
*90 percent of adolescent repeat arson offenders are from fatherless homes.
*Fatherless children are nearly twice as likely to be victims of abuse or neglect.<ref>https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/bowling-alone-how-washington-has-helped-destroy-american-civil-society-and-family-life/</ref>

== Feminism and population decline ==

The historian Martin van Creveld wrote in his book ''Equality: The Impossible Quest':
{{Cquote|In many modern societies, the advent of feminism has caused men and women to be placed on a more equal footing than ever before. The catch is that, in most of the societies in question, women, desperately trying to achieve what they see as equality, no longer bear enough children to maintain the population. Some countries, such as the U.S., are making up for the deficit by importing millions of foreigners. Others, such as Japan, seem resigned to gradual demographic decline and hope that robots will make up the difference. If demographics count for anything, the future of patriarchy — not the comparatively mild form of patriarchy that is said to have characterized the West, but the more rigorous [[Islam]]ic variety—seems assured...

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

See [[Quotations about Feminism]]

== Atheist feminism ==

''See also:'' [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women]]
[[File:Annie Laurie Gaylor.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]] is an atheist feminist. She is co-president of the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]].

Gaylor's husband, [[Dan Barker]], who heads the organization along with her, is usually the person invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization's leader and her many books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref> See: [[Atheism and women]]

[[Atheist feminism]] is a type of feminism whose advocates are [[Atheism|atheists]].

Writing on the [[Atheism and sexism|sexism within the atheist population]], atheist Victoria Bekiempis wrote in a ''Guardian'' article entitled ''Why the [[New Atheism]] is a boys' club'':
{{cquote|[[Annie Laurie Gaylor]], who founded the Freedom From Religion Foundation with her mother, Anne Nicol Gaylor, in 1978, sums it up succinctly: “One word — sexism.” Gaylor’s husband, Dan Barker, who helms the organization along with her, is usually the one invited to speaking engagements, despite her longer tenure as the organization’s leader and her numerous books on atheism.<ref>Bekiempis, Victoria (Summer 2011). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/26/new-atheism-boys-club "Why the New Atheism is a boys' club"]. Bitch Magazine, no. 51. Retrieved from September 26, 2011 edition of The Guardian/CommentaryIsFree.</ref>}}

Feminists who are [[theism|theists]] often belong to religious bodies which practice [[liberal]] theology. In addition, some feminists practice goddess worship. Since atheism rejects theism, atheistic feminism rejects/disbelieves in the existence of God or gods (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).

=== Atheism, women, men and atheist feminism ===

Since most atheists lean Left politically (see: [[Atheism and politics]]) most atheist women are feminists. However, this may not apply to atheist men or apply to a lesser degree, given that a significant majority of atheist are men and that the men's rights movement has many atheist men within it. [[Reddit]] is a popular place for atheists and a Reddit survey found that 94% of Men's Rights Movement supporters indicated that they had no religion (see also: [[Reddit atheism]]).<ref>[http://www.rawstory.com/2014/04/confirmed-mens-rights-activism-is-for-misogynists-without-god/ Confirmed: "Men’s Rights Activism" Is For Misogynists Without God], ''Raw Story''</ref> YouTube's most popular atheist is [[TheAmazingAtheist]] who is a men's rights activist. Another popular YouTube atheist [[Thunderf00t]] is very critical of feminism within atheism (See also: [[Atheism plus]]).

=== Atheist movement, feminism and schism within atheism ===

Within the [[atheist movement]] post [[New Atheism]] and the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy, there has been a lot of conflict between [[Atheism|atheists]] concerning feminism. One of the results of the conflict was the new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] losing a lot of public support and support among the irreligious (see: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]]).

=== Atheist feminism and its view of religion ===

See: [[Atheist feminism and religion]]

== Intersectionality==
As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing "identity groups." In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress. For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender? Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity. Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.
== Femen ==

''See also:'' [[Femen]] and [[Atheist feminism]] and [[Atheism and women]]

[[Femen]] is a [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] radical feminist activist group which is now based in Paris. According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', "Femen’s members consider [[atheism]] to be a fundamental tenet of the group’s ideology."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/12/meet-femen-naked-shock-troops-feminism-who-greeted-trump-with-topless-protest-paris/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb5ef3499053 Meet Femen, the ‘naked shock troops of feminism’ who greeted Trump with a topless protest in Paris], By Antonia Noori Farzan, Washington Post, November 12, 2018</ref>

Femen engages in topless publicity stunts/protests. Femen was one of the first radical feminist organizations to gain transnational media publicity.

== Christianity and women's rights ==

See: [[Christianity and women's rights]]

==See also==

*[[Anti-Feminism]]
*[[Me Too Movement]]
*[[Essay:Conservative Women Vs. Feminism]]
*[[Feminism and housewives]]
*[[Feminist style]]
*[[Gender equality]]
*[[Gender police]]
*[[Feminists for Life]]
*[[Feminism and reason]]
*[[Feminist hypocrisy]]
*[[Battered woman syndrome]]
*[[Communism and feminism]]
*[[Feminist myths]]
*[[Feminist nitpicking]]
*[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]]
*[[Liberal totalitarianism]]
*[[The personal is political]]
*[[Misandry]]
*[[Erica Jong]]
*[[Trans-exclusionary feminism]]
{{liberalism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi-ftIGVsCI Dana Loesch Rips Feminists] on [[Louder With Crowder]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee_ESpTudus #SJW Feminist Myths Destroyed by Karen Straughan] on Louder With Crowder
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRj2qMLq8SY Feminism & Fat Pride: The Unholy Alliance] on Louder With Crowder with [[Paul Joseph Watson]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYo1ewgG94M The Truth About 'Rape Culture'] by Paul Joseph Watson
*[http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/ The Feminist eZine] Archive of articles about Feminist History.
*[http://www.cia-on-campus.org/surveil/steinem.html Gloria Steinem and the CIA], ''The New York Times'', February 21, 1967.
*[https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg02217.html Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem], Nancy Borman, ''The Village Voice''.
*[http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man?], Christina Hoff Sommers, ''The American'' March/April 2008.
*[https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/f0wr6b/conservatives_find_unlikely_ally_in_fighting/ Conservatives find unlikely ally in fighting transgender rights: Radical feminists], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', February 8, 2020.

{{Communism}}

[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Feminism]]
[[Category:Communism]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Transgenderism

2022-09-05T13:52:29Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Opposition */ Punctuation and formatting

The theory of '''"sex change"''' is based on the claim that a person of one [[gender]] can be born "trapped" in an opposite-gender body. The theory plays havoc with traditional ideas of [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]]. It is referred to as '''"transgenderism"''' by its liberal proponents, but can be better seen and understood as a type of mental disorder called '''[[gender confusion]]'''.<ref>[http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-2896200258/gender-confusion.html Gender confusion]</ref><ref>[http://www.focusonthefamily.com/parenting/parenting-challenges/gender-confusion-in-children Answering parents' questions on gender confusion in children] at Focus on the Family</ref>

==Transgender Ideology==

Traditionally, individuals who are classed or who identify themselves as "transgender" or "transsexual" are said to possess a desire to become the opposite sex. However, many such individuals reject this categorization, insisting that they are in some meaningful sense a member of the opposite sex already. While acknowledging that this is not true by any genetic or anatomical definition, transgender individuals insist that such physical markers as sex chromosomes, or the possession of male or female reproductive organs and/or sexual characteristics, have nothing to do with whether a person truly is male or female; that it is a matter of personal identity or self-perception and thus not subject to biological reality. To this end, transgender individuals will frequently insist that they were "born in the wrong body" and that they are simply changing their outward appearance to reflect this inner truth.

Those who identify as transgender over the long term frequently assert that they have had feelings of gender confusion from the ages of 3-5, the period in which males and females typically begin to be socialized differently and to become aware of these categories. They further state that these feelings intensify significantly during puberty, and persist throughout their adult lives. Some seek to compensate by engaging in behavior that overly exaggerates the stereotypes associated with their sex (some "male-to-female" transsexuals, for example, previously took up hobbies such as bodybuilding, or joined the military). Many, however, experience feelings of failure and depression, and suicides or attempted suicides are not uncommon. The transgender movement strongly implies that this depressive state is the inevitable endpoint for all transgender persons, unless they are given the opportunity to live as the opposite sex; in this context, such behavior is represented as literally a matter of life and death. Although this is far from universally true, as many transgender individuals never do act on their desires, it has become part of the popular image surrounding transsexualism in recent years.

There is nothing within the scientific knowledge of the human body and of sexual development to support the claim of transgender individuals that they were "born in the wrong body." Disorders of sexual development, including various forms of hermaphroditism, are well-known and carefully documented, but such "intersex" cases, as they are sometimes labeled, are rare and cannot account for more than a small minority of those who identify as transgender. Claims sometimes made to the effect that such persons have brains resembling those of the opposite sex are not borne out by the available medical research. The ways in which persons with gender confusion view themselves overlap considerably with the symptoms of anorexia and "body integrity dysphoria" (in which people seek to become disabled via the removal of a limb or the destruction of a sense such as vision or hearing), and it has been suggested that the cause of these disorders lies in a defect of the brain's spatial-cognitive abilities, but more research is needed.

100% of all [[rape]]s between inmates resulting in pregnancy in women's prisons are committed by transgenders.

==Alleged medical treatment==

Although some people affected by gender confusion are content merely with transvestism or "cross-dressing" (that is, wearing the clothing of the opposite sex), many seek to also have their physical appearance altered, so that their bodies will more closely resemble that of their desired gender. The ultimate goal among such persons is to be accepted not simply as someone who likes dressing as a member of their desired gender, but as someone who truly ''is'' that gender. Today, this process is popularly referred to as "transitioning" (a man, for example, would be said to be "transitioning to female," and vice versa).

The idea of "transitioning" (in both a surgical and a non-surgical sense) has been embraced primarily by advocates of the 1960s [[sexual revolution]] such as [[homosexual rights]] activists, but rejected by the [[Roman Catholic Church]] and most conservative [[Protestant]] denominations, though some liberal churches (such as the [[Episcopalians]] and [[Unitarians]]), which no longer believe in the truth of Scripture, have become increasingly accepting of it.<ref>"The key point is that the (transsexual) surgical operation is so superficial and external that it does not change the personality. If the person was male, he remains male. If she was female, she remains female." [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/CatholicTSDecision.html]</ref>

[[Transgender|Gender-confused]] patients seek to undergo surgical [[sex change operation]]s (also known as [[gender reassignment surgery]], or what amounts to surgical mutilation) to change their external appearance to that of the gender with which they claim to [[identify]]. Patients often undergo [[psychotherapy]], [[hormone treatment]], and facial surgery as well. A man, for example, will be prescribed artificial female hormones such as estrogen, which would cause him to develop larger breasts and other female physical characteristics; conversely, a woman would be given artificial male hormones such as testosterone, which would cause her to develop a deeper voice, more facial and body hair, and other male physical characteristics. What is often not disclosed, however, is that these hormones are by their nature highly disruptive of the body's normal processes and often have serious long-term side effects. Women who take testosterone for long periods, for example, are at increased risk for heart disease, and may have their reproductive ability seriously damaged.

In the United States, according to traditional practices, a patient must undergo counseling before being approved for the surgery. Patients in the US are also required to have two letters of recommendation from certified psychiatrists, and must have lived a year acting as the gender that they claim to identify with.<ref>http://www.wpath.org/publications_standards.cfm</ref> Patients sometimes choose to have the surgery done abroad in places like [[Thailand]] for three reasons: 1. It is often less expensive for the patient, 2. The patient may be able to bypass some legal restrictions, 3. The surgeons in Thailand have a reputation of being particularly skilled in this area.<ref>http://www.bangkokcompanies.com/Surgery/thailandsurgery_sex_change_surgery.htm</ref> However, even such "safeguards" as exist are frequently not observed in practice. Many individuals begin hormone therapy within a few months or even weeks of "coming out" as transgender, and many of the psychiatric evaluations are cursory only.

It should be noted that hormone therapy and removing and adding body parts does not change the genetic makeup of an individual. On the genetic level, individuals who started as men are still men no matter what appearance they choose, and women who started as women are still women after surgery as well.

==Legality==

Different states have different laws regarding the status of people who have had sex change operations. Generally, their birth certificates are reissued with their new claimed legal [[gender]]. Since they are not required to divorce before surgery, this could lead to de facto [[same sex marriage|same-sex "marriage"]] if they stay with their spouse. The country of [[Brazil]] offers free sex change operations because they are claimed to be a constitutional "right".<ref>https://www.nbcnews.com/id/20323334/ns/health-health_care/t/brazil-provide-free-sex-change-operations/#.U1HYG8fw9Ea</ref>

==Opposition==

[[J. Michael Bailey]] wrote a book which disagrees with the "born trapped" theory. In his book, he argued that some people born male who want to cross genders are driven primarily by an erotic fascination with themselves as women.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/health/psychology/21gender.html?ex=1345348800&en=0c1176374e251f82&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss</ref> Dr. Bailey has come under tremendous social and administrative pressure, motivated by [[political correctness]], from liberal partisans who disagree with his scientific views based on political and personal motivation. This pressure has focused primarily upon objections to the ''implications'' of his theory, rather than objections to his ''empirical evidence''. Rather than try to refute his empirical findings, "[[transgender]] activists worked to try to ruin Bailey professionally and personally." <ref>http://www.bioethics.northwestern.edu/faculty/work/dreger/controversy_tmwwbq.pdf</ref>

According to the [[Vatican]], people who have undergone a sex-change operation cannot enter into a valid marriage, either because they would be "marrying" someone of the same sex in the eyes of the church or because their mental state casts doubt on their ability to make and uphold their "marriage" vows.<ref>http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/CatholicTSDecision.html</ref>

===Detransitioners===

One significant phenomenon in recent years has been the increasing prominence of "de-transitioners," referring to men and women who underwent gender reassignment but then reverted to living as their actual gender. In some cases, this is purely in reaction to the negative medical consequences of the procedures involved, while others have come to reject the transgender ideology itself as destructive and detached from reality.<ref>[https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/07/hundreds-of-transgender-people-want-to-go-back-to-their-birth-sex-says-formerly-trans-woman/ 'Hundreds' of Transgender People Want To Go Back To Their Birth Sex, Says Formerly Trans Woman]</ref> Among this latter group, critiques of the ideology vary; some continue to subscribe to a version of [[critical theory]], adhering to such movements as radical [[feminism]], while others embrace a more traditional understanding of gender roles, whether from the influence of Christian teachings or from a decision that these are more socially stable.<ref>https://changedmovement.com/stories/laura-perry</ref>

Whatever their motivations, detransitioned individuals have often been sharply and publicly critical of the transgender movement, and for that reason have been attacked by LGBT activists and by the media for being "transphobic." A ''60 Minutes'' segment on [[CBS]] in May 2021 that briefly included the stories of a few such persons, in a broader story on the status of "transgender rights" in America, was denounced by these activists, because it acknowledged that some people who transition have second thoughts and do not have universally positive experiences.<ref>Valerie Richardson, [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/26/60-minutes-backlash-lgbt-advocates-detransitioning/ '60 Minutes' hit with backlash from LGBTQ advocates for detransition report]. ''The Washington Times'', May 26, 2021.</ref>

==Famous gender-confused people==
*Christine (born George) Jorgensen: An American [[World War II]] veteran, George became Christine following a 1952 operation. This was the first widely publicized sex change surgery.<ref>[http://www.christinejorgensen.org/ Christine Jorgensen site]</ref>

*[[Walter Carlos]], 1967

*[[Bruce Jenner]] (who now claims to be "Caitlyn" Jenner) won Olympic medals competing as a male decathlete.

*Jan (born James) Morris: A British [[World War II]] veteran, reporter, and father, Morris underwent sex change surgery in 1972.<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/profile/profile_jan_morris.shtml Jan Morris: A Profile]</ref>

*Renée Richards (born Richard Raskind): An American eye surgeon and tennis player. Richards made waves in 1976, when he entered amateur [[tennis]] competitions as a "woman".<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/01/garden/01renee.html The Lady Regrets]</ref>

*Chastity ("Chaz") Bono: Daughter of [[Sonny and Cher]]. Underwent surgical mutilation in 2009, and legally became a "man" when the Los Angeles County Superior Court approved her name and gender "change" on May 6, 2010.<ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/209/000108882/</ref>

*Larry ("Lana") Wachowski: Co-Director of [[The Matrix]] trilogy.<ref>https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/category/entities/people/lana-wachowski</ref> His brother, Andy ("Lily") Wachowski also came out as gender-confused in 2016.<ref>
https://www.windycitytimes.com/lgbt/Second-Wachowski-filmmaker-sibling-comes-out-as-trans-/54509.html</ref>

*Roderick ("Laverne") Cox:<ref>[https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1209545/ IMDb profile]</ref> First gender-confused actor to be nominated for a Primetime Emmy.<ref>https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/tv/la-et-st-emmys-laverne-cox-trans-orange-is-the-new-black-20140710-story.html</ref>

*Walter ("Jenna") Talackova: Canadian male model and TV personality of Czech/First Nations background who experienced gender confusion early on and underwent surgical mutilation at age 19 to facilitate his delusion. Talackova tried to deceive organizers of the Miss Universe Canada pageant to enter the 2012 version of the event by claiming to be a "woman", but he was denied entry into the pageant (which is reserved for women only, specifically stating in its rules that only natural-born women are qualified to enter) when he was discovered to really be a man. He then contacted liberal [[feminism|feminist]] attorney Gloria Allred, who forced the Miss Universe organization to cave in to liberal [[bullying]], [[political correctness]] and the LGBT agenda and allowed Talackova to enter the pageant. He did not get far in the pageant however, as he failed to make the final five contestants.<ref>[http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/transgender-contestant-falls-short-at-miss-universe-canada-1.1188866 "Transgender" contestant falls short at Miss Universe Canada]</ref>

*Jaron ("Jazz Jennings") Bloshinsky:<ref>[http://gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/jaron-bloshinsky/ Gender, Patriarchy, and All That Jazz : Mary Lou Singleton] (Warning: Contains feminist rhetoric and nonsense)</ref> Star of reality TV series ''I Am Jazz''. 15-year-old boy who began claiming to be a "girl" from the age of five after experiencing gender confusion. His parents, Greg and Janette Bloshinsky, have chosen to encourage and enable him in his choice to pretend to be "female".

*Brandon ("Nyla Rose") DeGroat,<ref>Two references:
*[https://playerswiki.com/nyla-rose Brandon "Nyla Rose" DeGroat bio]
*[https://eeriedigest.com/2011/04/interview-of-actor-brandon-degroat/ Interview with Actor Brandon DeGroat]</ref> an undersized gender-confused male professional wrestler and actor who competes against female wrestlers in intergender matches in [[All Elite Wrestling]].<ref>https://wrestling-edge.com/cody-and-brandi-rhodes-did-not-know-nyla-rose-was-transgender/</ref>

*[[Fallon Fox]] (real name unknown), a gender-confused male professional MMA fighter who fractured a female opponent's skull.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://nationalfile.com/trans-mma-fighter-enjoyed-fracturing-biological-womans-skull-called-it-bliss/|title=Trans MMA Fighter ‘Enjoyed’ Fracturing Biological Woman’s Skull, Called it ‘Bliss’|date=June 22, 2020
|accessdate=2020-09-10}}</ref>

*Ellen ("Elliot") Page came out as gender-confused in 2020.<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/dec/01/elliot-page-star-of-juno-x-men-announces-he-is-transgender</ref>

==See also==
*[[Transgender activism]]
*[[Transgender bathrooms]]
* [[Transracial]]

==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

==External links==
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eJKsNRRT-4 'Men Don't Belong In My Sport' | Female Wrestler SHREDS Transgender Athletes], ''The Daily Caller'' youtube.com
*[https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1454188597704286212 Misgender me and I will punch you in the face].
*[https://twitter.com/SarahAshtonLV/status/1516133207531479057 Sarah Ashton-Cirillo], a self-described transgender journalist, reporting from [[Kharkiv]] during the [[Russia-Ukraine war]].

{{Democrat establishment}}
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Psychology]]
[[Category:Political Terms]]
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]

Vaccination

2022-09-04T16:37:06Z

RobLeonardWoo: References

'''Vaccination''' is the [[injection]] of a dead or weakened infectious organism in order to prevent the [[disease]].<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/about/terms/glossary.htm#v</ref> This limited exposure to the pathogen is intended to cause the patient's body to react and create antibodies, but not actually become ill. In the United States and throughout the modern world, some parents routinely get their children [[vaccine|vaccinated]] to ward off measles and several other diseases which most people in the 21st century have never heard of. Disease such as [[polio]] and [[smallpox]], major causes of death and suffering in the past, have been eliminated from the developed world through mass vaccination. Measles has recently begun to return because some children have not been vaccinated.

Often vaccinations have adverse side effects. Particularly new and untested vaccinations tend to be unpopular, and controversies have developed over whether the government has the right to vaccinate schoolchildren against the parents' wishes.

Some people are hesitant to take them due to toxins and unhealthy substances which are in vaccines. Some contain some of what seem to be the strangest ingredients, such as [[Monosodium Glutamate]] (classified as an [[Excitotoxin]]), [[aspartame]] (artificial sweetener), [[formaldehyde]], and aborted human fetal tissue (for diploid cells, etc.) <ref>Hull, Janet. "Toxins In Vaccines." Toxins In Vaccines. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.janethull.com/newsletter/0706/aspartame_in_the_pink_packet.php>.</ref> Others avoid them because some research has shown that they drastically increase the risk of autism.<ref>Heyes. "Whistleblower Goes Public: CDC Buried Data Showing Vaccines Increase Risk of Autism by 340%." Natural News. 21 Aug. 2014. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/046552_MMR_vaccine_autism_CDC_whistleblower.html>.</ref> Although this latter claim has been countered by some conflicting research,<ref>https://www.webmd.com/g00/brain/autism/do-vaccines-cause-autism</ref> many still consider this to be a risk. Some vaccines contain (or formerly contained) thimerosal, which contains mercury; this was one of the main reasons a link to autism was suspected. Still more individuals avoid them for religious reasons.
Those who stay away from the vaccine often seem to avoid getting that disease by using natural means, like [[Vitamin D]] supplementation <ref>Biggar, Allison. "How to Prevent and Cure the Flu Naturally without a Vaccine." NaturalNews. 20 Nov. 2009. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/027542_flu_cures_remedies.html>.</ref> or the use of other natural treatments.

Common or routine vaccines exist for:
[[covid 19]], chicken pox, diptheria, influenza (select strains only), pneumonia, shingles, etc.

==Books==
*Kurt Link M.D. ''The Vaccine Controversy: The History, Use, And Safety Of Vaccinations'' (Praeger, 2005).<ref>[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1285115/ BMJ v.331(7526); 2005 Nov 19. National Library of Medicine]</ref>

===References==
<references/>

==External links==

*[https://abcnews.go.com/Health/CancerPreventionAndTreatment/gardasil-hpv-vaccine-faces-safety-questions/story?id=8356717 Cervic cancer Gardasil side-effects controversy]

[[Category:Medicine]]

Vaccination

2022-09-04T16:34:24Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* External links */ Dead link replaced

'''Vaccination''' is the [[injection]] of a dead or weakened infectious organism in order to prevent the [[disease]].<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/about/terms/glossary.htm#v</ref> This limited exposure to the pathogen is intended to cause the patient's body to react and create antibodies, but not actually become ill. In the United States and throughout the modern world, some parents routinely get their children [[vaccine|vaccinated]] to ward off measles and several other diseases which most people in the 21st century have never heard of. Disease such as [[polio]] and [[smallpox]], major causes of death and suffering in the past, have been eliminated from the developed world through mass vaccination. Measles has recently begun to return because some children have not been vaccinated.

Often vaccinations have adverse side effects. Particularly new and untested vaccinations tend to be unpopular, and controversies have developed over whether the government has the right to vaccinate schoolchildren against the parents' wishes.

Some people are hesitant to take them due to toxins and unhealthy substances which are in vaccines. Some contain some of what seem to be the strangest ingredients, such as [[Monosodium Glutamate]] (classified as an [[Excitotoxin]]), [[aspartame]] (artificial sweetener), [[formaldehyde]], and aborted human fetal tissue (for diploid cells, etc.) <ref>Hull, Janet. "Toxins In Vaccines." Toxins In Vaccines. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.janethull.com/newsletter/0706/aspartame_in_the_pink_packet.php>.</ref> Others avoid them because some research has shown that they drastically increase the risk of autism.<ref>Heyes. "Whistleblower Goes Public: CDC Buried Data Showing Vaccines Increase Risk of Autism by 340%." Natural News. 21 Aug. 2014. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/046552_MMR_vaccine_autism_CDC_whistleblower.html>.</ref> Although this latter claim has been countered by some conflicting research,<ref>https://www.webmd.com/g00/brain/autism/do-vaccines-cause-autism</ref> many still consider this to be a risk. Some vaccines contain (or formerly contained) thimerosal, which contains mercury; this was one of the main reasons a link to autism was suspected. Still more individuals avoid them for religious reasons.
Those who stay away from the vaccine often seem to avoid getting that disease by using natural means, like [[Vitamin D]] supplementation <ref>Biggar, Allison. "How to Prevent and Cure the Flu Naturally without a Vaccine." NaturalNews. 20 Nov. 2009. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/027542_flu_cures_remedies.html>.</ref> or the use of other natural treatments.

Common or routine vaccines exist for:
[[covid 19]], chicken pox, diptheria, influenza (select strains only), pneumonia, shingles, etc.

==References==
<references/>

==Books==
*Kurt Link M.D. ''The Vaccine Controversy: The History, Use, And Safety Of Vaccinations'' (Praeger, 2005).<ref>[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1285115/ BMJ v.331(7526); 2005 Nov 19National Library of Medicine]</ref>

==External links==

*[https://abcnews.go.com/Health/CancerPreventionAndTreatment/gardasil-hpv-vaccine-faces-safety-questions/story?id=8356717 Cervic cancer Gardasil side-effects controversy]

[[Category:Medicine]]

Vaccination

2022-09-04T16:22:15Z

RobLeonardWoo: Minor errors fixed

'''Vaccination''' is the [[injection]] of a dead or weakened infectious organism in order to prevent the [[disease]].<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/about/terms/glossary.htm#v</ref> This limited exposure to the pathogen is intended to cause the patient's body to react and create antibodies, but not actually become ill. In the United States and throughout the modern world, some parents routinely get their children [[vaccine|vaccinated]] to ward off measles and several other diseases which most people in the 21st century have never heard of. Disease such as [[polio]] and [[smallpox]], major causes of death and suffering in the past, have been eliminated from the developed world through mass vaccination. Measles has recently begun to return because some children have not been vaccinated.

Often vaccinations have adverse side effects. Particularly new and untested vaccinations tend to be unpopular, and controversies have developed over whether the government has the right to vaccinate schoolchildren against the parents' wishes.

Some people are hesitant to take them due to toxins and unhealthy substances which are in vaccines. Some contain some of what seem to be the strangest ingredients, such as [[Monosodium Glutamate]] (classified as an [[Excitotoxin]]), [[aspartame]] (artificial sweetener), [[formaldehyde]], and aborted human fetal tissue (for diploid cells, etc.) <ref>Hull, Janet. "Toxins In Vaccines." Toxins In Vaccines. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.janethull.com/newsletter/0706/aspartame_in_the_pink_packet.php>.</ref> Others avoid them because some research has shown that they drastically increase the risk of autism.<ref>Heyes. "Whistleblower Goes Public: CDC Buried Data Showing Vaccines Increase Risk of Autism by 340%." Natural News. 21 Aug. 2014. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/046552_MMR_vaccine_autism_CDC_whistleblower.html>.</ref> Although this latter claim has been countered by some conflicting research,<ref>https://www.webmd.com/g00/brain/autism/do-vaccines-cause-autism</ref> many still consider this to be a risk. Some vaccines contain (or formerly contained) thimerosal, which contains mercury; this was one of the main reasons a link to autism was suspected. Still more individuals avoid them for religious reasons.
Those who stay away from the vaccine often seem to avoid getting that disease by using natural means, like [[Vitamin D]] supplementation <ref>Biggar, Allison. "How to Prevent and Cure the Flu Naturally without a Vaccine." NaturalNews. 20 Nov. 2009. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/027542_flu_cures_remedies.html>.</ref> or the use of other natural treatments.

Common or routine vaccines exist for:
[[covid 19]], chicken pox, diptheria, influenza (select strains only), pneumonia, shingles, etc.

==References==
<references/>

==Books==
*Kurt Link M.D. ''The Vaccine Controversy: The History, Use, And Safety Of Vaccinations'' (Praeger, 2005).<ref>[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1285115/ BMJ v.331(7526); 2005 Nov 19National Library of Medicine]</ref>

==External links==

*[http://au.todaytonight.yahoo.com/article/43654/health/gardasil-effects-controversy Gardasil side-effects controversy]

[[Category:Medicine]]

Vaccination

2022-09-04T16:17:11Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Books */ Details added

'''Vaccination''' is the [[injection]] of a dead or weakened infectious organism in order to prevent the [[disease]].<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/about/terms/glossary.htm#v</ref> This limited exposure to the pathogen is intended to cause the patient's body to react and create antibodies, but not actually become ill. In the United States and throughout the modern world, some parents routinely get their children [[vaccine|vaccinated]] to ward off measles and several other diseases which most people in the 21st century have never heard of. Disease such as [[polio]] and [[smallpox]], major causes of death and suffering in the past, have been eliminated from the developed world through mass vaccination.. Measles has recently begun to return because some children have not been vaccinated.

Often vaccinations have adverse side effects. Particularly new and untested vaccinations tend to be unpopular, and controversies have developed over whether the government has the right to vaccinate schoolchildren against the parents' wishes.

Some people are hesitant to take them due to toxins and unhealthy substances which are in vaccines. Some contain some of what seem to be the strangest ingredients, such as [[Monosodium Glutamate]] (classified as an [[Excitotoxin]]), [[aspartame]] (artificial sweetener), [[formaldehyde]], and aborted human fetal tissue (for diploid cells, etc.) <ref>Hull, Janet. "Toxins In Vaccines." Toxins In Vaccines. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.janethull.com/newsletter/0706/aspartame_in_the_pink_packet.php>.</ref> Others avoid them because some research has shown that they drastically increase the risk of autism.<ref>Heyes. "Whistleblower Goes Public: CDC Buried Data Showing Vaccines Increase Risk of Autism by 340%." Natural News. 21 Aug. 2014. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/046552_MMR_vaccine_autism_CDC_whistleblower.html>.</ref> Although this latter claim has been countered by some conflicting research,<ref>https://www.webmd.com/g00/brain/autism/do-vaccines-cause-autism</ref> many still consider this to be a risk. Some vaccines contain (or formerly contained) thimerosal, which contains mercury; this was one of the main reasons a link to autism was suspected. Still more individuals avoid them for religious reasons.
Those who stay away from the vaccine often seem to avoid getting that disease by using natural means, like [[Vitamin D]] supplementation <ref>Biggar, Allison. "How to Prevent and Cure the Flu Naturally without a Vaccine." NaturalNews. 20 Nov. 2009. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/027542_flu_cures_remedies.html>.</ref> or the use of other natural treatments.

Common or routine vaccines exist for:
[[covid 19], ]chicken pox, diptheria, influenza (select strains only), pneumonia, shingles, etc.

==References==
<references/>

==Books==
* Kurt Link M.D. ''The Vaccine Controversy: The History, Use, And Safety Of Vaccinations'' (Prayer, 2005)<ref>[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1285115/ BMJ v.331(7526); 2005 Nov 19National Library of Medicine]

==External links==

*[http://au.todaytonight.yahoo.com/article/43654/health/gardasil-effects-controversy Gardasil side-effects controversy]

[[Category:Medicine]]

Vaccination

2022-09-04T16:06:32Z

RobLeonardWoo: Expanded

'''Vaccination''' is the [[injection]] of a dead or weakened infectious organism in order to prevent the [[disease]].<ref>https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/about/terms/glossary.htm#v</ref> This limited exposure to the pathogen is intended to cause the patient's body to react and create antibodies, but not actually become ill. In the United States and throughout the modern world, some parents routinely get their children [[vaccine|vaccinated]] to ward off measles and several other diseases which most people in the 21st century have never heard of. Disease such as [[polio]] and [[smallpox]], major causes of death and suffering in the past, have been eliminated from the developed world through mass vaccination.. Measles has recently begun to return because some children have not been vaccinated.

Often vaccinations have adverse side effects. Particularly new and untested vaccinations tend to be unpopular, and controversies have developed over whether the government has the right to vaccinate schoolchildren against the parents' wishes.

Some people are hesitant to take them due to toxins and unhealthy substances which are in vaccines. Some contain some of what seem to be the strangest ingredients, such as [[Monosodium Glutamate]] (classified as an [[Excitotoxin]]), [[aspartame]] (artificial sweetener), [[formaldehyde]], and aborted human fetal tissue (for diploid cells, etc.) <ref>Hull, Janet. "Toxins In Vaccines." Toxins In Vaccines. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.janethull.com/newsletter/0706/aspartame_in_the_pink_packet.php>.</ref> Others avoid them because some research has shown that they drastically increase the risk of autism.<ref>Heyes. "Whistleblower Goes Public: CDC Buried Data Showing Vaccines Increase Risk of Autism by 340%." Natural News. 21 Aug. 2014. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/046552_MMR_vaccine_autism_CDC_whistleblower.html>.</ref> Although this latter claim has been countered by some conflicting research,<ref>https://www.webmd.com/g00/brain/autism/do-vaccines-cause-autism</ref> many still consider this to be a risk. Some vaccines contain (or formerly contained) thimerosal, which contains mercury; this was one of the main reasons a link to autism was suspected. Still more individuals avoid them for religious reasons.
Those who stay away from the vaccine often seem to avoid getting that disease by using natural means, like [[Vitamin D]] supplementation <ref>Biggar, Allison. "How to Prevent and Cure the Flu Naturally without a Vaccine." NaturalNews. 20 Nov. 2009. Web. 3 Dec. 2015. <http://www.naturalnews.com/027542_flu_cures_remedies.html>.</ref> or the use of other natural treatments.

Common or routine vaccines exist for:
[[covid 19], ]chicken pox, diptheria, influenza (select strains only), pneumonia, shingles, etc.

==References==
<references/>

==Books==
* ''The Vaccine Controversy: The History, Use, And Safety Of Vaccinations''

==External links==

*[http://au.todaytonight.yahoo.com/article/43654/health/gardasil-effects-controversy Gardasil side-effects controversy]

[[Category:Medicine]]

Transgenderism

2022-09-03T20:49:12Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Famous gender-confused people */ Richard Saunder's book describes the work she did in support of transgender issues. Find a better source or restore Consrvarvative's deletion.

The theory of '''"sex change"''' is based on the claim that a person of one [[gender]] can be born "trapped" in an opposite-gender body. The theory plays havoc with traditional ideas of [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]]. It is referred to as '''"transgenderism"''' by its liberal proponents, but can be better seen and understood as a type of mental disorder called '''[[gender confusion]]'''.<ref>[http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-2896200258/gender-confusion.html Gender confusion]</ref><ref>[http://www.focusonthefamily.com/parenting/parenting-challenges/gender-confusion-in-children Answering parents' questions on gender confusion in children] at Focus on the Family</ref>

==Transgender Ideology==

Traditionally, individuals who are classed or who identify themselves as "transgender" or "transsexual" are said to possess a desire to become the opposite sex. However, many such individuals reject this categorization, insisting that they are in some meaningful sense a member of the opposite sex already. While acknowledging that this is not true by any genetic or anatomical definition, transgender individuals insist that such physical markers as sex chromosomes, or the possession of male or female reproductive organs and/or sexual characteristics, have nothing to do with whether a person truly is male or female; that it is a matter of personal identity or self-perception and thus not subject to biological reality. To this end, transgender individuals will frequently insist that they were "born in the wrong body" and that they are simply changing their outward appearance to reflect this inner truth.

Those who identify as transgender over the long term frequently assert that they have had feelings of gender confusion from the ages of 3-5, the period in which males and females typically begin to be socialized differently and to become aware of these categories. They further state that these feelings intensify significantly during puberty, and persist throughout their adult lives. Some seek to compensate by engaging in behavior that overly exaggerates the stereotypes associated with their sex (some "male-to-female" transsexuals, for example, previously took up hobbies such as bodybuilding, or joined the military). Many, however, experience feelings of failure and depression, and suicides or attempted suicides are not uncommon. The transgender movement strongly implies that this depressive state is the inevitable endpoint for all transgender persons, unless they are given the opportunity to live as the opposite sex; in this context, such behavior is represented as literally a matter of life and death. Although this is far from universally true, as many transgender individuals never do act on their desires, it has become part of the popular image surrounding transsexualism in recent years.

There is nothing within the scientific knowledge of the human body and of sexual development to support the claim of transgender individuals that they were "born in the wrong body." Disorders of sexual development, including various forms of hermaphroditism, are well-known and carefully documented, but such "intersex" cases, as they are sometimes labeled, are rare and cannot account for more than a small minority of those who identify as transgender. Claims sometimes made to the effect that such persons have brains resembling those of the opposite sex are not borne out by the available medical research. The ways in which persons with gender confusion view themselves overlap considerably with the symptoms of anorexia and "body integrity dysphoria" (in which people seek to become disabled via the removal of a limb or the destruction of a sense such as vision or hearing), and it has been suggested that the cause of these disorders lies in a defect of the brain's spatial-cognitive abilities, but more research is needed.

100% of all [[rape]]s between inmates resulting in pregnancy in women's prisons are committed by transgenders.

==Alleged medical treatment==

Although some people affected by gender confusion are content merely with transvestism or "cross-dressing" (that is, wearing the clothing of the opposite sex), many seek to also have their physical appearance altered, so that their bodies will more closely resemble that of their desired gender. The ultimate goal among such persons is to be accepted not simply as someone who likes dressing as a member of their desired gender, but as someone who truly ''is'' that gender. Today, this process is popularly referred to as "transitioning" (a man, for example, would be said to be "transitioning to female," and vice versa).

The idea of "transitioning" (in both a surgical and a non-surgical sense) has been embraced primarily by advocates of the 1960s [[sexual revolution]] such as [[homosexual rights]] activists, but rejected by the [[Roman Catholic Church]] and most conservative [[Protestant]] denominations, though some liberal churches (such as the [[Episcopalians]] and [[Unitarians]]), which no longer believe in the truth of Scripture, have become increasingly accepting of it.<ref>"The key point is that the (transsexual) surgical operation is so superficial and external that it does not change the personality. If the person was male, he remains male. If she was female, she remains female." [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/CatholicTSDecision.html]</ref>

[[Transgender|Gender-confused]] patients seek to undergo surgical [[sex change operation]]s (also known as [[gender reassignment surgery]], or what amounts to surgical mutilation) to change their external appearance to that of the gender with which they claim to [[identify]]. Patients often undergo [[psychotherapy]], [[hormone treatment]], and facial surgery as well. A man, for example, will be prescribed artificial female hormones such as estrogen, which would cause him to develop larger breasts and other female physical characteristics; conversely, a woman would be given artificial male hormones such as testosterone, which would cause her to develop a deeper voice, more facial and body hair, and other male physical characteristics. What is often not disclosed, however, is that these hormones are by their nature highly disruptive of the body's normal processes and often have serious long-term side effects. Women who take testosterone for long periods, for example, are at increased risk for heart disease, and may have their reproductive ability seriously damaged.

In the United States, according to traditional practices, a patient must undergo counseling before being approved for the surgery. Patients in the US are also required to have two letters of recommendation from certified psychiatrists, and must have lived a year acting as the gender that they claim to identify with.<ref>http://www.wpath.org/publications_standards.cfm</ref> Patients sometimes choose to have the surgery done abroad in places like [[Thailand]] for three reasons: 1. It is often less expensive for the patient, 2. The patient may be able to bypass some legal restrictions, 3. The surgeons in Thailand have a reputation of being particularly skilled in this area.<ref>http://www.bangkokcompanies.com/Surgery/thailandsurgery_sex_change_surgery.htm</ref> However, even such "safeguards" as exist are frequently not observed in practice. Many individuals begin hormone therapy within a few months or even weeks of "coming out" as transgender, and many of the psychiatric evaluations are cursory only.

It should be noted that hormone therapy and removing and adding body parts does not change the genetic makeup of an individual. On the genetic level, individuals who started as men are still men no matter what appearance they choose, and women who started as women are still women after surgery as well.

==Legality==

Different states have different laws regarding the status of people who have had sex change operations. Generally, their birth certificates are reissued with their new claimed legal [[gender]]. Since they are not required to divorce before surgery, this could lead to de facto [[same sex marriage|same-sex "marriage"]] if they stay with their spouse. The country of [[Brazil]] offers free sex change operations because they are claimed to be a constitutional "right".<ref>https://www.nbcnews.com/id/20323334/ns/health-health_care/t/brazil-provide-free-sex-change-operations/#.U1HYG8fw9Ea</ref>

==Opposition==

[[J. Michael Bailey]] wrote a book which disagrees with the "born trapped" theory.
*In his book, he argued that some people born male who want to cross genders are driven primarily by an erotic fascination with themselves as women.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/health/psychology/21gender.html?ex=1345348800&en=0c1176374e251f82&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss</ref>

Dr. Bailey has come under tremendous social and administrative pressure, motivated by [[political correctness]], from liberal partisans who disagree with his scientific views based on political and personal motivation. This pressure has focused primarily upon objections to the ''implications'' of his theory, rather than objections to his ''empirical evidence''. Rather than try to refute his empirical findings, "[[transgender]] activists worked to try to ruin Bailey professionally and personally." <ref>http://www.bioethics.northwestern.edu/faculty/work/dreger/controversy_tmwwbq.pdf</ref>

According to the [[Vatican]],
* people who have undergone a sex-change operation cannot enter into a valid marriage, either because they would be "marrying" someone of the same sex in the eyes of the church or because their mental state casts doubt on their ability to make and uphold their "marriage" vows.<ref>http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/CatholicTSDecision.html</ref>

===Detransitioners===

One significant phenomenon in recent years has been the increasing prominence of "de-transitioners," referring to men and women who underwent gender reassignment but then reverted to living as their actual gender. In some cases, this is purely in reaction to the negative medical consequences of the procedures involved, while others have come to reject the transgender ideology itself as destructive and detached from reality.<ref>[https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/07/hundreds-of-transgender-people-want-to-go-back-to-their-birth-sex-says-formerly-trans-woman/ 'Hundreds' of Transgender People Want To Go Back To Their Birth Sex, Says Formerly Trans Woman]</ref> Among this latter group, critiques of the ideology vary; some continue to subscribe to a version of [[critical theory]], adhering to such movements as radical [[feminism]], while others embrace a more traditional understanding of gender roles, whether from the influence of Christian teachings or from a decision that these are more socially stable.<ref>https://changedmovement.com/stories/laura-perry</ref>

Whatever their motivations, detransitioned individuals have often been sharply and publicly critical of the transgender movement, and for that reason have been attacked by LGBT activists and by the media for being "transphobic." A ''60 Minutes'' segment on [[CBS]] in May 2021 that briefly included the stories of a few such persons, in a broader story on the status of "transgender rights" in America, was denounced by these activists, because it acknowledged that some people who transition have second thoughts and do not have universally positive experiences.<ref>Valerie Richardson, [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/26/60-minutes-backlash-lgbt-advocates-detransitioning/ '60 Minutes' hit with backlash from LGBTQ advocates for detransition report]. ''The Washington Times'', May 26, 2021.</ref>

==Famous gender-confused people==
*Christine (born George) Jorgensen: An American [[World War II]] veteran, George became Christine following a 1952 operation. This was the first widely publicized sex change surgery.<ref>[http://www.christinejorgensen.org/ Christine Jorgensen site]</ref>

*[[Walter Carlos]], 1967

*[[Bruce Jenner]] (who now claims to be "Caitlyn" Jenner) won Olympic medals competing as a male decathlete.

*Jan (born James) Morris: A British [[World War II]] veteran, reporter, and father, Morris underwent sex change surgery in 1972.<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/profile/profile_jan_morris.shtml Jan Morris: A Profile]</ref>

*Renée Richards (born Richard Raskind): An American eye surgeon and tennis player. Richards made waves in 1976, when he entered amateur [[tennis]] competitions as a "woman".<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/01/garden/01renee.html The Lady Regrets]</ref>

*Chastity ("Chaz") Bono: Daughter of [[Sonny and Cher]]. Underwent surgical mutilation in 2009, and legally became a "man" when the Los Angeles County Superior Court approved her name and gender "change" on May 6, 2010.<ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/209/000108882/</ref>

*Larry ("Lana") Wachowski: Co-Director of [[The Matrix]] trilogy.<ref>https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/category/entities/people/lana-wachowski</ref> His brother, Andy ("Lily") Wachowski also came out as gender-confused in 2016.<ref>
https://www.windycitytimes.com/lgbt/Second-Wachowski-filmmaker-sibling-comes-out-as-trans-/54509.html</ref>

*Roderick ("Laverne") Cox:<ref>[https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1209545/ IMDb profile]</ref> First gender-confused actor to be nominated for a Primetime Emmy.<ref>https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/tv/la-et-st-emmys-laverne-cox-trans-orange-is-the-new-black-20140710-story.html</ref>

*Walter ("Jenna") Talackova: Canadian male model and TV personality of Czech/First Nations background who experienced gender confusion early on and underwent surgical mutilation at age 19 to facilitate his delusion. Talackova tried to deceive organizers of the Miss Universe Canada pageant to enter the 2012 version of the event by claiming to be a "woman", but he was denied entry into the pageant (which is reserved for women only, specifically stating in its rules that only natural-born women are qualified to enter) when he was discovered to really be a man. He then contacted liberal [[feminism|feminist]] attorney Gloria Allred, who forced the Miss Universe organization to cave in to liberal [[bullying]], [[political correctness]] and the LGBT agenda and allowed Talackova to enter the pageant. He did not get far in the pageant however, as he failed to make the final five contestants.<ref>[http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/transgender-contestant-falls-short-at-miss-universe-canada-1.1188866 "Transgender" contestant falls short at Miss Universe Canada]</ref>

*Jaron ("Jazz Jennings") Bloshinsky:<ref>[http://gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/jaron-bloshinsky/ Gender, Patriarchy, and All That Jazz : Mary Lou Singleton] (Warning: Contains feminist rhetoric and nonsense)</ref> Star of reality TV series ''I Am Jazz''. 15-year-old boy who began claiming to be a "girl" from the age of five after experiencing gender confusion. His parents, Greg and Janette Bloshinsky, have chosen to encourage and enable him in his choice to pretend to be "female".

*Nyla Rose (real name unknown), an undersized gender-confused male professional wrestler who competes against female wrestlers in intergender matches in [[All Elite Wrestling]].<ref>https://wrestling-edge.com/cody-and-brandi-rhodes-did-not-know-nyla-rose-was-transgender/</ref>

*[[Fallon Fox]] (real name unknown), a gender-confused male professional MMA fighter who fractured a female opponent's skull.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://nationalfile.com/trans-mma-fighter-enjoyed-fracturing-biological-womans-skull-called-it-bliss/|title=Trans MMA Fighter ‘Enjoyed’ Fracturing Biological Woman’s Skull, Called it ‘Bliss’|date=June 22, 2020
|accessdate=2020-09-10}}</ref>

*Ellen ("Elliot") Page came out as gender-confused in 2020.<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/dec/01/elliot-page-star-of-juno-x-men-announces-he-is-transgender</ref>

*[[Michelle Obama]] is said to have transitioned in the late 1980s and early 1990s.{{fact}}

==See also==
*[[Transgender activism]]
*[[Transgender bathrooms]]
* [[Transracial]]

==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

==External links==
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eJKsNRRT-4 'Men Don't Belong In My Sport' | Female Wrestler SHREDS Transgender Athletes], ''The Daily Caller'' youtube.com
*[https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1454188597704286212 Misgender me and I will punch you in the face].
*[https://twitter.com/SarahAshtonLV/status/1516133207531479057 Sarah Ashton-Cirillo], a self-described transgender journalist, reporting from [[Kharkiv]] during the [[Russia-Ukraine war]].

{{Democrat establishment}}
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Psychology]]
[[Category:Political Terms]]
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]

Transgenderism

2022-09-03T13:40:51Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Famous gender-confused people */ A better source is needed. The book is about her support for transgender persons

The theory of '''"sex change"''' is based on the claim that a person of one [[gender]] can be born "trapped" in an opposite-gender body. The theory plays havoc with traditional ideas of [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]]. It is referred to as '''"transgenderism"''' by its liberal proponents, but can be better seen and understood as a type of mental disorder called '''[[gender confusion]]'''.<ref>[http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-2896200258/gender-confusion.html Gender confusion]</ref><ref>[http://www.focusonthefamily.com/parenting/parenting-challenges/gender-confusion-in-children Answering parents' questions on gender confusion in children] at Focus on the Family</ref>

==Transgender Ideology==

Traditionally, individuals who are classed or who identify themselves as "transgender" or "transsexual" are said to possess a desire to become the opposite sex. However, many such individuals reject this categorization, insisting that they are in some meaningful sense a member of the opposite sex already. While acknowledging that this is not true by any genetic or anatomical definition, transgender individuals insist that such physical markers as sex chromosomes, or the possession of male or female reproductive organs and/or sexual characteristics, have nothing to do with whether a person truly is male or female; that it is a matter of personal identity or self-perception and thus not subject to biological reality. To this end, transgender individuals will frequently insist that they were "born in the wrong body" and that they are simply changing their outward appearance to reflect this inner truth.

Those who identify as transgender over the long term frequently assert that they have had feelings of gender confusion from the ages of 3-5, the period in which males and females typically begin to be socialized differently and to become aware of these categories. They further state that these feelings intensify significantly during puberty, and persist throughout their adult lives. Some seek to compensate by engaging in behavior that overly exaggerates the stereotypes associated with their sex (some "male-to-female" transsexuals, for example, previously took up hobbies such as bodybuilding, or joined the military). Many, however, experience feelings of failure and depression, and suicides or attempted suicides are not uncommon. The transgender movement strongly implies that this depressive state is the inevitable endpoint for all transgender persons, unless they are given the opportunity to live as the opposite sex; in this context, such behavior is represented as literally a matter of life and death. Although this is far from universally true, as many transgender individuals never do act on their desires, it has become part of the popular image surrounding transsexualism in recent years.

There is nothing within the scientific knowledge of the human body and of sexual development to support the claim of transgender individuals that they were "born in the wrong body." Disorders of sexual development, including various forms of hermaphroditism, are well-known and carefully documented, but such "intersex" cases, as they are sometimes labeled, are rare and cannot account for more than a small minority of those who identify as transgender. Claims sometimes made to the effect that such persons have brains resembling those of the opposite sex are not borne out by the available medical research. The ways in which persons with gender confusion view themselves overlap considerably with the symptoms of anorexia and "body integrity dysphoria" (in which people seek to become disabled via the removal of a limb or the destruction of a sense such as vision or hearing), and it has been suggested that the cause of these disorders lies in a defect of the brain's spatial-cognitive abilities, but more research is needed.

100% of all [[rape]]s between inmates resulting in pregnancy in women's prisons are committed by transgenders.

==Alleged medical treatment==

Although some people affected by gender confusion are content merely with transvestism or "cross-dressing" (that is, wearing the clothing of the opposite sex), many seek to also have their physical appearance altered, so that their bodies will more closely resemble that of their desired gender. The ultimate goal among such persons is to be accepted not simply as someone who likes dressing as a member of their desired gender, but as someone who truly ''is'' that gender. Today, this process is popularly referred to as "transitioning" (a man, for example, would be said to be "transitioning to female," and vice versa).

The idea of "transitioning" (in both a surgical and a non-surgical sense) has been embraced primarily by advocates of the 1960s [[sexual revolution]] such as [[homosexual rights]] activists, but rejected by the [[Roman Catholic Church]] and most conservative [[Protestant]] denominations, though some liberal churches (such as the [[Episcopalians]] and [[Unitarians]]), which no longer believe in the truth of Scripture, have become increasingly accepting of it.<ref>"The key point is that the (transsexual) surgical operation is so superficial and external that it does not change the personality. If the person was male, he remains male. If she was female, she remains female." [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/CatholicTSDecision.html]</ref>

[[Transgender|Gender-confused]] patients seek to undergo surgical [[sex change operation]]s (also known as [[gender reassignment surgery]], or what amounts to surgical mutilation) to change their external appearance to that of the gender with which they claim to [[identify]]. Patients often undergo [[psychotherapy]], [[hormone treatment]], and facial surgery as well. A man, for example, will be prescribed artificial female hormones such as estrogen, which would cause him to develop larger breasts and other female physical characteristics; conversely, a woman would be given artificial male hormones such as testosterone, which would cause her to develop a deeper voice, more facial and body hair, and other male physical characteristics. What is often not disclosed, however, is that these hormones are by their nature highly disruptive of the body's normal processes and often have serious long-term side effects. Women who take testosterone for long periods, for example, are at increased risk for heart disease, and may have their reproductive ability seriously damaged.

In the United States, according to traditional practices, a patient must undergo counseling before being approved for the surgery. Patients in the US are also required to have two letters of recommendation from certified psychiatrists, and must have lived a year acting as the gender that they claim to identify with.<ref>http://www.wpath.org/publications_standards.cfm</ref> Patients sometimes choose to have the surgery done abroad in places like [[Thailand]] for three reasons: 1. It is often less expensive for the patient, 2. The patient may be able to bypass some legal restrictions, 3. The surgeons in Thailand have a reputation of being particularly skilled in this area.<ref>http://www.bangkokcompanies.com/Surgery/thailandsurgery_sex_change_surgery.htm</ref> However, even such "safeguards" as exist are frequently not observed in practice. Many individuals begin hormone therapy within a few months or even weeks of "coming out" as transgender, and many of the psychiatric evaluations are cursory only.

It should be noted that hormone therapy and removing and adding body parts does not change the genetic makeup of an individual. On the genetic level, individuals who started as men are still men no matter what appearance they choose, and women who started as women are still women after surgery as well.

==Legality==

Different states have different laws regarding the status of people who have had sex change operations. Generally, their birth certificates are reissued with their new claimed legal [[gender]]. Since they are not required to divorce before surgery, this could lead to de facto [[same sex marriage|same-sex "marriage"]] if they stay with their spouse. The country of [[Brazil]] offers free sex change operations because they are claimed to be a constitutional "right".<ref>https://www.nbcnews.com/id/20323334/ns/health-health_care/t/brazil-provide-free-sex-change-operations/#.U1HYG8fw9Ea</ref>

==Opposition==

[[J. Michael Bailey]] wrote a book which disagrees with the "born trapped" theory.
*In his book, he argued that some people born male who want to cross genders are driven primarily by an erotic fascination with themselves as women.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/health/psychology/21gender.html?ex=1345348800&en=0c1176374e251f82&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss</ref>

Dr. Bailey has come under tremendous social and administrative pressure, motivated by [[political correctness]], from liberal partisans who disagree with his scientific views based on political and personal motivation. This pressure has focused primarily upon objections to the ''implications'' of his theory, rather than objections to his ''empirical evidence''. Rather than try to refute his empirical findings, "[[transgender]] activists worked to try to ruin Bailey professionally and personally." <ref>http://www.bioethics.northwestern.edu/faculty/work/dreger/controversy_tmwwbq.pdf</ref>

According to the [[Vatican]],
* people who have undergone a sex-change operation cannot enter into a valid marriage, either because they would be "marrying" someone of the same sex in the eyes of the church or because their mental state casts doubt on their ability to make and uphold their "marriage" vows.<ref>http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/CatholicTSDecision.html</ref>

===Detransitioners===

One significant phenomenon in recent years has been the increasing prominence of "de-transitioners," referring to men and women who underwent gender reassignment but then reverted to living as their actual gender. In some cases, this is purely in reaction to the negative medical consequences of the procedures involved, while others have come to reject the transgender ideology itself as destructive and detached from reality.<ref>[https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/07/hundreds-of-transgender-people-want-to-go-back-to-their-birth-sex-says-formerly-trans-woman/ 'Hundreds' of Transgender People Want To Go Back To Their Birth Sex, Says Formerly Trans Woman]</ref> Among this latter group, critiques of the ideology vary; some continue to subscribe to a version of [[critical theory]], adhering to such movements as radical [[feminism]], while others embrace a more traditional understanding of gender roles, whether from the influence of Christian teachings or from a decision that these are more socially stable.<ref>https://changedmovement.com/stories/laura-perry</ref>

Whatever their motivations, detransitioned individuals have often been sharply and publicly critical of the transgender movement, and for that reason have been attacked by LGBT activists and by the media for being "transphobic." A ''60 Minutes'' segment on [[CBS]] in May 2021 that briefly included the stories of a few such persons, in a broader story on the status of "transgender rights" in America, was denounced by these activists, because it acknowledged that some people who transition have second thoughts and do not have universally positive experiences.<ref>Valerie Richardson, [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/26/60-minutes-backlash-lgbt-advocates-detransitioning/ '60 Minutes' hit with backlash from LGBTQ advocates for detransition report]. ''The Washington Times'', May 26, 2021.</ref>

==Famous gender-confused people==
*Christine (born George) Jorgensen: An American [[World War II]] veteran, George became Christine following a 1952 operation. This was the first widely publicized sex change surgery.<ref>[http://www.christinejorgensen.org/ Christine Jorgensen site]</ref>

*[[Walter Carlos]], 1967

*[[Bruce Jenner]] (who now claims to be "Caitlyn" Jenner) won Olympic medals competing as a male decathlete.

*Jan (born James) Morris: A British [[World War II]] veteran, reporter, and father, Morris underwent sex change surgery in 1972.<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/profile/profile_jan_morris.shtml Jan Morris: A Profile]</ref>

*Renée Richards (born Richard Raskind): An American eye surgeon and tennis player. Richards made waves in 1976, when he entered amateur [[tennis]] competitions as a "woman".<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/01/garden/01renee.html The Lady Regrets]</ref>

*Chastity ("Chaz") Bono: Daughter of [[Sonny and Cher]]. Underwent surgical mutilation in 2009, and legally became a "man" when the Los Angeles County Superior Court approved her name and gender "change" on May 6, 2010.<ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/209/000108882/</ref>

*Larry ("Lana") Wachowski: Co-Director of [[The Matrix]] trilogy.<ref>https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/category/entities/people/lana-wachowski</ref> His brother, Andy ("Lily") Wachowski also came out as gender-confused in 2016.<ref>
https://www.windycitytimes.com/lgbt/Second-Wachowski-filmmaker-sibling-comes-out-as-trans-/54509.html</ref>

*Roderick ("Laverne") Cox:<ref>[https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1209545/ IMDb profile]</ref> First gender-confused actor to be nominated for a Primetime Emmy.<ref>https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/tv/la-et-st-emmys-laverne-cox-trans-orange-is-the-new-black-20140710-story.html</ref>

*Walter ("Jenna") Talackova: Canadian male model and TV personality of Czech/First Nations background who experienced gender confusion early on and underwent surgical mutilation at age 19 to facilitate his delusion. Talackova tried to deceive organizers of the Miss Universe Canada pageant to enter the 2012 version of the event by claiming to be a "woman", but he was denied entry into the pageant (which is reserved for women only, specifically stating in its rules that only natural-born women are qualified to enter) when he was discovered to really be a man. He then contacted liberal [[feminism|feminist]] attorney Gloria Allred, who forced the Miss Universe organization to cave in to liberal [[bullying]], [[political correctness]] and the LGBT agenda and allowed Talackova to enter the pageant. He did not get far in the pageant however, as he failed to make the final five contestants.<ref>[http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/transgender-contestant-falls-short-at-miss-universe-canada-1.1188866 "Transgender" contestant falls short at Miss Universe Canada]</ref>

*Jaron ("Jazz Jennings") Bloshinsky:<ref>[http://gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/jaron-bloshinsky/ Gender, Patriarchy, and All That Jazz : Mary Lou Singleton] (Warning: Contains feminist rhetoric and nonsense)</ref> Star of reality TV series ''I Am Jazz''. 15-year-old boy who began claiming to be a "girl" from the age of five after experiencing gender confusion. His parents, Greg and Janette Bloshinsky, have chosen to encourage and enable him in his choice to pretend to be "female".

*Nyla Rose (real name unknown), an undersized gender-confused male professional wrestler who competes against female wrestlers in intergender matches in [[All Elite Wrestling]].<ref>https://wrestling-edge.com/cody-and-brandi-rhodes-did-not-know-nyla-rose-was-transgender/</ref>

*[[Fallon Fox]] (real name unknown), a gender-confused male professional MMA fighter who fractured a female opponent's skull.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://nationalfile.com/trans-mma-fighter-enjoyed-fracturing-biological-womans-skull-called-it-bliss/|title=Trans MMA Fighter ‘Enjoyed’ Fracturing Biological Woman’s Skull, Called it ‘Bliss’|date=June 22, 2020
|accessdate=2020-09-10}}</ref>

*Ellen ("Elliot") Page came out as gender-confused in 2020.<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/dec/01/elliot-page-star-of-juno-x-men-announces-he-is-transgender</ref>

*[[Michelle Obama]], transitioned in the late 1980s and early 1990s.{{fact}}

==See also==
*[[Transgender activism]]
*[[Transgender bathrooms]]
* [[Transracial]]

==References==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

==External links==
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eJKsNRRT-4 'Men Don't Belong In My Sport' | Female Wrestler SHREDS Transgender Athletes], ''The Daily Caller'' youtube.com
*[https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1454188597704286212 Misgender me and I will punch you in the face].
*[https://twitter.com/SarahAshtonLV/status/1516133207531479057 Sarah Ashton-Cirillo], a self-described transgender journalist, reporting from [[Kharkiv]] during the [[Russia-Ukraine war]].

{{Democrat establishment}}
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Psychology]]
[[Category:Political Terms]]
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]

Climate agenda

2022-09-02T14:32:30Z

RobLeonardWoo: Merge Winter

<center><big>{{days until|2029|12|31}} Days Until Final Destruction of the Planet'''</big></center>
'''"Climate change"''' is the new name used by [[liberal]]s for their [[global warming]] hoax, which they coined as it became obvious that there is no crisis in global warming. The modification in terminology is identical to what [[liberals]] did in redefining "evolution" to be "change over time," which of course is a meaningless expression just as "climate change" is. Numerous past predictions of climatic catastrophes have failed to hold up.<ref>Multiple references:
*Lott, Maxim (March 19, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/science/10-times-experts-predicted-the-world-would-end-by-now 10 times 'experts' predicted the world would end by now]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 20, 2019.
*[https://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-the-art-of-climate-science-11552002661 Notable & Quotable: The Art of Climate Science]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. March 7, 2019. Retrieved March 20, 2019.
*Lott, Maxim (May 28, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/science/five-most-over-the-top-climate-warnings Five most over-the-top climate warnings]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
See also:
*Lifson, Thomas (March 8, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/peer-reviewed-study-shows-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-disaster-predictions Shhhh! Nobody tell Ocasio-Cortez scientists are skeptical of global warming]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 20, 2019.</ref>

While on the one hand, [[secular]] scientists (and those who believe in a [[old earth]]) claim "'''''Climate change occurs naturally'''''" in repeated cycles of cooling and warming (known as the Milankovitch theory), they occasionally argue that man-made climate change can occur and is more impactful. {{See also|Ice Age}} (a period of cold [[atmosphere|atmospheric]] worldwide temperatures and intense [[precipitation]] that followed the [[Noah's Flood|the world wide flood]])

Many writers have been urging America to fund an ill-conceived initiative to "stop global warming" as if warmer nights or winters would make human life more difficult. The term "climate change" has largely replaced the term "global warming", in ideological discussions.

Ideologues insist that the world's top scientists have reached a "consensus" that most of the warming which land-based weather stations have recorded in the last century is due to human activity. The basis for this claim is a set of reports published by the [[IPCC]], an agency of the United Nations. The assumption is that the government-appointed representatives who run the IPCC would be completely objective and neutral, and would place finding and revealing the truth ahead of any nationalistic interests.

A lot of money is spent publicizing one side's position in the debate:
* ''Newsweek'' purports to take readers inside the world of “Global-Warming Deniers: A Well-Funded Machine” without mentioning that the global-warming alarmists are even better funded, in some cases with government support. [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/aug/15/the-hottest-year-1934/]

Journalists omit mention of key scientific points:

* Good news is no news, which is why the mainstream media largely ignores all studies showing net benefits of climate change. [http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/17/the-good-side-of-climate-change/]

Ideologues use all sorts of tricks to convince the general public to support them on the climate change issue. A perennial favorite is to trumpet the current year as the "[[warmest year on record]]", as if one [[outlier]] denotes a [[trend]]. Probably the most insidious kind of trick is to accuse objective people of cherry-picking and censorship, while hypocritically doing just that themselves.

The allegedly harmful effects of climate change include warming temperatures, changing weather patterns, an increase in sea level and in general any climate event affected by global warming.<ref>http://chaser.env.nagoya-u.ac.jp/~kengo/lec/IPCC_TAR-FRONT.pdf</ref> Climate change is one of the top [[Environmental Issues|environmental issues]], with [[liberal]]s and [[conservative]]s evenly divided on whether [[global warming]] is man-made or, if it is significantly occurring, is a natural event — along with [[global cooling]]. By 2019, voters were increasingly rejecting radical climate change policies.<ref>Burnett, H. Sterling (May 18, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/around-the-world-backlash-against-expensive-climate-change-policies Around the world, backlash against expensive climate-change policies]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved May 18, 2019.</ref>

Jack M. Hollander wrote:
*The planet has warmed since the mid-1800s, but before that it cooled for more than five centuries. Cycles of warming and cooling have been part of Earth's natural [[climate history]] for millions of years. So what is the [[global warming debate]] about? It's about the proposition that human use of [[fossil fuels]] has contributed significantly to the past century's warming, and that expected future warming may have catastrophic global consequences. But hard evidence for this human contribution simply does not exist; the evidence we have is suggestive at best. Does that mean the human effects are not occurring? Not necessarily. But [[Climategate media coverage#Climategate media coverage|media coverage]] of global warming has been so alarmist that it fails to convey how flimsy the evidence really is. Most people don't realize that many strong statements about a human contribution to global warming are based more on [[politics]] than on [[science]]. Indeed, the climate change issue has become so highly [[Politicization of science|politicized]] that its scientific and political aspects are now almost indistinguishable.<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM Global Warming: Both Sides</ref>

In March 2021 during a "hot mic" moment when he thought no one was listening during a speech he gave, [[Joe Biden]] publicly admitted indirectly what many people have already known, that "climate change" does not exist, when he said in an aside to someone off the stage that "...(you're) starting to convince the American people there’s a thing called climate change".<ref>[https://welovetrump.com/2022/03/17/biden-gets-caught-on-hot-mic-telling-truth-about-climate-change/ Biden Gets Caught On Hot Mic Telling Truth About Climate Change]</ref>

==Questions==
#What is the most important greenhouse gas?
#*AGW proponents say it's [[carbon dioxide]]
#*A peer-reviewed scientific paper says it's [[water vapor]]<ref>[http://thejll.com/Frascati/ReichelThejllLassenSCL.pdf "Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas ..."]</ref>
#What is the role of clouds?
#*Low-altitude clouds reflect some of the sun's radiation back into the atmosphere, cooling the earth. It's not yet known whether global warming will dissipate clouds, which would effectively speed up the process of climate change, or increase [[cloud cover]], which would slow it down. [http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1912448,00.html#ixzz1EyuBDJo1]
#What are the uncertainties in understanding climatic change?
#*The UN's climate panel said recently there is '''a 90% chance''' that most of the last 50 to 100 years of global warming are due to human activity
#*[[Sallie Baliunas]] points out that the same climate panel also said, "Our ability to quantify the human influence on global climate is limited because the expected signal is still emerging from the noise of natural variability, and because there are uncertainties in key factors" [http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/books/g_warming/solar.html]

==Hypocrisy==

Many times, AGW advocates pay lip service to general principles which they themselves violate, while broadcasting false accusations that their opponents are violating these principles. The AGW side has made every effort to censor their opponents, heaping enormous pressure on scientists and other academics to silence them. Accordingly, the US media gave great publicity to [[James Hansen]] when he accused NASA of trying to silence him.<ref>Hansen "shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change" [http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm]</ref>

==Environmentalism and climate change==
The main contention of [[environmentalist]]s like [[Al Gore]] is the argument that:
#The earth's atmosphere warmed one or two degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 Centigrade) during the 20th century.
#Most of this warming is man-made.
#The warming is likely to continue and to be harmful to human, animal and plant life.
#We must all work together to stop it by reducing emission of [[greenhouse gases]].

==Science and climate change==
Nuclear physicist Jack M. Hollander wrote:
<blockquote>... climate change remains a fascinating and important scientific subject. Climate dynamics and climate history are extraordinarily complex, and despite intensive study for decades, scientists are not yet able to explain satisfactorily such basic phenomena as extreme weather events ([[hurricane]]s, [[tornado]]es, [[drought]]s), El Nino variations, historical [[climate cycles]], and trends of [[atmospheric temperature]]s. The scientific uncertainties about all these matters are great, and not surprisingly, competent scientists disagree in their interpretations of what is and is not known.<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM</ref></blockquote>

Physicist William Happer wrote:
<blockquote>The current debates about global climate change are complicated by our not understanding the physics of the sun or of the earth’s atmosphere and oceans well enough to dismiss them as major causes of climate change on the earth. Dramatic climate changes like the [[medieval warm period]] at the time of the [[Viking]] settlements of [[Iceland]] and [[Greenland]] from about a.d. 900 to 1250, and the subsequent “[[little ice age]],” from about 1250 to 1700, which led to extinction of the Greenland settlements, were certainly not caused by manmade changes in the concentration of [[carbon dioxide]] in the atmosphere.<ref>http://media.hoover.org/documents/0817939326_27.pdf</ref></blockquote>

One of the major problems with many scientists' conclusions about climate change is a misunderstanding of [[correlation]] versus [[causation]]. Some studies show correlations between increasing concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases and increasing [[precipitation]], and between human activity and atmospheric greenhouse gases, and then go so far as to conclude that humans are causing increased rain, snow, and catastrophic flooding.<ref>Gillis, Justin. "Study Links Rise in Rain and Snow to Human Actions." ''The New York Times'', February 16, 2011. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/science/earth/17extreme.html?_r=2&ref=science</ref><ref>Schiermeier, Quirin. "Increased Flood Risk Linked to Global Warming." 2011. ''Nature'', Vol. 470, p. 316. http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110216/full/470316a.html</ref> Correlation does not imply causation. This is especially true considering the relatively short periods of data used (a few decades at most) compared to the Earth's age, and the fact that weather patterns have been cyclic throughout history (see [[climate cycles]]).

Climate change is neither anthropogenic nor apocalyptic. [[Douglas Pollock]] comments that 95% of greenhouse gases are water vapor 3.6% of these gases are CO2.
Of the gases in the atmosphere 0.04% is CO2, only 0.01% is generated by humans. All greenhouse gases represent 1% of the gases.
CO2 is the gas of life, it is vital for life, in fact the earth has greened between 1982 and 2014 by 15% and the Sahara has shrunk by 300 thousand km2.<ref>[https://odysee.com/globalwarming:4 The Truth about Climate Change, Global Warming and United Nations Mafia - by [[Douglas Pollock]], a scientist recognized by Donald Trump]</ref>

In the middle ages there was a warm period on earth, instead of being detrimental, it was beneficial, as fewer people died from cold (cold kills 20 times more than heat), the greatest cathedrals and castles in history were built (including Notre Dame).
In the last 8 glaciations CO2 has been at its maximum level and in the warmings at its minimum.

Between 1945 and 1970 the temperature decreased as the world became more and more industrialized.
The current warming has been the weakest since the last 10,000 years.
The sun and the Earth's oscillations (Milanković cycles) are the main causes of climate change, scientists have found a correlation.
The environmentalism business moves 1.3 trillion dollars.
Is it worth sending the economy down the drain?
In Germany, electricity has risen by 215% for using "renewable" energies (which are more expensive and less eficient).<ref>[https://www.nzz.ch/klimapolitik_verteilt_das_weltvermoegen_neu-ld.1003523 Klimapolitik verteilt das Weltvermögen neu]</ref>

Prominent personalities have spoken out on the matter:
John L. Casey, nasa scientist has said that climate change is the "biggest scam".
Patrick Moore, co-founder of GreenPeace talks about this being a scare campaign to steal more funds from taxpayers.
Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer said in 2010 "We at the IPCC de facto redistribute the world's wealth with climate policies..." "One must free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is about environmentalism. This is no longer about environmentalism."
In the past 41 climate "experts" have made erroneous predictions about environmental catastrophes.
The water level is not going to rise 3 meters as predicted, the Archimedes Principle says that ice has the same density as water, it is not able to rise much when the ice melts.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/20/nolte-climate-experts-are-0-41-with-their-doomsday-predictions/|title=Nolte: Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 with Their Doomsday Predictions *UPDATE 0-53*|publisher=Breitbart|date=September 20, 2019}}</ref>

Who started with the myth of 97% of scientists agreeing that "the Earth is warming and human emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause" is John Cook of the Global Change Institute in Australia, "main cause" meaning over 50%, but an analysis reveals that it is only 2%.
To get to 97% he added papers that explicitly said there is anthropogenic climate change, without saying how much of it was anthropogenic and added papers that said there is climate change, without saying it is anthropogenic although he could say implicitly.<ref>[https://odysee.com/Eco-Communism-The-Climate-Change-Hoax-Documentary:1 Eco-Communism The Climate Change Hoax Documentary]</ref><ref>[https://www.bitchute.com/video/9Vqlq3wsWrI/ GREENPEACE FOUNDER DEBUNKS CLIMATE CHANGE! (DR. PATRICK MOORE UNCUT) | LOUDER WITH CROWDER]</ref><ref>[https://www.prageru.com/video/do-97-of-climate-scientists-really-agree Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree?]</ref><ref>[http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-study-falsely-classifies-scientists.html 97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them]</ref><ref>[https://www.wsj.com/articles/joseph-bast-and-roy-spencer-the-myth-of-the-climate-change-97-1401145980 The Myth of the Climate Change '97%']</ref><ref>[https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/?sh=62e148cb3f9f '97% Of Climate Scientists Agree' Is 100% Wrong]</ref>

==History of Climate Change vs. Global Warming==
The term climate change has its origins several decades ago when physicist Gilbert Plass published a study called ''The Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climatic Change'' in 1956.<ref>http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1956.tb01206.x/abstract</ref>
In this study, Plass postulated the release of CO2 into the atmosphere by industrial and other human activities may have caused the temperature rise noticed in the twentieth century.

The term global warming was first thought to be used by Wallace Broecker, a geochemist from [[Columbia University]]'s Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory. His paper, ''Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?'' <ref>http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/files/2009/10/broeckerglobalwarming75.pdf</ref> acknowledged the scenario of global warming, though there was a common acknowledgement that airborne aerosols may cause global cooling.

A National Academy of Science study of carbon dioxide's impact on climate published in 1979 also used the term global warming to refer to surface temperature change.<ref>http://www.atmos.ucla.edu/~brianpm/download/charney_report.pdf</ref> Jule Charney of the [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] in Cambridge declared: "If carbon dioxide continues to increase, we find no reason to doubt that climate changes will result and no reason to believe that these changes will be negligible.” Climate change was still used to refer to the other changes thought to be caused by increased CO2.

==Extreme weather events==
With regard to the catastrophic flooding in [[Pakistan]], Fox News reported that Pakistani senator and “the country’s top climate official" Sherry Rehman, said on Twitter that Pakistan is in 2022 experiencing a "serious climate catastrophe, one of the hardest in the decade." The senator said that “we are at the moment at the ground zero of the front line of extreme weather events”, and described “an unrelenting cascade of heatwaves, forest fires, flash floods, multiple glacial lake outbursts, flood events and now the monster monsoon of the decade.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/world/pakistan-flooding-deaths-pass-one-thousand-in-climate-catastrophe "Pakistan flooding deaths pass 1,000 in ‘climate catastrophe’ ". Fox News August 28, 2022</ref>

===Winters===
Heavy seasonal snow and extreme snowstorms occur with great frequency, with. the number "of extreme snowstorms in the eastern two-thirds of the contiguous United States" increasing over the last hundred years. There were about double the number of extreme snowstorms in the second half of the 20th century than the first.<ref>[https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/climate-change-and-extreme-snow-us "Climate Change and Extreme Snow in the US", National Centers forEnvironmental Information]</ref>

==Further reading==
* [http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/CCRG.pdf Climate Change Reference Guide]
* [http://www.who.int/heli/risks/climate/climatedirectory/en/index1.html Climate change: directory of references/resources]
* [https://www.ncei.noaa.gov National Climatic Data Center]
* [http://www.realclimate.org/ Real Climate]
* [http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/ IPCC Fifth Assessment Report]
* [http://www.thegwpf.com/ The Global Warming Policy Forum]

==See also==
*[[Anthropogenic global warming]]
*[[War on Science]]
*[[Michael Shellenberger|APOCALYPSE NEVER]]
*[[Cloud cover]]
*[[Ice age]]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/category/weather Fox News on "extreme weather in USA]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM Global warming: both sides]
*[http://www.no-carbon-tax.org Australian Anti-Climate Hypocrisy Site]

{{Climategate scandal}}
{{communism}}
[[Category:Environmentalism]]
[[Category:Climate Change]]
[[Category:Liberal Falsehoods]]

Climate agenda

2022-09-02T14:29:09Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* See also */ Addition

<center><big>{{days until|2029|12|31}} Days Until Final Destruction of the Planet'''</big></center>
'''"Climate change"''' is the new name used by [[liberal]]s for their [[global warming]] hoax, which they coined as it became obvious that there is no crisis in global warming. The modification in terminology is identical to what [[liberals]] did in redefining "evolution" to be "change over time," which of course is a meaningless expression just as "climate change" is. Numerous past predictions of climatic catastrophes have failed to hold up.<ref>Multiple references:
*Lott, Maxim (March 19, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/science/10-times-experts-predicted-the-world-would-end-by-now 10 times 'experts' predicted the world would end by now]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 20, 2019.
*[https://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-the-art-of-climate-science-11552002661 Notable & Quotable: The Art of Climate Science]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. March 7, 2019. Retrieved March 20, 2019.
*Lott, Maxim (May 28, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/science/five-most-over-the-top-climate-warnings Five most over-the-top climate warnings]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
See also:
*Lifson, Thomas (March 8, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/peer-reviewed-study-shows-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-disaster-predictions Shhhh! Nobody tell Ocasio-Cortez scientists are skeptical of global warming]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 20, 2019.</ref>

While on the one hand, [[secular]] scientists (and those who believe in a [[old earth]]) claim "'''''Climate change occurs naturally'''''" in repeated cycles of cooling and warming (known as the Milankovitch theory), they occasionally argue that man-made climate change can occur and is more impactful. {{See also|Ice Age}} (a period of cold [[atmosphere|atmospheric]] worldwide temperatures and intense [[precipitation]] that followed the [[Noah's Flood|the world wide flood]])

Many writers have been urging America to fund an ill-conceived initiative to "stop global warming" as if warmer nights or winters would make human life more difficult. The term "climate change" has largely replaced the term "global warming", in ideological discussions.

Ideologues insist that the world's top scientists have reached a "consensus" that most of the warming which land-based weather stations have recorded in the last century is due to human activity. The basis for this claim is a set of reports published by the [[IPCC]], an agency of the United Nations. The assumption is that the government-appointed representatives who run the IPCC would be completely objective and neutral, and would place finding and revealing the truth ahead of any nationalistic interests.

A lot of money is spent publicizing one side's position in the debate:
* ''Newsweek'' purports to take readers inside the world of “Global-Warming Deniers: A Well-Funded Machine” without mentioning that the global-warming alarmists are even better funded, in some cases with government support. [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/aug/15/the-hottest-year-1934/]

Journalists omit mention of key scientific points:

* Good news is no news, which is why the mainstream media largely ignores all studies showing net benefits of climate change. [http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/17/the-good-side-of-climate-change/]

Ideologues use all sorts of tricks to convince the general public to support them on the climate change issue. A perennial favorite is to trumpet the current year as the "[[warmest year on record]]", as if one [[outlier]] denotes a [[trend]]. Probably the most insidious kind of trick is to accuse objective people of cherry-picking and censorship, while hypocritically doing just that themselves.

The allegedly harmful effects of climate change include warming temperatures, changing weather patterns, an increase in sea level and in general any climate event affected by global warming.<ref>http://chaser.env.nagoya-u.ac.jp/~kengo/lec/IPCC_TAR-FRONT.pdf</ref> Climate change is one of the top [[Environmental Issues|environmental issues]], with [[liberal]]s and [[conservative]]s evenly divided on whether [[global warming]] is man-made or, if it is significantly occurring, is a natural event — along with [[global cooling]]. By 2019, voters were increasingly rejecting radical climate change policies.<ref>Burnett, H. Sterling (May 18, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/around-the-world-backlash-against-expensive-climate-change-policies Around the world, backlash against expensive climate-change policies]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved May 18, 2019.</ref>

Jack M. Hollander wrote:
*The planet has warmed since the mid-1800s, but before that it cooled for more than five centuries. Cycles of warming and cooling have been part of Earth's natural [[climate history]] for millions of years. So what is the [[global warming debate]] about? It's about the proposition that human use of [[fossil fuels]] has contributed significantly to the past century's warming, and that expected future warming may have catastrophic global consequences. But hard evidence for this human contribution simply does not exist; the evidence we have is suggestive at best. Does that mean the human effects are not occurring? Not necessarily. But [[Climategate media coverage#Climategate media coverage|media coverage]] of global warming has been so alarmist that it fails to convey how flimsy the evidence really is. Most people don't realize that many strong statements about a human contribution to global warming are based more on [[politics]] than on [[science]]. Indeed, the climate change issue has become so highly [[Politicization of science|politicized]] that its scientific and political aspects are now almost indistinguishable.<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM Global Warming: Both Sides</ref>

In March 2021 during a "hot mic" moment when he thought no one was listening during a speech he gave, [[Joe Biden]] publicly admitted indirectly what many people have already known, that "climate change" does not exist, when he said in an aside to someone off the stage that "...(you're) starting to convince the American people there’s a thing called climate change".<ref>[https://welovetrump.com/2022/03/17/biden-gets-caught-on-hot-mic-telling-truth-about-climate-change/ Biden Gets Caught On Hot Mic Telling Truth About Climate Change]</ref>

==Questions==
#What is the most important greenhouse gas?
#*AGW proponents say it's [[carbon dioxide]]
#*A peer-reviewed scientific paper says it's [[water vapor]]<ref>[http://thejll.com/Frascati/ReichelThejllLassenSCL.pdf "Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas ..."]</ref>
#What is the role of clouds?
#*Low-altitude clouds reflect some of the sun's radiation back into the atmosphere, cooling the earth. It's not yet known whether global warming will dissipate clouds, which would effectively speed up the process of climate change, or increase [[cloud cover]], which would slow it down. [http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1912448,00.html#ixzz1EyuBDJo1]
#What are the uncertainties in understanding climatic change?
#*The UN's climate panel said recently there is '''a 90% chance''' that most of the last 50 to 100 years of global warming are due to human activity
#*[[Sallie Baliunas]] points out that the same climate panel also said, "Our ability to quantify the human influence on global climate is limited because the expected signal is still emerging from the noise of natural variability, and because there are uncertainties in key factors" [http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/books/g_warming/solar.html]

==Winters==
Heavy seasonal snow and extreme snowstorms occur with great frequency, with. the number "of extreme snowstorms in the eastern two-thirds of the contiguous United States" increasing over the last hundred years. There were about double the number of extreme snowstorms in the second half of the 20th century than the first.<ref>[https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/climate-change-and-extreme-snow-us "Climate Change and Extreme Snow in the US", National Centers forEnvironmental Information]</ref>

==Hypocrisy==

Many times, AGW advocates pay lip service to general principles which they themselves violate, while broadcasting false accusations that their opponents are violating these principles. The AGW side has made every effort to censor their opponents, heaping enormous pressure on scientists and other academics to silence them. Accordingly, the US media gave great publicity to [[James Hansen]] when he accused NASA of trying to silence him.<ref>Hansen "shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change" [http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm]</ref>

==Environmentalism and climate change==
The main contention of [[environmentalist]]s like [[Al Gore]] is the argument that:
#The earth's atmosphere warmed one or two degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 Centigrade) during the 20th century.
#Most of this warming is man-made.
#The warming is likely to continue and to be harmful to human, animal and plant life.
#We must all work together to stop it by reducing emission of [[greenhouse gases]].

==Science and climate change==
Nuclear physicist Jack M. Hollander wrote:
<blockquote>... climate change remains a fascinating and important scientific subject. Climate dynamics and climate history are extraordinarily complex, and despite intensive study for decades, scientists are not yet able to explain satisfactorily such basic phenomena as extreme weather events ([[hurricane]]s, [[tornado]]es, [[drought]]s), El Nino variations, historical [[climate cycles]], and trends of [[atmospheric temperature]]s. The scientific uncertainties about all these matters are great, and not surprisingly, competent scientists disagree in their interpretations of what is and is not known.<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM</ref></blockquote>

Physicist William Happer wrote:
<blockquote>The current debates about global climate change are complicated by our not understanding the physics of the sun or of the earth’s atmosphere and oceans well enough to dismiss them as major causes of climate change on the earth. Dramatic climate changes like the [[medieval warm period]] at the time of the [[Viking]] settlements of [[Iceland]] and [[Greenland]] from about a.d. 900 to 1250, and the subsequent “[[little ice age]],” from about 1250 to 1700, which led to extinction of the Greenland settlements, were certainly not caused by manmade changes in the concentration of [[carbon dioxide]] in the atmosphere.<ref>http://media.hoover.org/documents/0817939326_27.pdf</ref></blockquote>

One of the major problems with many scientists' conclusions about climate change is a misunderstanding of [[correlation]] versus [[causation]]. Some studies show correlations between increasing concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases and increasing [[precipitation]], and between human activity and atmospheric greenhouse gases, and then go so far as to conclude that humans are causing increased rain, snow, and catastrophic flooding.<ref>Gillis, Justin. "Study Links Rise in Rain and Snow to Human Actions." ''The New York Times'', February 16, 2011. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/science/earth/17extreme.html?_r=2&ref=science</ref><ref>Schiermeier, Quirin. "Increased Flood Risk Linked to Global Warming." 2011. ''Nature'', Vol. 470, p. 316. http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110216/full/470316a.html</ref> Correlation does not imply causation. This is especially true considering the relatively short periods of data used (a few decades at most) compared to the Earth's age, and the fact that weather patterns have been cyclic throughout history (see [[climate cycles]]).

Climate change is neither anthropogenic nor apocalyptic. [[Douglas Pollock]] comments that 95% of greenhouse gases are water vapor 3.6% of these gases are CO2.
Of the gases in the atmosphere 0.04% is CO2, only 0.01% is generated by humans. All greenhouse gases represent 1% of the gases.
CO2 is the gas of life, it is vital for life, in fact the earth has greened between 1982 and 2014 by 15% and the Sahara has shrunk by 300 thousand km2.<ref>[https://odysee.com/globalwarming:4 The Truth about Climate Change, Global Warming and United Nations Mafia - by [[Douglas Pollock]], a scientist recognized by Donald Trump]</ref>

In the middle ages there was a warm period on earth, instead of being detrimental, it was beneficial, as fewer people died from cold (cold kills 20 times more than heat), the greatest cathedrals and castles in history were built (including Notre Dame).
In the last 8 glaciations CO2 has been at its maximum level and in the warmings at its minimum.

Between 1945 and 1970 the temperature decreased as the world became more and more industrialized.
The current warming has been the weakest since the last 10,000 years.
The sun and the Earth's oscillations (Milanković cycles) are the main causes of climate change, scientists have found a correlation.
The environmentalism business moves 1.3 trillion dollars.
Is it worth sending the economy down the drain?
In Germany, electricity has risen by 215% for using "renewable" energies (which are more expensive and less eficient).<ref>[https://www.nzz.ch/klimapolitik_verteilt_das_weltvermoegen_neu-ld.1003523 Klimapolitik verteilt das Weltvermögen neu]</ref>

Prominent personalities have spoken out on the matter:
John L. Casey, nasa scientist has said that climate change is the "biggest scam".
Patrick Moore, co-founder of GreenPeace talks about this being a scare campaign to steal more funds from taxpayers.
Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer said in 2010 "We at the IPCC de facto redistribute the world's wealth with climate policies..." "One must free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is about environmentalism. This is no longer about environmentalism."
In the past 41 climate "experts" have made erroneous predictions about environmental catastrophes.
The water level is not going to rise 3 meters as predicted, the Archimedes Principle says that ice has the same density as water, it is not able to rise much when the ice melts.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/20/nolte-climate-experts-are-0-41-with-their-doomsday-predictions/|title=Nolte: Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 with Their Doomsday Predictions *UPDATE 0-53*|publisher=Breitbart|date=September 20, 2019}}</ref>

Who started with the myth of 97% of scientists agreeing that "the Earth is warming and human emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause" is John Cook of the Global Change Institute in Australia, "main cause" meaning over 50%, but an analysis reveals that it is only 2%.
To get to 97% he added papers that explicitly said there is anthropogenic climate change, without saying how much of it was anthropogenic and added papers that said there is climate change, without saying it is anthropogenic although he could say implicitly.<ref>[https://odysee.com/Eco-Communism-The-Climate-Change-Hoax-Documentary:1 Eco-Communism The Climate Change Hoax Documentary]</ref><ref>[https://www.bitchute.com/video/9Vqlq3wsWrI/ GREENPEACE FOUNDER DEBUNKS CLIMATE CHANGE! (DR. PATRICK MOORE UNCUT) | LOUDER WITH CROWDER]</ref><ref>[https://www.prageru.com/video/do-97-of-climate-scientists-really-agree Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree?]</ref><ref>[http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-study-falsely-classifies-scientists.html 97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them]</ref><ref>[https://www.wsj.com/articles/joseph-bast-and-roy-spencer-the-myth-of-the-climate-change-97-1401145980 The Myth of the Climate Change '97%']</ref><ref>[https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/?sh=62e148cb3f9f '97% Of Climate Scientists Agree' Is 100% Wrong]</ref>

==History of Climate Change vs. Global Warming==
The term climate change has its origins several decades ago when physicist Gilbert Plass published a study called ''The Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climatic Change'' in 1956.<ref>http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1956.tb01206.x/abstract</ref>
In this study, Plass postulated the release of CO2 into the atmosphere by industrial and other human activities may have caused the temperature rise noticed in the twentieth century.

The term global warming was first thought to be used by Wallace Broecker, a geochemist from [[Columbia University]]'s Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory. His paper, ''Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?'' <ref>http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/files/2009/10/broeckerglobalwarming75.pdf</ref> acknowledged the scenario of global warming, though there was a common acknowledgement that airborne aerosols may cause global cooling.

A National Academy of Science study of carbon dioxide's impact on climate published in 1979 also used the term global warming to refer to surface temperature change.<ref>http://www.atmos.ucla.edu/~brianpm/download/charney_report.pdf</ref> Jule Charney of the [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] in Cambridge declared: "If carbon dioxide continues to increase, we find no reason to doubt that climate changes will result and no reason to believe that these changes will be negligible.” Climate change was still used to refer to the other changes thought to be caused by increased CO2.

==Extreme weather events==
With regard to the catastrophic flooding in [[Pakistan]], Fox News reported that Pakistani senator and “the country’s top climate official" Sherry Rehman, said on Twitter that Pakistan is in 2022 experiencing a "serious climate catastrophe, one of the hardest in the decade." The senator said that “we are at the moment at the ground zero of the front line of extreme weather events”, and described “an unrelenting cascade of heatwaves, forest fires, flash floods, multiple glacial lake outbursts, flood events and now the monster monsoon of the decade.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/world/pakistan-flooding-deaths-pass-one-thousand-in-climate-catastrophe "Pakistan flooding deaths pass 1,000 in ‘climate catastrophe’ ". Fox News August 28, 2022</ref>

==Further reading==
* [http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/CCRG.pdf Climate Change Reference Guide]
* [http://www.who.int/heli/risks/climate/climatedirectory/en/index1.html Climate change: directory of references/resources]
* [https://www.ncei.noaa.gov National Climatic Data Center]
* [http://www.realclimate.org/ Real Climate]
* [http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/ IPCC Fifth Assessment Report]
* [http://www.thegwpf.com/ The Global Warming Policy Forum]

==See also==
*[[Anthropogenic global warming]]
*[[War on Science]]
*[[Michael Shellenberger|APOCALYPSE NEVER]]
*[[Cloud cover]]
*[[Ice age]]
*[https://www.foxnews.com/category/weather Fox News on "extreme weather in USA]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM Global warming: both sides]
*[http://www.no-carbon-tax.org Australian Anti-Climate Hypocrisy Site]

{{Climategate scandal}}
{{communism}}
[[Category:Environmentalism]]
[[Category:Climate Change]]
[[Category:Liberal Falsehoods]]

Climate agenda

2022-09-02T14:25:14Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Extreme weather events */ Citation

<center><big>{{days until|2029|12|31}} Days Until Final Destruction of the Planet'''</big></center>
'''"Climate change"''' is the new name used by [[liberal]]s for their [[global warming]] hoax, which they coined as it became obvious that there is no crisis in global warming. The modification in terminology is identical to what [[liberals]] did in redefining "evolution" to be "change over time," which of course is a meaningless expression just as "climate change" is. Numerous past predictions of climatic catastrophes have failed to hold up.<ref>Multiple references:
*Lott, Maxim (March 19, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/science/10-times-experts-predicted-the-world-would-end-by-now 10 times 'experts' predicted the world would end by now]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 20, 2019.
*[https://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-the-art-of-climate-science-11552002661 Notable & Quotable: The Art of Climate Science]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. March 7, 2019. Retrieved March 20, 2019.
*Lott, Maxim (May 28, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/science/five-most-over-the-top-climate-warnings Five most over-the-top climate warnings]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
See also:
*Lifson, Thomas (March 8, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/peer-reviewed-study-shows-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-disaster-predictions Shhhh! Nobody tell Ocasio-Cortez scientists are skeptical of global warming]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 20, 2019.</ref>

While on the one hand, [[secular]] scientists (and those who believe in a [[old earth]]) claim "'''''Climate change occurs naturally'''''" in repeated cycles of cooling and warming (known as the Milankovitch theory), they occasionally argue that man-made climate change can occur and is more impactful. {{See also|Ice Age}} (a period of cold [[atmosphere|atmospheric]] worldwide temperatures and intense [[precipitation]] that followed the [[Noah's Flood|the world wide flood]])

Many writers have been urging America to fund an ill-conceived initiative to "stop global warming" as if warmer nights or winters would make human life more difficult. The term "climate change" has largely replaced the term "global warming", in ideological discussions.

Ideologues insist that the world's top scientists have reached a "consensus" that most of the warming which land-based weather stations have recorded in the last century is due to human activity. The basis for this claim is a set of reports published by the [[IPCC]], an agency of the United Nations. The assumption is that the government-appointed representatives who run the IPCC would be completely objective and neutral, and would place finding and revealing the truth ahead of any nationalistic interests.

A lot of money is spent publicizing one side's position in the debate:
* ''Newsweek'' purports to take readers inside the world of “Global-Warming Deniers: A Well-Funded Machine” without mentioning that the global-warming alarmists are even better funded, in some cases with government support. [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/aug/15/the-hottest-year-1934/]

Journalists omit mention of key scientific points:

* Good news is no news, which is why the mainstream media largely ignores all studies showing net benefits of climate change. [http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/17/the-good-side-of-climate-change/]

Ideologues use all sorts of tricks to convince the general public to support them on the climate change issue. A perennial favorite is to trumpet the current year as the "[[warmest year on record]]", as if one [[outlier]] denotes a [[trend]]. Probably the most insidious kind of trick is to accuse objective people of cherry-picking and censorship, while hypocritically doing just that themselves.

The allegedly harmful effects of climate change include warming temperatures, changing weather patterns, an increase in sea level and in general any climate event affected by global warming.<ref>http://chaser.env.nagoya-u.ac.jp/~kengo/lec/IPCC_TAR-FRONT.pdf</ref> Climate change is one of the top [[Environmental Issues|environmental issues]], with [[liberal]]s and [[conservative]]s evenly divided on whether [[global warming]] is man-made or, if it is significantly occurring, is a natural event — along with [[global cooling]]. By 2019, voters were increasingly rejecting radical climate change policies.<ref>Burnett, H. Sterling (May 18, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/around-the-world-backlash-against-expensive-climate-change-policies Around the world, backlash against expensive climate-change policies]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved May 18, 2019.</ref>

Jack M. Hollander wrote:
*The planet has warmed since the mid-1800s, but before that it cooled for more than five centuries. Cycles of warming and cooling have been part of Earth's natural [[climate history]] for millions of years. So what is the [[global warming debate]] about? It's about the proposition that human use of [[fossil fuels]] has contributed significantly to the past century's warming, and that expected future warming may have catastrophic global consequences. But hard evidence for this human contribution simply does not exist; the evidence we have is suggestive at best. Does that mean the human effects are not occurring? Not necessarily. But [[Climategate media coverage#Climategate media coverage|media coverage]] of global warming has been so alarmist that it fails to convey how flimsy the evidence really is. Most people don't realize that many strong statements about a human contribution to global warming are based more on [[politics]] than on [[science]]. Indeed, the climate change issue has become so highly [[Politicization of science|politicized]] that its scientific and political aspects are now almost indistinguishable.<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM Global Warming: Both Sides</ref>

In March 2021 during a "hot mic" moment when he thought no one was listening during a speech he gave, [[Joe Biden]] publicly admitted indirectly what many people have already known, that "climate change" does not exist, when he said in an aside to someone off the stage that "...(you're) starting to convince the American people there’s a thing called climate change".<ref>[https://welovetrump.com/2022/03/17/biden-gets-caught-on-hot-mic-telling-truth-about-climate-change/ Biden Gets Caught On Hot Mic Telling Truth About Climate Change]</ref>

==Questions==
#What is the most important greenhouse gas?
#*AGW proponents say it's [[carbon dioxide]]
#*A peer-reviewed scientific paper says it's [[water vapor]]<ref>[http://thejll.com/Frascati/ReichelThejllLassenSCL.pdf "Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas ..."]</ref>
#What is the role of clouds?
#*Low-altitude clouds reflect some of the sun's radiation back into the atmosphere, cooling the earth. It's not yet known whether global warming will dissipate clouds, which would effectively speed up the process of climate change, or increase [[cloud cover]], which would slow it down. [http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1912448,00.html#ixzz1EyuBDJo1]
#What are the uncertainties in understanding climatic change?
#*The UN's climate panel said recently there is '''a 90% chance''' that most of the last 50 to 100 years of global warming are due to human activity
#*[[Sallie Baliunas]] points out that the same climate panel also said, "Our ability to quantify the human influence on global climate is limited because the expected signal is still emerging from the noise of natural variability, and because there are uncertainties in key factors" [http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/books/g_warming/solar.html]

==Winters==
Heavy seasonal snow and extreme snowstorms occur with great frequency, with. the number "of extreme snowstorms in the eastern two-thirds of the contiguous United States" increasing over the last hundred years. There were about double the number of extreme snowstorms in the second half of the 20th century than the first.<ref>[https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/climate-change-and-extreme-snow-us "Climate Change and Extreme Snow in the US", National Centers forEnvironmental Information]</ref>

==Hypocrisy==

Many times, AGW advocates pay lip service to general principles which they themselves violate, while broadcasting false accusations that their opponents are violating these principles. The AGW side has made every effort to censor their opponents, heaping enormous pressure on scientists and other academics to silence them. Accordingly, the US media gave great publicity to [[James Hansen]] when he accused NASA of trying to silence him.<ref>Hansen "shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change" [http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm]</ref>

==Environmentalism and climate change==
The main contention of [[environmentalist]]s like [[Al Gore]] is the argument that:
#The earth's atmosphere warmed one or two degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 Centigrade) during the 20th century.
#Most of this warming is man-made.
#The warming is likely to continue and to be harmful to human, animal and plant life.
#We must all work together to stop it by reducing emission of [[greenhouse gases]].

==Science and climate change==
Nuclear physicist Jack M. Hollander wrote:
<blockquote>... climate change remains a fascinating and important scientific subject. Climate dynamics and climate history are extraordinarily complex, and despite intensive study for decades, scientists are not yet able to explain satisfactorily such basic phenomena as extreme weather events ([[hurricane]]s, [[tornado]]es, [[drought]]s), El Nino variations, historical [[climate cycles]], and trends of [[atmospheric temperature]]s. The scientific uncertainties about all these matters are great, and not surprisingly, competent scientists disagree in their interpretations of what is and is not known.<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM</ref></blockquote>

Physicist William Happer wrote:
<blockquote>The current debates about global climate change are complicated by our not understanding the physics of the sun or of the earth’s atmosphere and oceans well enough to dismiss them as major causes of climate change on the earth. Dramatic climate changes like the [[medieval warm period]] at the time of the [[Viking]] settlements of [[Iceland]] and [[Greenland]] from about a.d. 900 to 1250, and the subsequent “[[little ice age]],” from about 1250 to 1700, which led to extinction of the Greenland settlements, were certainly not caused by manmade changes in the concentration of [[carbon dioxide]] in the atmosphere.<ref>http://media.hoover.org/documents/0817939326_27.pdf</ref></blockquote>

One of the major problems with many scientists' conclusions about climate change is a misunderstanding of [[correlation]] versus [[causation]]. Some studies show correlations between increasing concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases and increasing [[precipitation]], and between human activity and atmospheric greenhouse gases, and then go so far as to conclude that humans are causing increased rain, snow, and catastrophic flooding.<ref>Gillis, Justin. "Study Links Rise in Rain and Snow to Human Actions." ''The New York Times'', February 16, 2011. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/science/earth/17extreme.html?_r=2&ref=science</ref><ref>Schiermeier, Quirin. "Increased Flood Risk Linked to Global Warming." 2011. ''Nature'', Vol. 470, p. 316. http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110216/full/470316a.html</ref> Correlation does not imply causation. This is especially true considering the relatively short periods of data used (a few decades at most) compared to the Earth's age, and the fact that weather patterns have been cyclic throughout history (see [[climate cycles]]).

Climate change is neither anthropogenic nor apocalyptic. [[Douglas Pollock]] comments that 95% of greenhouse gases are water vapor 3.6% of these gases are CO2.
Of the gases in the atmosphere 0.04% is CO2, only 0.01% is generated by humans. All greenhouse gases represent 1% of the gases.
CO2 is the gas of life, it is vital for life, in fact the earth has greened between 1982 and 2014 by 15% and the Sahara has shrunk by 300 thousand km2.<ref>[https://odysee.com/globalwarming:4 The Truth about Climate Change, Global Warming and United Nations Mafia - by [[Douglas Pollock]], a scientist recognized by Donald Trump]</ref>

In the middle ages there was a warm period on earth, instead of being detrimental, it was beneficial, as fewer people died from cold (cold kills 20 times more than heat), the greatest cathedrals and castles in history were built (including Notre Dame).
In the last 8 glaciations CO2 has been at its maximum level and in the warmings at its minimum.

Between 1945 and 1970 the temperature decreased as the world became more and more industrialized.
The current warming has been the weakest since the last 10,000 years.
The sun and the Earth's oscillations (Milanković cycles) are the main causes of climate change, scientists have found a correlation.
The environmentalism business moves 1.3 trillion dollars.
Is it worth sending the economy down the drain?
In Germany, electricity has risen by 215% for using "renewable" energies (which are more expensive and less eficient).<ref>[https://www.nzz.ch/klimapolitik_verteilt_das_weltvermoegen_neu-ld.1003523 Klimapolitik verteilt das Weltvermögen neu]</ref>

Prominent personalities have spoken out on the matter:
John L. Casey, nasa scientist has said that climate change is the "biggest scam".
Patrick Moore, co-founder of GreenPeace talks about this being a scare campaign to steal more funds from taxpayers.
Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer said in 2010 "We at the IPCC de facto redistribute the world's wealth with climate policies..." "One must free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is about environmentalism. This is no longer about environmentalism."
In the past 41 climate "experts" have made erroneous predictions about environmental catastrophes.
The water level is not going to rise 3 meters as predicted, the Archimedes Principle says that ice has the same density as water, it is not able to rise much when the ice melts.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/20/nolte-climate-experts-are-0-41-with-their-doomsday-predictions/|title=Nolte: Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 with Their Doomsday Predictions *UPDATE 0-53*|publisher=Breitbart|date=September 20, 2019}}</ref>

Who started with the myth of 97% of scientists agreeing that "the Earth is warming and human emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause" is John Cook of the Global Change Institute in Australia, "main cause" meaning over 50%, but an analysis reveals that it is only 2%.
To get to 97% he added papers that explicitly said there is anthropogenic climate change, without saying how much of it was anthropogenic and added papers that said there is climate change, without saying it is anthropogenic although he could say implicitly.<ref>[https://odysee.com/Eco-Communism-The-Climate-Change-Hoax-Documentary:1 Eco-Communism The Climate Change Hoax Documentary]</ref><ref>[https://www.bitchute.com/video/9Vqlq3wsWrI/ GREENPEACE FOUNDER DEBUNKS CLIMATE CHANGE! (DR. PATRICK MOORE UNCUT) | LOUDER WITH CROWDER]</ref><ref>[https://www.prageru.com/video/do-97-of-climate-scientists-really-agree Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree?]</ref><ref>[http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-study-falsely-classifies-scientists.html 97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them]</ref><ref>[https://www.wsj.com/articles/joseph-bast-and-roy-spencer-the-myth-of-the-climate-change-97-1401145980 The Myth of the Climate Change '97%']</ref><ref>[https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/?sh=62e148cb3f9f '97% Of Climate Scientists Agree' Is 100% Wrong]</ref>

==History of Climate Change vs. Global Warming==
The term climate change has its origins several decades ago when physicist Gilbert Plass published a study called ''The Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climatic Change'' in 1956.<ref>http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1956.tb01206.x/abstract</ref>
In this study, Plass postulated the release of CO2 into the atmosphere by industrial and other human activities may have caused the temperature rise noticed in the twentieth century.

The term global warming was first thought to be used by Wallace Broecker, a geochemist from [[Columbia University]]'s Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory. His paper, ''Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?'' <ref>http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/files/2009/10/broeckerglobalwarming75.pdf</ref> acknowledged the scenario of global warming, though there was a common acknowledgement that airborne aerosols may cause global cooling.

A National Academy of Science study of carbon dioxide's impact on climate published in 1979 also used the term global warming to refer to surface temperature change.<ref>http://www.atmos.ucla.edu/~brianpm/download/charney_report.pdf</ref> Jule Charney of the [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] in Cambridge declared: "If carbon dioxide continues to increase, we find no reason to doubt that climate changes will result and no reason to believe that these changes will be negligible.” Climate change was still used to refer to the other changes thought to be caused by increased CO2.

==Extreme weather events==
With regard to the catastrophic flooding in [[Pakistan]], Fox News reported that Pakistani senator and “the country’s top climate official" Sherry Rehman, said on Twitter that Pakistan is in 2022 experiencing a "serious climate catastrophe, one of the hardest in the decade." The senator said that “we are at the moment at the ground zero of the front line of extreme weather events”, and described “an unrelenting cascade of heatwaves, forest fires, flash floods, multiple glacial lake outbursts, flood events and now the monster monsoon of the decade.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/world/pakistan-flooding-deaths-pass-one-thousand-in-climate-catastrophe "Pakistan flooding deaths pass 1,000 in ‘climate catastrophe’ ". Fox News August 28, 2022</ref>

==Further reading==
* [http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/CCRG.pdf Climate Change Reference Guide]
* [http://www.who.int/heli/risks/climate/climatedirectory/en/index1.html Climate change: directory of references/resources]
* [https://www.ncei.noaa.gov National Climatic Data Center]
* [http://www.realclimate.org/ Real Climate]
* [http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/ IPCC Fifth Assessment Report]
* [http://www.thegwpf.com/ The Global Warming Policy Forum]

==See also==
*[[Anthropogenic global warming]]
*[[War on Science]]
*[[Michael Shellenberger|APOCALYPSE NEVER]]
*[[Cloud cover]]
*[[Ice age]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM Global warming: both sides]
*[http://www.no-carbon-tax.org Australian Anti-Climate Hypocrisy Site]

{{Climategate scandal}}
{{communism}}
[[Category:Environmentalism]]
[[Category:Climate Change]]
[[Category:Liberal Falsehoods]]

Climate agenda

2022-09-02T14:20:26Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* History of Climate Change vs. Global Warming */ New section added. Lots of examples can be added to this for 2022

<center><big>{{days until|2029|12|31}} Days Until Final Destruction of the Planet'''</big></center>
'''"Climate change"''' is the new name used by [[liberal]]s for their [[global warming]] hoax, which they coined as it became obvious that there is no crisis in global warming. The modification in terminology is identical to what [[liberals]] did in redefining "evolution" to be "change over time," which of course is a meaningless expression just as "climate change" is. Numerous past predictions of climatic catastrophes have failed to hold up.<ref>Multiple references:
*Lott, Maxim (March 19, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/science/10-times-experts-predicted-the-world-would-end-by-now 10 times 'experts' predicted the world would end by now]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 20, 2019.
*[https://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-the-art-of-climate-science-11552002661 Notable & Quotable: The Art of Climate Science]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. March 7, 2019. Retrieved March 20, 2019.
*Lott, Maxim (May 28, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/science/five-most-over-the-top-climate-warnings Five most over-the-top climate warnings]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
See also:
*Lifson, Thomas (March 8, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/peer-reviewed-study-shows-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-disaster-predictions Shhhh! Nobody tell Ocasio-Cortez scientists are skeptical of global warming]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 20, 2019.</ref>

While on the one hand, [[secular]] scientists (and those who believe in a [[old earth]]) claim "'''''Climate change occurs naturally'''''" in repeated cycles of cooling and warming (known as the Milankovitch theory), they occasionally argue that man-made climate change can occur and is more impactful. {{See also|Ice Age}} (a period of cold [[atmosphere|atmospheric]] worldwide temperatures and intense [[precipitation]] that followed the [[Noah's Flood|the world wide flood]])

Many writers have been urging America to fund an ill-conceived initiative to "stop global warming" as if warmer nights or winters would make human life more difficult. The term "climate change" has largely replaced the term "global warming", in ideological discussions.

Ideologues insist that the world's top scientists have reached a "consensus" that most of the warming which land-based weather stations have recorded in the last century is due to human activity. The basis for this claim is a set of reports published by the [[IPCC]], an agency of the United Nations. The assumption is that the government-appointed representatives who run the IPCC would be completely objective and neutral, and would place finding and revealing the truth ahead of any nationalistic interests.

A lot of money is spent publicizing one side's position in the debate:
* ''Newsweek'' purports to take readers inside the world of “Global-Warming Deniers: A Well-Funded Machine” without mentioning that the global-warming alarmists are even better funded, in some cases with government support. [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/aug/15/the-hottest-year-1934/]

Journalists omit mention of key scientific points:

* Good news is no news, which is why the mainstream media largely ignores all studies showing net benefits of climate change. [http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/17/the-good-side-of-climate-change/]

Ideologues use all sorts of tricks to convince the general public to support them on the climate change issue. A perennial favorite is to trumpet the current year as the "[[warmest year on record]]", as if one [[outlier]] denotes a [[trend]]. Probably the most insidious kind of trick is to accuse objective people of cherry-picking and censorship, while hypocritically doing just that themselves.

The allegedly harmful effects of climate change include warming temperatures, changing weather patterns, an increase in sea level and in general any climate event affected by global warming.<ref>http://chaser.env.nagoya-u.ac.jp/~kengo/lec/IPCC_TAR-FRONT.pdf</ref> Climate change is one of the top [[Environmental Issues|environmental issues]], with [[liberal]]s and [[conservative]]s evenly divided on whether [[global warming]] is man-made or, if it is significantly occurring, is a natural event — along with [[global cooling]]. By 2019, voters were increasingly rejecting radical climate change policies.<ref>Burnett, H. Sterling (May 18, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/around-the-world-backlash-against-expensive-climate-change-policies Around the world, backlash against expensive climate-change policies]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved May 18, 2019.</ref>

Jack M. Hollander wrote:
*The planet has warmed since the mid-1800s, but before that it cooled for more than five centuries. Cycles of warming and cooling have been part of Earth's natural [[climate history]] for millions of years. So what is the [[global warming debate]] about? It's about the proposition that human use of [[fossil fuels]] has contributed significantly to the past century's warming, and that expected future warming may have catastrophic global consequences. But hard evidence for this human contribution simply does not exist; the evidence we have is suggestive at best. Does that mean the human effects are not occurring? Not necessarily. But [[Climategate media coverage#Climategate media coverage|media coverage]] of global warming has been so alarmist that it fails to convey how flimsy the evidence really is. Most people don't realize that many strong statements about a human contribution to global warming are based more on [[politics]] than on [[science]]. Indeed, the climate change issue has become so highly [[Politicization of science|politicized]] that its scientific and political aspects are now almost indistinguishable.<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM Global Warming: Both Sides</ref>

In March 2021 during a "hot mic" moment when he thought no one was listening during a speech he gave, [[Joe Biden]] publicly admitted indirectly what many people have already known, that "climate change" does not exist, when he said in an aside to someone off the stage that "...(you're) starting to convince the American people there’s a thing called climate change".<ref>[https://welovetrump.com/2022/03/17/biden-gets-caught-on-hot-mic-telling-truth-about-climate-change/ Biden Gets Caught On Hot Mic Telling Truth About Climate Change]</ref>

==Questions==
#What is the most important greenhouse gas?
#*AGW proponents say it's [[carbon dioxide]]
#*A peer-reviewed scientific paper says it's [[water vapor]]<ref>[http://thejll.com/Frascati/ReichelThejllLassenSCL.pdf "Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas ..."]</ref>
#What is the role of clouds?
#*Low-altitude clouds reflect some of the sun's radiation back into the atmosphere, cooling the earth. It's not yet known whether global warming will dissipate clouds, which would effectively speed up the process of climate change, or increase [[cloud cover]], which would slow it down. [http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1912448,00.html#ixzz1EyuBDJo1]
#What are the uncertainties in understanding climatic change?
#*The UN's climate panel said recently there is '''a 90% chance''' that most of the last 50 to 100 years of global warming are due to human activity
#*[[Sallie Baliunas]] points out that the same climate panel also said, "Our ability to quantify the human influence on global climate is limited because the expected signal is still emerging from the noise of natural variability, and because there are uncertainties in key factors" [http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/books/g_warming/solar.html]

==Winters==
Heavy seasonal snow and extreme snowstorms occur with great frequency, with. the number "of extreme snowstorms in the eastern two-thirds of the contiguous United States" increasing over the last hundred years. There were about double the number of extreme snowstorms in the second half of the 20th century than the first.<ref>[https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/climate-change-and-extreme-snow-us "Climate Change and Extreme Snow in the US", National Centers forEnvironmental Information]</ref>

==Hypocrisy==

Many times, AGW advocates pay lip service to general principles which they themselves violate, while broadcasting false accusations that their opponents are violating these principles. The AGW side has made every effort to censor their opponents, heaping enormous pressure on scientists and other academics to silence them. Accordingly, the US media gave great publicity to [[James Hansen]] when he accused NASA of trying to silence him.<ref>Hansen "shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change" [http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm]</ref>

==Environmentalism and climate change==
The main contention of [[environmentalist]]s like [[Al Gore]] is the argument that:
#The earth's atmosphere warmed one or two degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 Centigrade) during the 20th century.
#Most of this warming is man-made.
#The warming is likely to continue and to be harmful to human, animal and plant life.
#We must all work together to stop it by reducing emission of [[greenhouse gases]].

==Science and climate change==
Nuclear physicist Jack M. Hollander wrote:
<blockquote>... climate change remains a fascinating and important scientific subject. Climate dynamics and climate history are extraordinarily complex, and despite intensive study for decades, scientists are not yet able to explain satisfactorily such basic phenomena as extreme weather events ([[hurricane]]s, [[tornado]]es, [[drought]]s), El Nino variations, historical [[climate cycles]], and trends of [[atmospheric temperature]]s. The scientific uncertainties about all these matters are great, and not surprisingly, competent scientists disagree in their interpretations of what is and is not known.<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM</ref></blockquote>

Physicist William Happer wrote:
<blockquote>The current debates about global climate change are complicated by our not understanding the physics of the sun or of the earth’s atmosphere and oceans well enough to dismiss them as major causes of climate change on the earth. Dramatic climate changes like the [[medieval warm period]] at the time of the [[Viking]] settlements of [[Iceland]] and [[Greenland]] from about a.d. 900 to 1250, and the subsequent “[[little ice age]],” from about 1250 to 1700, which led to extinction of the Greenland settlements, were certainly not caused by manmade changes in the concentration of [[carbon dioxide]] in the atmosphere.<ref>http://media.hoover.org/documents/0817939326_27.pdf</ref></blockquote>

One of the major problems with many scientists' conclusions about climate change is a misunderstanding of [[correlation]] versus [[causation]]. Some studies show correlations between increasing concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases and increasing [[precipitation]], and between human activity and atmospheric greenhouse gases, and then go so far as to conclude that humans are causing increased rain, snow, and catastrophic flooding.<ref>Gillis, Justin. "Study Links Rise in Rain and Snow to Human Actions." ''The New York Times'', February 16, 2011. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/science/earth/17extreme.html?_r=2&ref=science</ref><ref>Schiermeier, Quirin. "Increased Flood Risk Linked to Global Warming." 2011. ''Nature'', Vol. 470, p. 316. http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110216/full/470316a.html</ref> Correlation does not imply causation. This is especially true considering the relatively short periods of data used (a few decades at most) compared to the Earth's age, and the fact that weather patterns have been cyclic throughout history (see [[climate cycles]]).

Climate change is neither anthropogenic nor apocalyptic. [[Douglas Pollock]] comments that 95% of greenhouse gases are water vapor 3.6% of these gases are CO2.
Of the gases in the atmosphere 0.04% is CO2, only 0.01% is generated by humans. All greenhouse gases represent 1% of the gases.
CO2 is the gas of life, it is vital for life, in fact the earth has greened between 1982 and 2014 by 15% and the Sahara has shrunk by 300 thousand km2.<ref>[https://odysee.com/globalwarming:4 The Truth about Climate Change, Global Warming and United Nations Mafia - by [[Douglas Pollock]], a scientist recognized by Donald Trump]</ref>

In the middle ages there was a warm period on earth, instead of being detrimental, it was beneficial, as fewer people died from cold (cold kills 20 times more than heat), the greatest cathedrals and castles in history were built (including Notre Dame).
In the last 8 glaciations CO2 has been at its maximum level and in the warmings at its minimum.

Between 1945 and 1970 the temperature decreased as the world became more and more industrialized.
The current warming has been the weakest since the last 10,000 years.
The sun and the Earth's oscillations (Milanković cycles) are the main causes of climate change, scientists have found a correlation.
The environmentalism business moves 1.3 trillion dollars.
Is it worth sending the economy down the drain?
In Germany, electricity has risen by 215% for using "renewable" energies (which are more expensive and less eficient).<ref>[https://www.nzz.ch/klimapolitik_verteilt_das_weltvermoegen_neu-ld.1003523 Klimapolitik verteilt das Weltvermögen neu]</ref>

Prominent personalities have spoken out on the matter:
John L. Casey, nasa scientist has said that climate change is the "biggest scam".
Patrick Moore, co-founder of GreenPeace talks about this being a scare campaign to steal more funds from taxpayers.
Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer said in 2010 "We at the IPCC de facto redistribute the world's wealth with climate policies..." "One must free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is about environmentalism. This is no longer about environmentalism."
In the past 41 climate "experts" have made erroneous predictions about environmental catastrophes.
The water level is not going to rise 3 meters as predicted, the Archimedes Principle says that ice has the same density as water, it is not able to rise much when the ice melts.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/20/nolte-climate-experts-are-0-41-with-their-doomsday-predictions/|title=Nolte: Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 with Their Doomsday Predictions *UPDATE 0-53*|publisher=Breitbart|date=September 20, 2019}}</ref>

Who started with the myth of 97% of scientists agreeing that "the Earth is warming and human emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause" is John Cook of the Global Change Institute in Australia, "main cause" meaning over 50%, but an analysis reveals that it is only 2%.
To get to 97% he added papers that explicitly said there is anthropogenic climate change, without saying how much of it was anthropogenic and added papers that said there is climate change, without saying it is anthropogenic although he could say implicitly.<ref>[https://odysee.com/Eco-Communism-The-Climate-Change-Hoax-Documentary:1 Eco-Communism The Climate Change Hoax Documentary]</ref><ref>[https://www.bitchute.com/video/9Vqlq3wsWrI/ GREENPEACE FOUNDER DEBUNKS CLIMATE CHANGE! (DR. PATRICK MOORE UNCUT) | LOUDER WITH CROWDER]</ref><ref>[https://www.prageru.com/video/do-97-of-climate-scientists-really-agree Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree?]</ref><ref>[http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-study-falsely-classifies-scientists.html 97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them]</ref><ref>[https://www.wsj.com/articles/joseph-bast-and-roy-spencer-the-myth-of-the-climate-change-97-1401145980 The Myth of the Climate Change '97%']</ref><ref>[https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/?sh=62e148cb3f9f '97% Of Climate Scientists Agree' Is 100% Wrong]</ref>

==History of Climate Change vs. Global Warming==
The term climate change has its origins several decades ago when physicist Gilbert Plass published a study called ''The Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climatic Change'' in 1956.<ref>http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1956.tb01206.x/abstract</ref>
In this study, Plass postulated the release of CO2 into the atmosphere by industrial and other human activities may have caused the temperature rise noticed in the twentieth century.

The term global warming was first thought to be used by Wallace Broecker, a geochemist from [[Columbia University]]'s Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory. His paper, ''Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?'' <ref>http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/files/2009/10/broeckerglobalwarming75.pdf</ref> acknowledged the scenario of global warming, though there was a common acknowledgement that airborne aerosols may cause global cooling.

A National Academy of Science study of carbon dioxide's impact on climate published in 1979 also used the term global warming to refer to surface temperature change.<ref>http://www.atmos.ucla.edu/~brianpm/download/charney_report.pdf</ref> Jule Charney of the [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] in Cambridge declared: "If carbon dioxide continues to increase, we find no reason to doubt that climate changes will result and no reason to believe that these changes will be negligible.” Climate change was still used to refer to the other changes thought to be caused by increased CO2.

==Extreme weather events==
With regard to the catastrophic flooding in [[Pakistan]], Fox News reported that Pakistani senator and “the country’s top climate official" Sherry Rehman, said on Twitter that Pakistan is in 2022 experiencing a "serious climate catastrophe, one of the hardest in the decade." The senator said that “we are at the moment at the ground zero of the front line of extreme weather events”, and described “an unrelenting cascade of heatwaves, forest fires, flash floods, multiple glacial lake outbursts, flood events and now the monster monsoon of the decade.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/world/pakistan-flooding-deaths-pass-one-thousand-in-climate-catastrophe]</ref>

==Further reading==
* [http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/CCRG.pdf Climate Change Reference Guide]
* [http://www.who.int/heli/risks/climate/climatedirectory/en/index1.html Climate change: directory of references/resources]
* [https://www.ncei.noaa.gov National Climatic Data Center]
* [http://www.realclimate.org/ Real Climate]
* [http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/ IPCC Fifth Assessment Report]
* [http://www.thegwpf.com/ The Global Warming Policy Forum]

==See also==
*[[Anthropogenic global warming]]
*[[War on Science]]
*[[Michael Shellenberger|APOCALYPSE NEVER]]
*[[Cloud cover]]
*[[Ice age]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2875898_ITM Global warming: both sides]
*[http://www.no-carbon-tax.org Australian Anti-Climate Hypocrisy Site]

{{Climategate scandal}}
{{communism}}
[[Category:Environmentalism]]
[[Category:Climate Change]]
[[Category:Liberal Falsehoods]]

Talk:Women

2022-08-29T14:16:04Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Amelia Earhart, really? */ She needs to be added

I'm not going into the Biblical issues here; that's for more scholarly folk than myself. However: "''Also not explicitly stated in the Bible, it is obvious that,''" does that work? At what level of opinion and/or writer's logic does CP draw the line? [[User:Aziraphale|Aziraphale]] 03:25, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: NO, this does not work. The logic in that is completely flawed.
::Also, if Eve was created from Adam's rib, wouldn't she be his sister? They are of the same flesh and blood...
::-- [[user:Orly|Orly]] 10:24 14 March 2007 (CET)
:::I agree that it doesn't work. People who talk about the "will of God" should be prepared to back it up, chapter and verse, with the Word of God. [[User:DavidE|DavidE]] 09:35, 31 August 2007 (EDT)

If god does not approve of menstruation, why did "he" design women that way?

-- [[user:Orly|Orly]] 15:42 14 March 2007 (CET)

* God not only approves of menstruation, he specifically designed that process to prepare the womb for another cycle of readiness for conception. But there was an ancient obsession with blood combined with the fact that the men in charge of writing scripture found it to be, uh, yucky. And it's not exactly a load of fun. As Tammy Wynette said, "Sometimes its hard to be a woman..." But there are compensations ;-) [[User:Teresita|Teresita]] 03:54, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
::Be careful saying "man writes scripture" and suggesting that human biases areinterjected into biblical writings, because there is a VAST majority here who take the bible LITERALLY and as directly from God Himself. They might not be too pleased lol...[[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 03:06, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

I thought of taking it out to. But those verses are in the bible still... I thought it better to explain their role than to refuse to acknowledge them just for their inconvenience.

-- BornAgainBrit

:Free advice for you to use, or not, as yous see fit: the reason religious debates are never resolved is simple (imo): people are trying to understand why a possibly omnipotent / omniscient being does what it does. We have no frame of reference for this, so we're stuck making all kinds of assumptions. Simple answer to any "why" question is, unfortunately, "why not?" Or "because." Or "it will all make sense 1,000 years from now, we simply lack perspective." Which doesn't mean those arguments are right, but what are you going to do?

:My advice: read, study, pray if you like. But you probably won't get an answer you like, and (conversely) you not getting an answer you like doesn't prove anything.

:[[User:Aziraphale|Aziraphale]] 13:32, 14 March 2007 (EDT) , going back to technical edits where the Chicago Manual can be proved far more easily ;)

This is really a terrible article! Some facts maybe? /What

Never mind: asked and answered on [[User_talk:TimSvendsen | TimSvendsen's]] page [[User:Sedge|Sedge]] 23:16, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Rename 'women in the bible' as that seems to be the only section?

What a sexist article! Someone really needs to fix it up. --[[User:Ian911299|Ian911299]] 15:56, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

I'm sorry but I do find it rather silly that the only sources cited on an article about one entire half of the human population are from the Bible.... Is this the Middle Ages?[[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 03:09, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

== category question ==

Um... Wikipedia articles needing context? Say what now? [[User:Aziraphale|Aziraphale]] 02:24, 15 August 2007 (EDT)

*Sooooo weird! I looked (as I am sure you did) for that stupid template...couldn't find it, and it vanished when I added the stub. --[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]] 04:48, 15 August 2007 (EDT)

:Well actually, I didn't look that hard. ;) For all I knew somebody was creating a category for articles that provide balance/rebuttal to the WP version of the same thing... or something. I started by asking, since it seems a lot of people get burned for stepping on admin toes. Believe it or not, I don't actually go OUT of my way to do so heheheheh. [[User:Aziraphale|Aziraphale]] 12:58, 15 August 2007 (EDT) ''<-not bad, just drawn that way...''

==out of context==

"women shall not speak in church" Paul's letter to the Corinthians 14:34
People often misquote, or take bible verses out of context. This is a perfect example of just that. The Pauline letters were actual letters that were sent to the early congregations addressing individual concerns and issues. In Corinth, the women were particularly talkative. Paul just wanted them to shut up, to use a bible verse like this is truly a mark against your faith. It shows how little you understand the bible, AND, it speaks volumes for the way that you veiw women.
:Do you have any evidence for that assertion? I Timothy 2:11-15 explains why women are to learn in silence, and it has nothing to do with particularly talkative women in one church:
<blockquote>Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.</blockquote>
:[[User:DavidE|DavidE]] 13:07, 17 August 2007 (EDT)
::That was the answer that I expected. [[User:DavidE|DavidE]] 09:34, 17 October 2011 (EDT)

==Women in history==

Women have made outstanding contributions to history and have done so for thousands of years. To say they haven't and include a small exclusive list is degrading. This webiste boasts the truth and yet is unbelieviably biased. {{unsigned|ModeratesRNeeded}}

:Put it in then! This is a user-editable site for that very reason. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:33, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
::Having a section that lists notable women in history is a little bit counter-intuitive because...
:::A. How do you define notability? How do you define one's impact on history?
:::B. There are ''far'' to many women that would be "notable" to even ''think'' about including a list. After all, women make up about half of the human race. To have an exclusive list is almost to delegate their impact in society to a small list. A list like this can never be complete. Also remember that there are probably several women who we don't know about--think of all the rulers who had wives, after all.
::If nobody objects with a '''very''' good reason, I'm going to delete that entire section. -[[User:Ilikecake|Ilikecake]] 22:04, 28 January 2009 (EST)

==Mutant statistics==

Was this a case of [[mutant statistics]]?

:When you look at strength per unit of lean body weight (body weight minus fat weight), women have slightly stronger legs

[[Joel Best]] writes about how sloppy journalists mutate factoids like this and distort the facts when making a point.

==Sixth day?==
In Genesis 2, it sayes God rested on the ''seventh'' day, he planted a garden in Eden, and Adam named the animals. Only ''after'' the animals were named did God make woman (otherwise there would have been much more arguing as to the name of the [[platapus]]). Woman was not made on the sixth day.
:I will add the appropriate Bible verses to clarify matters. [[User:DavidE|DavidE]] 11:17, 20 December 2007 (EST)

== New Testament ==

In the section on the New Testament, we read, "Most of these things are not believed by even the strictest Christians, and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians." On what basis do those "strictest" and "most conservative" Christians dismiss God's Word as unbelievable and extreme? [[User:DavidE|DavidE]] 12:05, 26 October 2012 (EDT)

== Vandalism ==

This page needs updating., especially the sexist "sole" (parody vandalism?). Suggested revision to the beginning of the lede:
:: Women are the female of the human species, and a young woman, is a girl. Most women have two Y-chromosones. They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Nortwestern Medecine.</ref> --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 11:20, May 15, 2022 (EDT)
:::Have at it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 13:58, May 15, 2022 (EDT)

== Notability ==

What is the criterion for notability here? Jill Biden is notable only because she is the wife of a sitting president. Is a governor of an American state notable in the same way as Joan of Arc is? A queen of Sparta is included but not [[Sappho]]! Why are Madonna and Lady Gaga privileged over [[Clara Schuman]], [[Jessye Norman]], and hundreds of other musicians? Furthermore, it would be better if the list was replaced by sections discussing women in politics, music, literature, science, etc. Using the current criterion the list could be endless. --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 11:33, May 20, 2022 (EDT)
:I agree. Never heard of some Celtic queen. That appears to be some junior high Eurocentric feminist stuff, probably. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 15:19, May 20, 2022 (EDT)
::Thanks, Rob. --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 17:17, May 20, 2022 (EDT)
:::I asked for User:Northwest's forbearance. Sorting out subheadings will probably take some time and maybe discussion. Thanks. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 17:21, May 20, 2022 (EDT)
See this comment on my Talk page, which should have been posted here: [[User_talk:Jackin the box#Re: Women]]
:Jackin the box, you accuse me of "edit-warring" by restoring information that you wrongly removed regarding the entries included in the article because of claims of "non-notability" by you, yet you yourself were the one who started the edit war to begin with by removing some of those entries and making edits of your own to impose liberal POV yet again (which you claim as "improvements" but are, in fact, not). [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 17:37, May 20, 2022 (EDT)

I invited comment and waited for a response. My edits were non-controversial. I fail to understand why minor pop starsr are so important to you, or political figures that will be forgotten in a few years. This is supposedly an encyclopaedia. A clear definition of notability is needed here, otherwise the list will be excessively long. For example, their are dozens of women PMs or Heads of State, major American writers alone. The list format is unsatisfactory. --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 17:54, May 20, 2022 (EDT)
:May I suggest we begin subheadings with politics, music, literature, science, etc. as suggested. Then we could possibly have a subhead on "contemporary figures" whose names can be rotated in and out as their 15 minutes of fame passes. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 18:22, May 20, 2022 (EDT)
:Women like [[Sarah Bernhardt]] or [[Zsa Zsa Gabor]] were largely regarded by their contemporaries like [[Madonna]] or [[Lady Gaga]]. I see no reason to include historical figures like that, but our contemporary figures can have their 15 minutes. And in contemporary figures, we don't need to delineate between politics, art, etc. Just toss 'em into the same cauldron. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 18:30, May 20, 2022 (EDT)
::Thanks. Perhaps what is needed is a new separate section <Some important contemporary women>? Though my point re Madonna or Lady Gaga, is there are so many, many other contemporary singers, who equally deserve to be included. And re Jill Biden, there are hundreds of women, who have achieved more politically than her. --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 19:06, May 20, 2022 (EDT)
:::Yah, that's my point. Jill Biden is out the door in something like 19 months or less; then [[Chasten Buttigieg]] of somebody gets rotated in. As to Madonna, her 14 minutes of fame is just about up like Joe Biden's, as she departs the gerontocracy. Lady Gaga represents a more middle-aged successor group, and [[Miley Cyrus]] or [[Nicki Minaj]] a younger group. So in the contemporary field, we limit it to two or three representatives, either generationally or competing heads in t he youth generation.
:::[[Nina Jankowicz]] expiration date has passed already, but [[AOC]] can remain, competing to become a historic legend like Eleanor Roosevelt or [[Margaret Chase Smith]]. The idea is, the contemporary figures are hoping to be added to the historic figures, although about 99% probably will fail. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 19:17, May 20, 2022 (EDT)

::Suggestion: Divide the ==Women in History== into subgroups and figure out an average number to round out, and use that number for ==Contemporary figures== with X number from each of the historic subgroups. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 19:31, May 20, 2022 (EDT)
::We may need a ===Women in business=== or ===Social activist=== subhead, too. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 19:38, May 20, 2022 (EDT)

:::Maybe a new article/section on famous contemporary women might be a good idea. Women in history implies that the person is of historical importance. Thus, being a woman premier or even president isn’t sufficient, because there have been several dozens such women. Also, maybe there should be a separate article/section on Nobel prize winners? Again there are too many of them to include. Who to include requires more thought. Several additions that I made should, on further thought, probably be deleted. I looked for a comparable Conservapedia article on men, but couldn't find one. I found this resource online: [https://www.historyextra.com/100-women/100-women-results/ "100 Women Who Changed the World"] . --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 09:36, May 21, 2022 (EDT)

::::Keep in mind our target readership, which would be basically school aged girls. It's meant to be inspirational. A separate article on Nobel winners sounds like an excellent idea. A separate page on contemporary women would be a nightmare to maintain. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 14:31, May 21, 2022 (EDT)

:::Interesting that you put Rachel Carsen in Politics and not Science. Can we call this the [[Politicization of science]], and how deeply ingrained it is? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 16:26, May 22, 2022 (EDT)

:::And why would Phyllis Schlafly be in Religion and not Politics? Sure, she never held elected office or an appointed position in government, but Schlafly & Carsen could easily go into a ==Social activism== subhead since Carsen, presumably was lacking in scientific credentials. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 16:36, May 22, 2022 (EDT)

==Amelia Earhart, really?==
Amelia Earhart, the most celebrated of all women aviators. Yah, that's how the liberal media sold her when she took off for her much-publicized trip around the world....until she crashed and burned in the South Pacific. Other say she was eaten by cannibals. Some say the Japanese executed her. But she never made it around the world. [[Hanna Reitsch]] had more "celebrated" accomplishments as an aviator in that period. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 22:38, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

People made jokes about her disappearance - like they did [[Jimmy Hoffa]] - decades after her disappearance, basically to mock all the [[liberal media]] hype about her. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 22:46, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

*Interesting. Add her! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 10:16, August 29, 2022 (EDT)
===refs===
{{reflist}}

Women

2022-08-28T21:30:02Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Negative role models */ More accurate and neutral

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] (1612-1672). One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Marian Anderson]] (1897-1993). Famous singer.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Mary Wollstonecraft]] (1759–97) She wrote ''A Vindication of the Rights of Women''.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
* [[Wangari Maathai]] (1940-2011.) A Kenyan political activist.
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

[https://www.nobelprize.org/womenwhochangedscience/stories| Other Nobel laureates]

=== Sport ===
*[[Junko Tabei]] (1939-2016) She was the first woman to reach the summit of [[Mount Everest]] in 1975,. she later was the first woman to climb all the highest peaks on every continent..

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Birthing Person and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], corrupt Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She prevented the Supreme Court from revisiting the ''Roe v. Wade'' ruling.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] woman appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], and who would not define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]
 
 
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership. Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Women

2022-08-28T21:27:03Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Sport */

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] (1612-1672). One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Marian Anderson]] (1897-1993). Famous singer.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Mary Wollstonecraft]] (1759–97) She wrote ''A Vindication of the Rights of Women''.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
* [[Wangari Maathai]] (1940-2011.) A Kenyan political activist.
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

[https://www.nobelprize.org/womenwhochangedscience/stories| Other Nobel laureates]

=== Sport ===
*[[Junko Tabei]] (1939-2016) She was the first woman to reach the summit of [[Mount Everest]] in 1975,. she later was the first woman to climb all the highest peaks on every continent..

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Birthing Person and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], corrupt Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She prevented the Supreme Court from revisiting the ''Roe v. Wade'' ruling.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who was unable to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]
 
 
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership. Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Talk:Feminism

2022-08-28T21:20:55Z

RobLeonardWoo: I was responding to another editors ranting

{{bias}}
==article problems==
Second Wave did not "resurge"-the feminism that emerged out of the later 80's/early 90's is Third Wave.

Also, feminism, contrary to what many people think, does not revolve around abortion. Feminist work also involves issues such as affordable access to childcare and prevention of domestic violence, just to name a couple. Couldn't this article reflect that rather than lumping all of feminism into one category of ideology?

----
Removed opinion.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:10, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

This article contains a lot of irrelevant information. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 04:18, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

A big problem with feminism is its desire to erase sex distinctions. Masculinity and femininity are no longer seen as God-given traits, or even ideals. [[Women in the military]], the so-called [[equal pay for equal work]] law; the forced muzzling of that Harvard president who dared suggest that women and men might not be equally suited to academic careers in math and science.

The idea that there's nothing sacred about the male-female relationship obviously provides support for [[gay rights]] agitation and same-sex "marriage". If there's nothing special about a man, then what does a woman need one for? She can have a "wife" too (as Garry Trudeau once put it). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:20, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't think the addition of the Rush Limbaugh "femi-nazi" comment is particularly relevant, largely because it's based on the wholly erroneous assumption that all feminists are pro-abortion. To include anything based on that assumption mischaracterizes the late 20th c/early 21st c "post feminist" era, where women who self-identify as feminists are far more likely to fall within a broad spectrum of ideals than one cookie cutter. [[User:Fsm1975|Fsm1975]] 23:32, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I just found this. This gives a leading source for a definition.
:Hillary Clinton received the endorsement of the National Organization for Women, a group of a half-million members who support feminist candidates for elective office. Asked whether she saw herself as a feminist, Clinton said by the standard definition, yes. "If you look in the dictionary, the word feminist means someone who believes in equal rights for women in society, in the economy, the political process -- generally believes in the equality of women," she said. "And I certainly believe in the equality of women." [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 14:35, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

::I’m curious why a person who would not accept a philosopher of science as a credible source for an entry on science would accept the definition of a politician/lawyer as definitive in terms of a philosophical/social/academic movement. Let alone why you would think she would be a “leading source for a definition”. Not that I object to the content of her definition, but the strongest claim I think you can support with it is “some politicians endorsed by [[NOW]] believe feminism means…” An interesting, but not especaly useful or informative claim.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:48, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

==Defining feminism==

Cut from intro:

:However there is no broad consensus among [[feminists]] (followers of feminism) about how gender equality ought to be understood. In recent years this has led many feminists to argue that, because there are so many different and mutually exclusive philosophies and philosophers that are called feminist, it is more appropriate to speak of feminisms (plural) than feminism (singular) <ref>Feminisms [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/]</ref>. For this reason it is difficult, if not impossible, to state any belief universally held by all feminists.

This sounds like a refusal to be categorized, defined or otherwise pinned down. But it's the job of an encyclopedia to define and categorize. How can we solve this problem? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 16:06, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

:The way I would suggest handling it is to take seriously the distinctions feminists make among themselves. (For example there is a clear split between the pro- and anti- pornography feminists (I’m still working on a RD of the [[pornography]] article as per our previous discussion btw) ). If we are going to really flesh out this article we ought to have a number of feminisms represented here—just as we don’t lump all creationists together but observe the very real distinction between Young and Old Earth Creationists.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:44, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

==Abortion poll==

The page I linked to had a whole series of polls. The two most recent polls said that 16% of the American public favored retaining unlimited rights to abortion, and 39% favored abortion being 'legal in most cases'. Of the remainder, 31% favored it being illegal in 'most' cases and 12% illegal in all cases. In other words, 55% favor it being legal in all or most cases and 43% favor it being illegal in all or most cases, with 2% unsure either way. The other poll referred to the retention of the rights granted under Roe v Wade and 62% favored this. This should be reflected in the article because as it stands the article misrepresents the facts. Please tell me why you think we should misrepresent facts clearly laid out in a neutral opinion poll --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:38, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

: Can you explain why abortion polling data is so relevant to this article? What is the point? It is an article about Feminism, not abortion politics.
: You put in a statement that the majority of Americans the current law on abortion rights, but in fact the most recent poll at the cited source says that only 16% support that right. So I corrected that. Now you want various other poll results. What is the point? People can follow the link to the polls if they wish. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:05, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::The statement about feminist support for abortion rights was in the original version of the article I saw. I linked to the poll to provide a citation on an issue that the original article said was of great importance to many feminists, and made it clear that these rights were opposed by many conservatives and some feminists. My original simple statement about 'majority' support for the right to a legal abortion in all or some cases was made convoluted by another editor and I attempted to clarify it. It has now been totally distorted by you. In addition to the 16% support you keep citing, you omit to say that an additional 39% support abortion rights 'in most cases'. Shall we say that only 12% of people - presumably conservatives - oppose abortion? This would be equally valid by your measure of validity. People can certainly follow the link, but it is dishonest to misrepresent its content in the way you are doing.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:16, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::: What is dishonest? It is an article about feminism, not about conservative abortion views. Maybe an article about abortion can explain the polls in detail, I don't know. The feminist organizations that support abortion rights want abortion to be legal in all cases. The 16% figure is the most relevant one. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:29, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::In that case, since there is no evidence that only feminists support abortion in all cases (we know that some are opposed) the relevant figure is the 62% who support the retention of rights under Roe v Wade, which I think we can agree was agreed by most feminists to be a landmark case on this issue. I suggest we cite that instead, which gives a clearer figure both of general feminist support for abortion rights and the degree to which that issue is supported by the population as a whole. The figure was quite unequivocal on the poll, and is probably less confusing than the other poll. I propose substituting that one. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 19:15, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: Could you give me an example of a feminist organization that opposes abortion rights in some cases? I think that the Roe v Wade poll is more confusing because it reflect not just opinions on abortion, but also opinions about legal theories. I wonder how many people even know what the legal consequence of overturning Roe v Wade would be. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 19:32, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::Sure - [ http://www.feministsforlife.org/] are probably the best-known group, but you can find other organisations listed on [http://www.gargaro.com/fem.html] and quotes from a variety of other sources on [http://www.geocities.com/livefreecritique/modernfeminists.html]. Personally, I don't think the Roe v Wade poll is confusing, because most people associate that case with abortion rights and would be unlikely to consider abstract legal theories in that context. Roe v Wade is cited as an event of significance in a timeline of women's rights on [http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html] and certainly supported by the majority of feminists - see [http://www.feminist.org/courts/roe.asp] and [http://www.now.org/press/01-04/01-22.html]. I feel that it is important to demonstrate the extent to which majority feminist thinking is supported by opinion among the country as a whole over this issue, hence my wish to cite either the full figures of the first poll or the limited figures over Roe v Wade of the second. The second set are probably clearer and easier.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 20:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::: There are certainly lots of feminists who are very happy with abortion law. But if you want to argue that a majority of the people agree with a majority of the feminists, then the Roe v Wade poll doesn't do it. A lot of people are for or against Roe v Wade for a lot of reasons. If you want opinions on abortion, the best polls are the ones that ask abortion questions. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 20:37, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::The language on the poll numbers, as it stands, is misleading. Currently the language is “As of April 2007, women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases, and according to a recent poll, 16% of the American public favor the retention of this right.” This is simply not the case, women have a right to abortions in most cases, but it is not unlimited. Parental notification laws, parental consent laws, laws banning third trimester abortions except when necessary to protect the health or life of the mother – all of these laws are (currently) constitutional (laws banning second trimester abortions except when necessary for the life or safety of the mother are also probably, but less clearly, allowable). That means that 16% of people favor an expansion of the right to an abortion, not keeping it the same. 39% seem to favor “keeping it the same” as there is currently a right to abortion in most, but not all cases.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 20:42, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: I agree that the numbers as currently stated are misleading. In that case, given that RSchlafly opposes using the Roe v Wade poll I think the fairest and most representative thing to do is to cite the full figures of the first poll, which is the most recent one in any case, and let people make their own minds up about the extent to which majority feminist thinking on this issue has influenced thinking in the population in general. I will edit accordingly.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:00, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Interestingly enough, even Roe v. Wade didn’t go as far as to say that a woman had a right to an abortion in all cases. It said that a woman had a right to an abortion in the first trimester, in the second trimester a woman has a right to an abortion unless the state can show a really good reason why she should be allowed to have one, and a state could outlaw almost all third trimester abortions. (The Casey decision which is the leading case at the moment, relaxed constraints on what the state could ban). So under current law more abortions can be outlawed than could be under Roe v. Wade and even under Roe it was not the case that “women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases”.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Thank you, that's very helpful and I hope my editing of the paragraph has reflected that. Please clarify if it seems inaccurate. It sounds as if law in the US is, in practice, quite similar to law in the UK, where abortions are illegal after 24 weeks unless there are life-threatening reasons, although in practice only a minute percentage of abortions are performed after 20 weeks.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:13, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::Your restatement in the article looks right to me. Just to be clear though, I am only talking about what women have a constitutionally protected right to (at the moment, I suspect that this will change in the near future). I’m not sure what the law is in any given state—the Supreme Court simply says “this is the most you can outlaw” in many states more abortions are allowed than the bare minimum. And I have no idea what the actual numbers look like here (actually I suspect that those numbers are not attainable here, given how tightly guarded medical records are).--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::: No, it is just not the case that abortion is limited by trimesters under USA law. Not under Roe, and not under Casey. USA law is not like UK law. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 22:03, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

==Why the deleted quotations?==

RobS - it is not very polite to delete another editor's work that is relevant to the article without discussing it first. I reverted your original edit so that it could be discussed. I should be grateful if you would be kind enough to do that here.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:36, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:answers.com is a wikimirror site. It is an invalid citition. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:06, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

::Well that's no problem. It's an extremely famous quotation and I have plenty of other sources for it. The other quotation from Pat Robertson is not from answers.com so I presume that is OK. If that's your only problem with it, I will restore it with a different source. It would have been mannerly of you to have asked me if I had another source for it rather than just deleting it though. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:10, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

==South End Press==
My apologies, but we can't use bigotted and hate filled extremist publishers for references. A blockquote from the mainspace cites a book published by South End Press, which also published this proven and debunked piece of trash. [http://www.southendpress.org/2004/items/OldNazis] The reference will be removed, and the editor is hereby warned to refrain from making further insertions from such hatefilled extremist sources. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:07, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

==To much emphasis on abortion==
I think that this artical is focused mainly on abortion which is not it is for.

::Agreed. I suggest cutting out all abortion references except one: Give it a bullet point in the list of goals, and no more. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== Misandry ==
This article has clearly mistaken the definition of femanism for misandry. There are more even-minded, considerate, and heterosexual feminists that can be counted, where as this article only lists those who qualify as man-haters. Honestly I think this kind of blatent bias is what's ruined Conservapedia, and really the entire country, but there's no reason to suggest that feminism goes against any of the values that we all share, and I suggest we completely overhall this entire article and include a section regarding feminist inspired misandry and the differences between the two practices. I also don't think there is any reason to suggest that feminism is a sin and in any way connected to homosexual behavior, which seems to be what this article implys. I'm not so quick to put females who wish to be heard in the same boat as abominations, and I wish I could say the same for all of the Conservapidia editors.
--[[User:YoungConservative|YoungConservative]] 15:43, 2 February 2008 (EST)YoungConservative

:What you say was true, back when the feminists really were seeking legal equality - before the radical feminists hijacked it for their attacks on family life, hate of tradition, and abortionist agenda. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== "boys being cheerleaders for it" ==

Is it not the case that George W. Bush was a cheerleader at Yale back in the day? [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 13:24, 2 March 2008 (EST)

: Could be. Many prominent men were once cheerleaders ... for ''boys'' playing football, not girls.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:27, 2 March 2008 (EST)

== Excessive quotes? ==

I'm not sure if I'm alone here in thinking that there are far too many quotes in this article? They make the layout rather bloated and do not seem to provide much in the way of information. Might I go ahead and perhaps remove some of the less relevant quotes? Thanks. --[[User:TJ|Crookles]] 15:32, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: No, please don't delete factual information, unless you see a clear [[rule]] violation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:27, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::There are no rule violations, but the quotations are not explained, not formatted, and are longer than the rest of the sections of the article put together. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:14, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::: The quotations illustrate what feminists really think, and that is informative.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:34, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::::Have you looked at them though? Some of them don't make sense, some are (supposedly) by feminists and others are ''about'' feminists (with no clear distinction), a lot of them are redundant, there is no formatting, and some of them contain poorly-censored swear words. It might be informative, but it does not look good in an encyclopedia for 75% or so of the article to be made up of unclear, unreferenced quotations. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:54, 3 March 2008 (EST)

I just put bullet points on those quotes, and it really seems like a terribly excessive list. Does anyone else think that some editing could be done to this to make it seem a little less over-the-top? [[User:Reaganite|Reaganite]] 18:05, 9 March 2008 (EDT)

== The list of feminist views ==

Is it just me or goes the top list of feminist views come accross as humourous rather than factual , i laughed when i read it because it sounds funny and witty rather than serious and factual. I think the tone needs altering, i can imagine liberals having a field day over it. --[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 18:58, 3 March 2008 (EST)

It really smacks of parody, and of course, there were no references. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 19:57, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: Both you are clueless if you don't realize what modern feminists think. By the way, "Realist2", "across" has only on "c" and we spell "humorous" without the "our" in [[America]]. Maybe you don't have many feminists in your country. America does.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:35, 3 March 2008 (EST)
::Why did you remove my reference to feminists wanting tougher penalties for rapists? Surely they do (it was the only referenced point on the list). [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:06, 4 March 2008 (EST)

If your can only edit by insulting others spelling or the spelling for the country they come from it shows a distinct lack of tolerance. I am here to be constructive so please dont put others down its not very christain at all. Also how would i know what feminists think ... funny enough im not even a woman so it would be very hard to put myself in that thought of mind. However writing with sarcasm or does not improve the article. I never said whats written is incorrect , i said the tone needs changing, didnt you read or inderstand that Aschlafly? I can say it in spanish if it helps lol. :-)--[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 13:38, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Where in her book did Hillary Clinton say that children should be raised by a "village" RATHER THAN their parents? [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 15:05, 5 March 2008 (EST)

I am removing the part about refusing to admit the wrongness of their ideology; it could be said about any ideology, but it is not listed on the Creationism or Christianity pages (or the Aethism one). [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 22:29, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
Aschlafly- why was my edit reverted? [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 21:51, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

: Because [[censorship]] of the truth is not allowed here. This is not Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:38, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

::How is removing an unsourced statement censorship? I would not take seriously any encyclopedia in which that statement appeared without evidence. [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 07:16, 18 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm really not sure about this list: I think this focuses too much on the radical feminists - the bra-burning, men-hating feminists from the sixties and seventies. But hasn't feminism developed, become more mainstream? For example, I'd consider myself a (conservative) feminist, and almost all of my girlfriends are too. We'd reject all or almost all of the points listed in the article:
- Yes, of course men and women are different; physically and mentally. We certainly don't believe in falsely imposing equality of outcomes - only of opportunity.
- Oppose chivalry? Nope. It's charming that a few men still open doors, give up seats for us. I don't know anyone who would complain about that.
- View traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal? Nope.
- Belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family? No-one I know.
- shirk traditional gender activities, like baking? I really don't understand this one. You're a feminist if you don't bake biscuits? Or is this a synecdoche for wider home-making activities?
- support affirmative action for women? Again, no. Affirmative action does no good in the short, medium or long-term. That's more a liberal value than a feminist one, wouldn't you say?
- prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do - This is straying into the dungaree-wearing radical lesbian feminist stereotype. Most feminists don't care what other women wear, as long as they're not wearing the same outfit as you at a cocktail party.

Look, I could go on, but my point is that this article paints feminism as the ''bête noire'' of conservative values and, while this may be true of more radical / historical feminism, it's too simplistic to cover the very, very large number of women worldwide who identify as feminists and conservatives.[[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 07:34, 21 January 2011 (EST)

==Difficulty of defining feminism==

It's not easy to define [[feminism]]. Is it "organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests"? Must one support [[equal rights]] to be a feminist?

Are there feminists who want women to "get more" than men, just as their are minority advocates who are want their group to "get more" than people in other groups? (Is feminism thus a kind of "group selfishness"?)

Is "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes" consistent with the Bible?

Is it possible to believe that men and women are "equally valuable" but made (in the image of God) to be inherently different? That is, are [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]] equally valuable qualities? Or what?

Are there currents in feminism which seek to advance women's interests but which '''do not''' assert that men and women are (or should be) "equal" in all respects?

What, then, is the proper relationship between men and women? Specifically, in the family, what are the proper roles? (How much leeway is there?)

Do all feminists oppose the "stay at home mom" phenomenon? (Or is that only [[Simone de Beauvoir]]?) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:55, 4 March 2008 (EST)

==Ridiculous Number of Quotes==

About three quarters of this article is made up of selected quotes from selected feminists, often those who do not represent mainstream feminism and are radicalised in their views. There are also a couple of unsubstantiated quotes from anti-feminists which appear to be used to represent fact rather than a person's opinion. Perhaps we could cut down on these or move them to another article ([[Quotes by Radical Feminists]] and [[Quotes by Anti-Feminists]]) in order to make this one a bit more encyclopedic. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:50, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

=="Ideological Edits"==

''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should raise children rather than the child's father and mother[5]''

The supporting reference for this is the title of a book, however the book itself states that it states a village (ie a large number of people - teachers, doctors etc) '''in addition''' to parents to successfully raise a child. Not once does the book say that parents are to be denied the main role in raising their children.

''prefer for role-reversal, like girls playing football and boys being cheerleaders for it, or men baking cookies for women''

Unsupported, mainstream feminism believes in equal roles, that is women can play football and boys can be cheerleaders, they do not believe in role reversal (ie boys cannot play football and women cannot be cheerleaders).

''prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do''

Unsupported, this is a radical view at best.

''Quotes from fictional characters''

The quotes from a character within a fiction book do not provide any valid insight into the mindset of a feminist, even if that book was written by a feminist.

Hope this clears it up, ready for reversion of reversion. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:59, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:Sorry, but conservatives believe that no one other than the parents should have the primary role in establishment of values, etc. Perhaps instead of pushing your liberal POV in editing a conservative encyclopedia, you could work as hard finding additional citations that you will approve of, illustrating the point. You cannot deny what is factual, that Feminism is a vehicle for liberal change of the social order, and the destruction of the traditional family. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:12, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

::This article is not about conservative beliefs, it is about the beliefs of feminists, and it appears that they are currently being misrepresented (the present revision states that feminists believe a village should raise children '''instead''' of parents, whereas the truth is that feminists believe a village should '''support''' parents in raising children). Could you please point out which of my points you believe to not be factually correct? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:15, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:::"Liberal POV" or not, I don't think fictional characters make very reliable as references. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:04, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::I await a response. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 18:07, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

GySom, the changes you made, apparently to make the article more ideologically neutral, would be a fine thing on Wikipedia, where they like to keep the public sheltered from facts, but not on CP, where we actually offer a choice, not an echo to the so-called "wisdom" of the crowd. From my experience here, I would suggest you concern yourself less with seeking out articles to make neutral, and spend your time creating new articles, helpful content that is both Christian and conservative friendly, because that is the stated goals and perspective of this encyclopedia and its Founders. Leave it to Wikipedia, and the dishonest presentations there, to "cleanse" topics near and dear to the liberals hearts. If you wish to make the changes you have, please provide proof that Feminists don't think that way. Responsive enough? --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:34, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Hang on, are you asking me to prove a negative? Asking someone to prove that mainstream feminism does not accept something is akin to proving that there are no invisible unicorns on Mars. It is up to the person making the claim to support it, not my job to weed through every single quote that a feminist has made and then provide an analysis to show that mainstream feminism does not support a claim that is made, it is the job of the person making the claim to support it. Let me lay out the changes I think should be made:

:*Mainstream feminists do not believe a village should raise a child instead of his or her parents, they believe that parents should be supported in their role by others (this I can actually support, by my recollection the book in the reference specifically states that parents should play the main role in raising their children).
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe in role reversal, they believe in the destruction of roles (that is, instead of believing that boys should not be allowed to play football and girls should not believe in cheer leading, they believe that boys and girls should both be able to play football or cheer lead should they desire)
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe that women should not wear dresses and should wear pants
:*A series of quotes from a ''fictional character'' in a book does not provide any insight into modern feminism

:If you have an argument about one of those points please make it, I don't need to hear about how I'm an evil liberal who should run away to Wikipedia as this gets us nowhere. It is conservative ideology to tell the truth no matter what it is, therefore it is imperative to truthfully represent the views of mainstream feminism on this encyclopedia. I guess my edits were ideological after all, just not in the way you think. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 19:48, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::Indeed, I am asking you to prove your assertion, GySom. You made the changes, now back them with proof. ''What Feminists believe is well known''. Do you demand proof of God? That there is air? The Feminist agenda is the complete re-ordering of the nuclear family, its denigration. That has been proved countless times. Your own points above show that Feminists reject completely God's own creation, the differences between men and women. Please stop with these silly distracting arguments promoting liberal ideals! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:59, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::If it has been proven countless times then there should be no problems with finding supporting evidence for it. I am not asking for proof of God or proof of air because the existence of these two is not being debated, rather we are discussing whether or not mainstream feminism believes in the three points I removed, and whether the forth should be included. I notice that you have only taken objection to the first point (regarding families), it is therefore acceptable to alter the information relating to the last three? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:05, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::Well, I am not a sysop here, so I certainly cannot stop you from doing so. If you change it back, and the Administrators and/or Andy are fine with it, so be it. I am not going to engage you in some endless discussion about the falsities and naivety of your assumptions, GySom! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:17, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::I am very open to hearing about the "falsities and naivety of my assumptions" and changing my mind if sources are produced, however at the moment it appears that there are no sources supporting the claim that feminists believe parents should not raise their children (the current cite says the opposite) and it appears that nobody has taken objection to the rewording of the claim that feminists favour role reversal or the removal of the claim that feminists shun dresses or the quotes from the fictional character. I will change the last three points, and leave the first open for now for continued discussion with yourself or others.

:::::Please, I am not trying to invite conflict, I just feel that this claim is not supported and therefore needs to be changed. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:24, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

*Yes, to be sure, I am certain those are your intentions! I stand by what I said above, but I have taken the liberty of asking Andy, Conservative and some others to review this. I hope that helps you out. Godspeed to you! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:26, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::I look forward to it, I was hoping that two users could have a civil discussion without going and calling in the big guns, but sadly this could not be the case. For those reviewing it here are my arguments:
::#The claim that feminists believe a village should raise a child '''instead''' of his/her parents is unsupported by the reference, those who read the book will find that it suggests that a village should '''support''' parents in raising their child, but that parents should play the main role
::#The claim that feminists believe in role reversal is wrong, feminists believe in the destruction of roles altogether
::#The claim that feminists believe that dresses should not be worn is a radical belief at best, and there are no cites supporting it
::#Quotes from a ''fictional character'' should never be used to make a point for or against feminism.
::Of these only number 1 was argued, and during this discussion there was no mention of why the source was correct, nor were any other sources raised. Numbers 2 and 3 were not argued, and number 4 was supported by HelpJazz. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 21:56, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::In response to your four points above:

:::#The thesis of the book is clear: "it takes a village to raise a child," and by its very terms that denies the exclusive role played by parents in raising children. The point in this entry is correct and you have not proposed alternative language that would be more accurate.
:::#No, feminists do crave role reversal, as in men baking cookies and women assuming traditionally male jobs. I'll add an example.
:::#I've added an example in response to your point about dresses.
:::#Your point here is not clear, and I'll look again at the entry.
:::Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:10, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually Andy, could we use your wording just there to clarify it?
*''believe that "it takes a village to raise a child" and deny the exclusive role played by [[parents]] in raising children.''
[[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 23:16, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Thankyou for your reply.
:#The thesis of the book is that it takes a village as well as the parents to raise a child, at the moment the entry reads that it takes a village rather than the parents, so yes the exclusivity of the role is denied, but not the role itself (by memory the book states that parents have a significant and unique role to play). I did have alternate language in my original edit: ''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should assist parents in raising children'' or something along those lines that clarifies that the position taken by the book is not to replace the parents - edit conflict, not adjusted for Feebasfactor's comment
:#There may be some confusion between role reversal and the destruction of roles. Role reversal in your example would be men baking cookies and women being expected not to bake cookies, and women taking traditionally male jobs with men being expected not to take those jobs. By the destruction of roles it is expected that both men and women have an equal right to bake cookies, and that both men and women have an equal right to take whatever job they want to, I believe the latter is closer to the desire of mainstream feminists to have equal roles and to breakdown the concept of gender, rather than pushing for a matriarchal society.
:#I'm not entirely happy that a one line quote from a blog in response to another article can be used to represent mainstream feminism, but it's your encyclopedia
:#There are quotes from a fictional character, I don't see why these should be in the article (using the same logic someone could use quotes from a fictional American president in a book to criticise America).
:Hope this clears it up. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:19, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Aren't the fictional quotes a tiny percentage of the quotes, and aren't they by a feminist author?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"''? Though I have met many feminists, I have never met a woman, ever, who felt that women should only wear pants. I know women who do not wear pants, because they feel the Bible calls them to wear only skirts, though this is not true for all of the Christian women I know, or even a majority of them. Most women, feminist or not, dress according to what they will be doing. If they will be hiking in the woods giving a lesson on the forest habitat, they will probably wear jeans. If they are going to a wedding or a funeral, they will almost certainly wear a dress. Some women personally prefer to wear dresses more than pants, or vice versa, but most women, feminist or not, don't feel that everyone should dress as they do. If the article is going to state that feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"'', then there should be a really good citation to show this. Certainly you can find many articles where women discuss the pros and cons of pants and/or dresses, but I've never seen anything that supported the claim made here. An example to the contrary would be the A Dress A Day blog<ref>A Dress A Day[http://www.dressaday.com/dressaday.html]</ref>, whose author writes regularly about the joys of wearing dresses; I'm quite certain she would consider herself a feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 23:22, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I've added another cite, and frankly am surprised that anyone would dispute this feminist preference to dress like men in order to make an ideological statement.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::::The whole pants thing was a big deal at the time because there were people & institutions who felt that women should *never* wear pants - restaurants that wouldn't serve women wearing pants, schools that wouldn't allow girls to wear pants (even in freezing cold weather - and skirts in those days were *short*!), and so on. Feminists of the time believed that women should be allowed to wear pants if they wished. (Not that they *should* wear pants.) Nowadays, most American women, feminist or not, wear both pants and skirts, just because we like to, or for practical reasons, not for political reasons. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:17, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::Cites about baking cookies and wearing pants are from 1970's, not modern feminism? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:55, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::: The 1970s is "modern". Perhaps a time period should be added to the entry? By the 1960s "modern" feminism was in full bloom.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:01, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::::Is the goal of the entry to describe feminism as it is understood today by the majority of women who consider themselves feminists? (I'm assuming this would be the best approach, though of course the history is of interest as well.) The radical femimism of the '60's and '70's was, well, radical, but I think that the kind of extreme views described in this article would be foreign to most women today who consider themselves feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:08, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

<- The section of the article in dispute is written in the present tense (''"Specifically, modern feminists tend to"'' as opposed to ''"Specifically, modern feminist tended to"'') after having described the era of the 1970's in the past tense, therefore the points should describe those beliefs held by mainstream feminists today. I'm not too sure many modern mainstream feminists favour wearing pants or role reversal, just as we don't see burning bras or (too many) claims that all sexual relationships in marriage are rape. In short, what was mainstream in the 1970's appears to now be classified as radical compared to the views of modern feminists, which appear to be more about breaking down gender inequality and the like. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 00:14, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I agree - though I would add that many of the ideas discussed in the 70's were radical feminism (not mainstream feminism) even then.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:20, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]], Thank you for your grammar edit! It really helps! While we're cleaning up this article, here's another item that might need to be changed. I don't think the statement that feminists ''"oppose single-sex schooling"'' is accurate. There are rather a lot of feminists at all-girl colleges like Smith and Bryn Mawr and Mount Holyoke. Also, I can't see your recent changes on the main article page, only the history page - I don't know if it's me or Conservapedia. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:27, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:It's stupid to argue about this sort of thing on an article discussion page. Just add a quote from a feminist who supports it. This goes for girls' schools, dresses, stay-at-home moms and all the other stuff above. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::: Can't. Article's locked, at least it is for me.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:00, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::Are we trying to use the view of one feminist to represent the views of all, or are we accurately trying to report on the collective views of mainstream feminism? If it's the latter then a single quote from one feminist won't do the job. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:21, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I have unlocked the article so that the requested source can be added. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:07, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Feminism and choice==

Feminists say they '''only want choice''' while actually asserting various "shoulds" and "oughts".

Wearing dresses is strongly discouraged by feminists; dressing like men is strongly encouraged. Indeed, all sorts of feminine behavior in the workplace is discouraged, and we '''all''' know that [[Simone de Beauvoir]] condemned the [[choice]] of woman staying home to raise her and her husband's children.

What we object to here is the [[liberal deceit|pretense]] that feminism supports women choosing either traditional female roles or modern "liberated" ones. They use coercion quite openly. Pretending that they do not is something you can do on your own blog, using your [[freedom of press]] to tell lies. You can't do it here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:16, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:According to her article she made those views in 1949, we are trying to discuss the views of modern feminists, or more specifically those around in 2008. As has been stated above, these are different to the views held in the past. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:24, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Ed Poor explains this extremely well. I don't know what TheGySom is referencing about 1949, but that is surely "modern" also. [[Feminism]] plainly represents views about how women ''should'' act, and women who disagree with that ideology are ostracized and ridiculed by the more militant feminists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:39, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Simone de Beauvoir wrote her controversial book ''The Second Sex'' in 1949. It is relevant to the history of feminism, but in no way should be used as a source to describe the views of mainstream twenty-first century feminists, as it was written almost 60 years ago. We've come a long way since then - most of today's feminists weren't even born when the book came out. I'm a woman, I have friends who are feminist and friends who definitely aren't, none of them have ever tried to encourage or discourage me from wearing dresses. Some of my friends wear only dresses/skirts for religious reasons (Christian or Jewish), but I've never met a woman who would not wear dresses for political reasons. The idea just doesn't ring true to me. Certainly for some activities or professions pants are a more practical and/or more safe choice, and some women tend towards pants or tend towards dresses for themselves, but those are not political or ideological choices, they are a matter of personal style and/or practicality. Feminists in the '70's fought for the right to wear pants in places and situations where it had not previously been allowed, mostly for practical and personal style reasons. I'm not trying to be argumentative here - just to give a woman's perspective. So far, the only sources in support of the idea that feminists encourage dressing like men have been offhand comments in blogs. Can we find some more solid sources for this idea if it is to be included in the article?--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I'm sure there are millionaire communists who say they have no desire to interfere with private property, and that they don't know any other communists who do either. And they would be right about themselves and their friends, but wrong about the ideology of communism.

:::: Likewise here. The ''[[sine qua non]]'' of modern feminism is for women to act like men. Why would clothes be excluded from that? They aren't. I've already provided two references and there are probably more, but I'm getting the sense that no amount of citations will persuade you because you know what you and your friends think about clothes. I suggest you spend some time researching this and ask women familiar with the feminist agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:26, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Name Changes==
The article says that feminists ''"refuse to take the husband's last name when marrying, despite the confusion and complexity that causes"''. However, the article used as a citation seems to be saying the opposite. It is an article about the complexity of such decisions for 21st century women, and how there are many different approaches to changing one's name, and how quite a few feminists are now changing their name to, one way or another, include their husband's name. (The author, who is marrying soon, begins the article with 8 of her own options, including hyphenation, etc.) The article goes on to give quite a few examples of feminist women who made various choices, for a wide variety of reasons. Based on the cited article, I think a more accurate statement for our article would be ''"feminists are likely to take a number of factors into consideration when deciding whether or not to change their last name to their husband's when they marry."'' Two relevant quotes from the article: ''"...they are doing what they can, making meaning of their own, focusing on what they do with their lives as much as what they do with their names. And by the way, isn't that the whole idea of feminism?"'' and ''"Hey, I'm a stay-at-home mom who took her husband's name and earns a fraction of our household income but none of that makes me any less of a feminist. Because for me, feminism is about respecting women and men and being able to make whatever lifestyle choices you want."'' <ref>"(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller. [http://dir.salon.com/story/mwt/feature/2003/10/16/names/index.html]</ref> I did not make this change, even though the article is now unlocked, because I'd like input from others first - I think that, together, we can make this a better article.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 21:40, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

== References ==

<references/>

==Question for the Editor--==
I just found my way to your site via Google, and read "Feminism." I noticed that your editorial policy says that you're not allowing the use of material that isn't accurate. That site says that early feminists were "suffragettes." The suffragettes were English, in fact -- in the use, the folks who supported the right to vote for women were suffragists, from Woodrow Wilson to good ol' Theodore Roosevelt. Your writers also have no idea that the term "feminist" at times has been somewhat conservative (hey! surprise!), as when the National Women's Party supported an Equal Rights Amendment while most women opposed it. In the meantime, in the twentieth century, some Republican women would have been comfortable calling themselves "feminists," from Margaret Chase Smith to Oveta Culp Hobby. The term has had somewhat varied meanings over the course of the century, and any accurate description should reflect that. Interested readers could check out Catherine Rymph's Republican Women, published by the very reputable U.North Carolina Press. {{unsigned|Mm444}}

== Unsourced quotes ==

There are tons of unsourced quotes in this article, and I will go through the list to see how many I can actually source. I will remove those quotes I couldn't find any info on, and I'll post them here so others can re-add them if they do find reliable sources. The key words are: Where was it said, and when. Evidence should be supplied. Quote-sites that simply say "She said so." are off-limits.

*"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." - Robin Morgan
I couldn't find anything more than just anti-feminist comments and "Men Rights" sites. No mention of where or when she supposedly said so. (Update: Found a site that says it's from "Sisterhood is Powerful". --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:56, 16 April 2008 (EDT))

A somewhat special case is the next one:
*"I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero-sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary-vested-interest-power. But then, I have great difficulty examining what men in general could possibly do about all this. In addition to doing the sh*twork that women have been doing for generations, possibly not exist? No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" - Robin Morgan
I found out that this quote comes from her introduction to the 1970 book "Sisterhood is Powerful". I also found this [http://www.feministcampus.org/network/chat/morgan04232003.asp snippet] about the quote:
{{cquote|Halimat: Following is a quote from you. Assuming that you weren't misquoted, do you still feel this way? How are women to get ahead without collaberation from those who currently hold the majority of legislative power? "I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero- sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary- vested-interest-power."

Robin Morgan: That quote is from the early 1970s and fortunately both the movement and I have matured in terms of developing a much more sophisticated range of tactics and strategies, due to our enormous numbers, than we ever could have imagined back in the late 60s and early 70s. While it is still true that "pale males" are at the top of the "food chain" - more men are changing every day. They're more involved with their children and families and on every level, from slowly learning to use Ms. through to adopting and adapting to anti-sexual harrassment workplace rules, men have been changing. It's not enough by far, but it is a start. And it's the power of the women's movement that has brought them even this far.}}
I'll leave the quote in the article, but I will also link to that interview so people can get a more modern reflection on the quote. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:03, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

One more from Robin Morgan:
*"Women are not inherently passive or peaceful. We're not inherently anything but human."
It's a really nice quote, so I regret that I couldn't find any proper sourcing for it. :/ --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:42, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Took out two (for now) from Dworkin:
*"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig."<nowiki><ref></nowiki>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp From] her book "Ice and Fire"<nowiki></ref></nowiki>
"Ice and Fire" is a ''novel''. As in ''fiction''. As such, I won't treat this as her own quote, just like I don't claim that authors like King or Clancy endorse every sentence from their books as their own views.
*Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman."
This quote is [http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp attributed] to "Liberty", but I couldn't find it in her Bibliography, so I'll cut it until somebody actually figures out whether it's a book (and whether it's fiction or non-fiction) or a paper or something. Citing made-up books sounds vaguely unlikely, but I'd rather be safe than sorry. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 17:27, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Dworkin again:
*"To be rapeable, a position that is social, not biological, defines what a woman is."
Couldn't find any proper sourcing, only quote pages that simply say she said it, but not where or when. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 18:00, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==Quotations and flowing prose==

There are way too many quotations here. Sure, we've proved the point. There's a lot of nasty things that were said by genuine, card-carrying feminists. But quotes don't make an article.

I want to know the roots of feminism, what it originally tried to do, what else it started to do, and how it did (and does) differ from simply "making sure women don't get mistreated". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:11, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
:Agree with the "way too many quotations" bit. A few quotes from several eras to illustrate how feminism developed and matured would be nice. If that's not possible, just crop it down. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:17, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
::It probably wouldn't hurt to review this. I am also pleased Miles that you have chosen a constructive approach of finding and adding references instead of just complaining. There is a greater chance of seeing constructive changes occur under that format than merely confronting. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:40, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==I think we have misrepresented Jilly Cooper==

I think Jilly Cooper, the veteran right-wing journo and toff, would be surprised to find herself identified as a feminist and downright astonished to be labelled a member of SCUM. Somebody has got a little confused here. (Or else they are being mischievious).

== Suggestion for separation ==

I personally feel it would be beneficial to make two articles on this subject. What's described here is what many call "radical feminism" whereas average everyday feminism is quite different. I'm not an expert in this field, but I can assure you that the generalizations made here are on the most extreme examples of feminists. -EternalCritic

I agree, much of what is addressed here under the heading of "feminism" would more properly be described as "radical feminism" (of the all women should be lesbians/all heterosexual intercourse is rape slant), and much of the substantive article seems to be un-cited impressions that appear to be sourced in popular culture (for example, if the ideological doctrine is too difficult to define, how can it be said that *all* feminists balk at chivalry or belittle family women?). Can the lengthy list of sound-bite quotations (from which the reader is apparently supposed to cobble together an idea of what feminism is) be removed to ultimately be replaced with an attempt to seriously engage with the tenants of feminism with a stronger focus on peer-reviewed academia reflecting a broader overview of the field rather than a relatively small group of extremists? -- [[User:BillyWest|BillyWest]] 11:28, August 28 2011

== Reversion explained ==

The edit summary to the last edit said, "I changed some awkward phrasing. I also think the bullets should be made into one coherent paragraph. Thoughts?" In fact, that edit introduced liberal bias and censored conservative truth. It was fully reverted even though it did also include some harmless stylistic changes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:20, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

== Citations? ==

I'm not clear on the policy. In the list of quotes, there are some that don't have real citations like:

"The nuclear family must be destroyed ... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process" - Linda Gordon

and

"Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women ... We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men ... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft" (from "The Declaration of Feminism" November, 1971)

I think these need real citations or they should be removed. Also, quotes about feminists should be in a separate section than quotes from feminists. Pat Robertson is mixed in with a bunch of feminists right now, under the "Other" heading.

--[[User:AdamBurns|AdamBurns]] 18:47, 16 December 2009 (EST)

== Enough quotations? ==

This article could make a more mature examination of feminism than putting up a bunch of quotations. --[[User:Marxian21|Marxian21]] 22:53, 22 January 2010 (EST)

== "No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" ==

I cannot find the phrase in either of the two references given. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:12, 30 January 2010 (EST)

:Please feel free to delete that phrase, then.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:18, 30 January 2010 (EST)
::I would, but TK has already reverted someone who edited it out--and I don't want to anger him. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:22, 30 January 2010 (EST)

== Reversion explained ==

Modern feminists are overwhelmingly pro-abortion, and even those who are not pro-abortion are still anti-motherhood.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:54, 1 June 2010 (EDT)

==Full rewrite==

I like the quotes, and we certainly need a conservative critique of modern "radical" feminism, but the movement has also had its good points. There are even places/issues where currents in contemporary feminism match up with conservative ideas.

The idea that men shouldn't use their power to abuse women is a longstanding conservative idea (see [[Chivalry]]), although this is nothing more than the general idea that no one, male or female, should abuse his power; it doesn't matter if it's man to woman, white to black, rich to poor, educated to ignorant, etc. However, many feminists bristle at the idea of accepting '''any''' help from men (such help seen as condescending at best). Most conservative Christians oppose [[pornography]] and [[sexual slavery]], and so on. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:23, 8 September 2010 (EDT)

I am trying to make this page compatible with a little Amazon Alexa Mod I cooked up, so far when It reads it,
There were multiple spelling errors, and when she spoke it sounded more like a rant then an actual informative conservative essay. Also the bulleted list doesn't play and the alexia device just stops playing, I believe the hardware isn't used to bullet points not being with-in heading or heading font so the Device just tries to reload the text in pure html using Wikipedias default source php (which I deleted to make my own.)
I understand that I need to be of higher standing, so can someone edit the article so it doesn't sound like a gigantic rant without any sources.
--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] [[User talk:Reevestehsnek|Talk]] 10:59, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:Sorry, we don't change pages so Amazon Alexa handles them better. That's Alexa's problem, not ours. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:48, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::I wasn't clear I made a mod for an alexa device that uses conservapedia as its source, but its obvi you don't care about all the hard hours of work it took to actual remove the php through bluetooth and rewrite the script using BSD. {{unsigned|Reevestehsnek}}
:::I'm not saying that at all, and that sounds like a great accomplishment that I could not do myself.

:::What I '''am''' saying is that this is not a sufficient reason for making major changes to the article. We simply cannot change an article's wording and point of view because it runs better through a speaking device. Articles are generally created to be read, and it's unusual for people to have them spoken to them by a device. Wording and point of view changes should only be made based on their own merits. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:09, 8 November 2018 (EST)

== feminism and obesity ==

feminism and obesity: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html I will leave it up to others decide what constitutes feminism as I am taking a break from Conservapedia barring any news events. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:03, 5 February 2011 (EST)

== Create a feminism and obesity article ==

Consider creating a [[Feminism and obesity]] article at Conservapedia and cite this material: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:08, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

:The blog you want cited makes a ''huge'' leap in its conclusions. Being a working mother does not automatically translate into being a feminist. I would guess the majority of working women are in the job market because there is a need for a second income to support a family, given the cost of basic necessities such as rent, food, gasoline, electricity, medical costs, clothing, etc. I know that is the case in my situation. We can't pay for the basics on my husband's salary alone. We haven't had a vacation in years. Most of my friends are in the same situation. And the blog completely ignores the single working mother - what is she supposed to do? Not work? --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 11:01, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

I agree that this article is no good, even though I wish it were true.
--[[User:corneliuscalvin|corneliuscalvin]] 7:56, 26 November 2012 (PDT)

:Can't talk now. of the World happening. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 23:01, 26 November 2012 (EST)

== No Christian feminism? ==

I think that this article would be served well if a section on [[Christian feminism]] was included. Maybe a new article on it would be better.[[User:Mr. Guye|Mr. Guye]] ([[User talk:Mr. Guye|talk]]) 19:15, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:That seems like a good idea, but an article on it would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view. But there's also the fact that the same term can have a different meaning for different people -- what one person considers Christian feminism can be completely different than what another person does. We would need to define the term clearly, but I think we'd be talking about second- and third-wave feminism, adherents of which have theologically and socially left-wing views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:47, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:::No, there is no requirement that a Conservapedia article discussing the topic of Christian feminism "would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view." There are no such requirements on content at Conservapedia, and no one, except perhaps Andy, has the authority to enforce such a requirement. All that is required is that "Conservapedia is a politically conservative, Christian encyclopedia project". Though many of our members are not Christians and are not politically conservative, they are required to edit in a manner consistent with the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]]. To require otherwise would turn this wiki into a Wikipedia-style "mobocracy" rather than a "best of the public" project.

:::The concept of feminism covers a lot of ground. There are conservative feminists, Christian feminists, and Republican feminists. Not all feminists subscribe to some of the silly excesses that one sometimes sees looking around on the internet and various media outlets. Many conservative feminists, for example, fully support encouraging girls to go into STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects.

:::So feel free to write sensible content on this topic. I look forward to reading it.

:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:49, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::::SamHB, they have found that promoting the idea that women are underrepresented in STEM fields and that this has to be corrected has the effect of telling women that STEM is not feminine/girly and thus women are more likely to avoid those fields. In other words, the policy is probably backfiring. See: http://review.chicagobooth.edu/economics/2017/article/how-promoting-stem-fields-women-can-backfire

::::Women tend to be more likely to be conformists and not mavericks.

::::Over and over again, liberals fail to take into account the unintended consequences of their social engineering! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:48, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::Once Christian denominations filly embrace the notion of female pastors, their memberships almost invariably spiral downward. That should surely be mentioned in relation to "Christian feminism".

::"But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve." - 1 Timothy 2:12-13[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:15, 2 December 2017 (EST)
:::Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I don't think Mr. Guye was even talking about female pastors when he was talking about Christian feminism, just something akin to, say, the Suffragettes, many of whom were Christian women who would NEVER advocate the pill, let alone abortion. But yes, we probably should note that bit somewhere either way. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:35, 2 December 2017 (EST)
::::What percentage of so-called "Christian feminists" believe that a wife is to obey her husband and that a husband is the head of the family? At least in its present form "Christian feminism" is just another endeavor to infect Christianity with unbiblical ideas. As far as the suffragette movement, I don't know if any of them were Christian women who held biblical Christianity views related to women. I do know that various suffragettes burned down churches.[https://www.christiantoday.com/article/suffrage-the-churchs-rocky-relationship-with-rebellion/67361.htm]

::::Christianity was at the forefront of various movements like abolition, child labor laws, etc. etc. Christendom is also known for its favorable views on the treatment of women (husbands loving their wives like Christ loved the church, etc. etc.), but it is not known for leading the charge as far as feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:48, 2 December 2017 (EST)

:::::Well, I do know that Susan B. Anthony specifically condemned abortion and the pill and stated that would make women even more enslaved, and I do know that Christians also do not support abortion and the pill (in fact, among us Catholics, it's considered a mortal sin), so there's that to consider. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 09:53, 2 December 2017 (EST)
==First-wave feminism was good?==
This article makes it sound like first-wave feminism was good and its doctrines were just simply corrupted in the 1960s. As it turns out, first-wave feminists were anti-Christianity and anti-man too, as pointed out by Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire and [[John Doyle]].[https://youtu.be/sgJoJsaI1WY][https://youtu.be/ME-JIO8_cic] Elizabeth Cady Stanton once said that the Bible and the church were the two greatest stumbling blocks in the way of women's emancipation. Susan B. Anthony was a religious skeptic, and other early feminists held similar views too. In fact, many were free lovers, like Victoria Woodhull. I strongly recommend that the early section saying liberals just twisted the term be deleted. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 20:22, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:But the early feminists were [[pro-life]], right?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:45, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::The Bible says wives must submit to their husbands (Pauline epistles and the Apostle Peter taught this). No doubt this was anethema to first wave feminists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:04, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure if they were truly anti-Christianity, they'd be all in favor of unlimited abortion on demand even back then (especially when the Church was ALWAYS against abortion), and yet, as demonstrated with [[Susan B. Anthony]], several of them were AGAINST abortion. I know [[Vladimir Lenin]] [https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/11/17/november-1920-2020-a-century-of-abortion-in-russia/ certainly was all in for unlimited abortion], being notorious for literally legalizing unlimited and unrestricted abortion in the USSR and being the first state leader to EVER do so, even having the audacity to claim THIS emancipated women, and was such that even the likes of [[Margaret Sanger]], herself no pro-life adherer, was reportedly aghast at it. Besides, my idea of having my hypothetical wife submitting to me would be closer to [https://youtu.be/xtO-AHuEhJc?t=428 what Geldoblame advocated for everyone under his rule] from ''Baten Kaitos'', and I'm pretty sure even Jesus and his disciples NEVER advocated for that kind of submission (even less so when Geldoblame used THAT as justification for committing mass murder against a mining community by torching it simply because they withheld ore shipments thanks to his draconian labor statutes that left them dangerously overworked). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:03, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:Being pro-life does not necessarily make one pro-Christianity. Victoria Woodhull was against abortion and she was a Marxist and practically a communist. Also even Sanger claimed to be against abortion if I am not incorrect, saying birth control got rid of the need for it. Planned Parenthood did not start to endorse the legalization of abortion until 1969, and abortion did not even start to become popular until after Roe v. Wade. That was really more of the Overton Window being shifted in conservatism's direction back then than feminism being conservative. It just really goes to show how much ground we've lost. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 22:42, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::Maybe so, but the anti-Christians most certainly tended to be very much anti-life, as Lenin and even Trotsky proved there (not to mention the Bolsheviks), and even the Jacobins, their ideological ancestors, were known to practice abortion in the most crude manner (specifically, bayonetting pregnant women, and/or using wine pressers to crush them). And since Marx was brought into it, Marx himself advocated massively for abortion as well, as did Engels, all in their plan to "abolish the family." And what better way to abolish the family than to destroy reproduction. If she was a Marxist, it only shows she didn't know Marx all that well, as otherwise, she'd be all in favor of abortion like her idol Marx. And let's not forget that this view of pro-abortion has been going on since 1923 with [https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/marxist-roots-abortion-joseph-hippolito/ Dr. Antoinette Konikow], who was a fellow traveler of Trotsky during the Russian Revolution, AND committed several abortions in the Boston area specifically as part of her Marxist advocacy. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:49, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:That may be true, but some anti-Christians are more radical than others. Also America was more conservative than Russia at the time of the Russian Revolution, so something like abortion would definitely be seen as morally unacceptable in that time regardless of where you were on the political spectrum. But my main point is if Stanton said Christianity got in the way of feminism, and she was the founder of American feminism and first-wave feminism, I just don't know how you can say feminism wasn't anti-Christian even back then. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 23:27, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::I've heard of some feminists getting back to the Christian faith. Victoria Woodhull, for one actually renounced the free love bits and advocated strongly for the Christian concept of motherhood later in life (too bad she didn't quite own up to how she did badly during that time, though). Besides, technically speaking, there have been PLENTY of Founding Fathers in America who were significantly anti-Christian, including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and apparently even John Adams. By that same logic, America ITSELF is anti-Christian from conception. In fact, [[Christopher Ferrara|Christopher A. Ferrara]] actually makes this argument in his book ''Liberty: The God that Failed''. I guess you could also argue that liberty in itself was anti-Christian. For that matter, I'd argue [[Freedom of Religion]] is ultimately anti-Christian as well. The Israelites tried that bit back in the day, and that led directly towards the [[Babylonian Exile]], per God's direction. And Russia was still conservative enough to have abortion be deemed explicitly illegal until Lenin and his Bolsheviks took over (there's a reason why the USSR under Lenin was the first country in all of history to actually make unlimited abortion legal, to the extent that STALIN of all people threw a bone to us pro-lifers by outlawing abortion for a year). I'd mention divorce, but Robespierre and the French Revolution beat Lenin to that bit. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:33, November 9, 2021 (EST)

== Fatherless children ==

Does only feminism cause this? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 10:28, January 24, 2022 (EST)
:Re-reading the section "Cultural Marxism", it seems out of place in an article on feminism. Isn't it about men who abandon their children? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 13:24, March 11, 2022 (EST)

==Bias?==
I thought feminists went out of business with [[vaccine mandate]]s (''my body my choice'') and [[transgender]]s taking over girls sports. Not to mention rape in prisons by transgenders. It's the law now. We've finally reached full equality. What more is there to debate? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 20:18, May 28, 2022 (EDT)

== Pants ==

I'm puzzled by the linking of pants and feminism. I suppose it is an assertion by women of their independence but hardily any women, whatever their age, wears a dress where I live, though there's a few more in hot weather (I'm envious). Isn't more a matter of convenience than ideology? It's the norm and so non-partisan. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:49, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
:Phyllis Schlafly was a conservative woman who defeated the feminists by preventing the passage of the [[Equal Rights Amendment]]. I have never seen a picture of her wearing pants. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:50, August 7, 2022 (EDT)

:What has this to do with the fact that most women of all ages wear trousers in North American? This has far more to do with comfort and convenience than feminism. I suspect that more women wear dresses in more liberal Europe. Personally I find women more attractive in dresses but I would not be so arrogant to insist that any woman has to wear one! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 13:52, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
::There's too much feminism in the USA and the fruits are not positive. 13th highest divorce rate in the world.[https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/divorce-rates-by-country] Lots of women taking depression pills. And there are surveys which show that women are now LESS happy post feminism. Thank God that the religious have a higher fertility rate, Roe vs. Wade was overturned and that the Bible is not pro-feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:10, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
:::Have you read the essay: [[Essay: Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)|Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)]]. In 22nd century North America, the majority of women may be wearing dresses. In all likelihood, should Jesus tarry, the majority of women in North America will not be pant-wearing, feminist whores!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:16, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

::Oh dear!--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:57, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

===Does the Bible forbid women from wearing pants?===
According to the [[ United Church of God]] it does not.

::Does Deuteronomy 22:5 forbid women from wearing pants? No, it doesn't. In fact, clothing “that pertains to a man” at the time the verse was written would not have been understood to mean pants. Men in the Middle East through the history of the Old and New Testaments did not ordinarily wear pants, trousers or slacks; they wore robe-like garments. And in many cultures such as in China, women have commonly worn pants. The scripture more specifically addresses and forbids transvestism and cross-dressing.
::The underlying principle certainly applies to today. Men should dress in an appropriately masculine manner and women should dress in an appropriately feminine manner. Clothing manufacturers make pants designed for men, and pants, slacks and pantsuits designed for women. The Bible emphasizes modesty, and for women, slacks are often more modest than a short skirt.
::God does not intend for this scripture to be understood in an extreme or unreasonable way. For example, it’s perfectly fine for a woman to wear her husband’s old shirt when she’s painting or to put on her male friend’s jacket when she’s cold.[https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/bible-questions-and-answers/does-the-bible-forbid-women-from-wearing-pantsPosted on Jan 27, 2011 by United Church of God]
--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:37, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:::A sensible and intelligent reading of the Bible and history, --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:42, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

::::Thanks. I guess we were all too stupid to figure that out. Does this apply to Drag Queen Story Hour at Pizza Hut, as well? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 14:45, August 28, 2022 (EDT)
See also [https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/365-does-the-bible-forbid-women-to-wear-pants] and [https://bibleask.org/does-the-bible-say-women-should-not-wear-pants/]. Can you clarify [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|RobSmith]]? The above quotation does not support transvestism! And trousers didn't exist in the biblical world. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 15:57, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:There is no reference to Deuteronomy in the article. And the Deuteronomy reference basically is about honesty, not enticing a member of your own sex by dressing up as something that you are not. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 16:26, August 28, 2022 (EDT)
:The point you are trying to make has nothing to do with feminism. It does, however have to do with gender confusion or dysphoria. While modern science may brand gender dysphoria as a mental handicap (perhaps involuntary or uncontrollable), Deuteronomy says gender confusion is a choice. But that is not a discussion for here in this article. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]] 16:32, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:::Really I was responding to another editor's ranting, though this article isn't so much about feminism as an extreme version of it. Even Andy Schafly agreed in an interview that his mother believed in the equal rights of women:
::::: Schlafly wants to know what I mean by "feminist". I offer a dictionary definition: "A feminist is someone who believes in equal rights for men and women."
:::::His response is surprising. "She may have agreed with that sort of general statement - as stated like that, yes."
:::::It seems that - as her opponents always maintained - the matriarch of American antifeminism was deep down a feminist herself. ''Daily Telegraph'' Jul 23, 2020

Women

2022-08-28T20:44:10Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* The arts */ Minor correction

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] (1612-1672). One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Marian Anderson]] (1897-1993). Famous singer.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Mary Wollstonecraft]] (1759–97) She wrote ''A Vindication of the Rights of Women''.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
* [[Wangari Maathai]] (1940-2011.) A Kenyan political activist.
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

[https://www.nobelprize.org/womenwhochangedscience/stories| Other Nobel laureates]

=== Sport ===
*[[Junko Tabei]] (1939-2016) She was the first I woman to reach the summit of Mount Everest in 1975,. she later was the first woman to climb all the highest peaks on every continent..

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Birthing Person and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], corrupt Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She prevented the Supreme Court from revisiting the ''Roe v. Wade'' ruling.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who was unable to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]].
 
 
[[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership.Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Women

2022-08-28T20:42:52Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Nobel laureates */ Link added

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] ()1612-1672. One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Marian Anderson]] (1897-1993). Famous singer.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Mary Wollstonecraft]] (1759–97) She wrote ''A Vindication of the Rights of Women''.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
* [[Wangari Maathai]] (1940-2011.) A Kenyan political activist.
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

[https://www.nobelprize.org/womenwhochangedscience/stories| Other Nobel laureates]

=== Sport ===
*[[Junko Tabei]] (1939-2016) She was the first I woman to reach the summit of Mount Everest in 1975,. she later was the first woman to climb all the highest peaks on every continent..

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Birthing Person and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], corrupt Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She wanted the law to treat women the same as men. She agreed with abortion.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who refused to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]].
 
 
[[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership.Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Women

2022-08-28T20:41:16Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Nobel laureates */

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] ()1612-1672. One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Marian Anderson]] (1897-1993). Famous singer.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Mary Wollstonecraft]] (1759–97) She wrote ''A Vindication of the Rights of Women''.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
* [[Wangari Maathai]] (1940-2011.) A Kenyan political activist.
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

[https://www.nobelprize.org/womenwhochangedscience/stories|See also other women Nobel laureates]

=== Sport ===
*[[Junko Tabei]] (1939-2016) She was the first I woman to reach the summit of Mount Everest in 1975,. she later was the first woman to climb all the highest peaks on every continent..

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Birthing Person and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives since 2002
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She wanted the law to treat women the same as men. She agreed with abortion.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who refused to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]].
 
 
[[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership.Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Women

2022-08-28T20:36:31Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Politics */ Addition

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] ()1612-1672. One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Marian Anderson]] (1897-1993). Famous singer.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Mary Wollstonecraft]] (1759–97) She wrote ''A Vindication of the Rights of Women''.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
* [[Wangari Maathai]] (1940-2011.) A Kenyan political activist.
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

=== Sport ===
*[[Junko Tabei]] (1939-2016) She was the first I woman to reach the summit of Mount Everest in 1975,. she later was the first woman to climb all the highest peaks on every continent..

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Lady and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives since 2002
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She wanted the law to treat women the same as men. She agreed with abortion.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who refused to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]].
 
 
[[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership.Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Women

2022-08-28T20:33:29Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Nobel laureates */ New section

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] ()1612-1672. One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Marian Anderson]] (1897-1993). Famous singer.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Mary Wollstonecraft]] (1759–97) She wrote ''A Vindication of the Rights of Women''.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

=== Sport ===
*[[Junko Tabei]] (1939-2016) She was the first I woman to reach the summit of Mount Everest in 1975,. she later was the first woman to climb all the highest peaks on every continent..

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Lady and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives since 2002
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She wanted the law to treat women the same as men. She agreed with abortion.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who refused to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]].
 
 
[[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership.Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Women

2022-08-28T20:28:33Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Politics */ Addition

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] ()1612-1672. One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Marian Anderson]] (1897-1993). Famous singer.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Mary Wollstonecraft]] (1759–97) She wrote ''A Vindication of the Rights of Women''.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Lady and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives since 2002
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She wanted the law to treat women the same as men. She agreed with abortion.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who refused to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]].
 
 
[[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership.Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Women

2022-08-28T20:24:07Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* The arts */ Addition

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] ()1612-1672. One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Marian Anderson]] (1897-1993). Famous singer.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Lady and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives since 2002
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She wanted the law to treat women the same as men. She agreed with abortion.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who refused to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]].
 
 
[[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership.Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Women

2022-08-28T20:19:28Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Politics */ Addition

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] ()1612-1672. One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Eleanor Roosevelt]] (1884-1962). Activist who worked for racial equality and was U.S. Representative to the U.N.
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Lady and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives since 2002
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She wanted the law to treat women the same as men. She agreed with abortion.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who refused to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]].
 
 
[[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership.Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Women

2022-08-28T20:16:57Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* The arts */ Additions

[[File:Angelica Kauffmann Self Portrait 1780 - 1785.jpg|300px|thumb|Angelica Kauffmann, Self Portrait, 1780 - 1785. One of only two female Founder Members of the Royal Academy of Art in London, England.]]
Women are the female of the human species. Most women have two X-chromosomes.<ref>Gamble, T., & Zarkower, D. (2012). Sex determination. ''Current Biology'', ''22''(8), R257–R262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.054 </ref> They also have different reproductive organs from men and normally can give birth. While on average women’s brains are smaller than men this is not an indication of a lower intelligence.<ref> [https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/battle-of-the-brain-men-vs-women-infographic “Battle of the Brain: Men Vs. Women”] Northwestern Medicine</ref> Other morphological differences from men include a thicker layer of subcutaneous [[fat]], a wider pelvis to facilitate carrying and birthing a [[baby]], and have less fine vellus and coarse hair than men.<ref>[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319881 Medical News Today]</ref>

Men have typically two times more upper body strength than women, and around 50% more leg strength.<ref>College women have 50 to 60 percent of the arm and shoulder strength and 70 percent of the leg strength of their male counterparts. [http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4171 Human Kinetics]</ref> Women have slightly longer average lifespans than men, which results in women overtaking men in population by middle age despite a 1.05:1 boy to girl ratio at birth in many countries, though the ratio differs in some parts of the world.<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/24/the-odds-that-you-will-give-birth-to-a-boy-or-girl-depend-on-where-in-the-world-you-live/ Pew Research],</ref>
Men are also more violent than women, according to conservative psychologist [[Jordan Peterson]].<ref> https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/</ref> Men also have higher levels of [[testosterone]] than women and this is associated with masculinity, while [[estrogen]] is one of the primary female [[hormone]]s.

== Women in history ==
[[File:Phyllis speaking in 1983.jpg|thumb|300px|Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the modern American conservative movement.]]
[[File:Candace Owens.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Candace Owens, leading civil rights activist.]]
[[File:MarieCurie.jpg|thumb|3-0px|[[Marie Curie]], Nobel winning scientist.]]
Most women, such as the Virgin Mary and most other women of the Bible as well as more well-known women in later history, have had positive impacts on society, like the wise woman of [[Proverbs 14]]:1).

The following is a selection the many famous women:
=== Religion ===
*[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary of Galilee]]
*[[Queen Esther]], the Jewish heroine of the [[Book of Esther]] in the Old Testament
*Judge [[Deborah]]." Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time". Judges 4:4.
*[[Judith]]. See [[Book of Judith]] in the O.T.
*[[Theresa of Avila]]
* St. [[Joan of Arc]]

=== The arts ===
*[[Murasaki Shikibu]], the Japanese author of the eleventh century ''[[The Tale of Genji]]'', described as the world's first novel.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190814-the-tale-of-genji-the-worlds-first-novel "The Tale of Genji: The world’s first novel?"]</ref>
*[[St Hildegard of Bingen]], medieval composer, philosopher, mystic,etc.
*[[Artemisia Gentileschi]] (1593 - 1654 or later). The most celebrated female painter of the 17th century.
*[[Anne Bradstreet]] ()1612-1672. One of America's first poets.
*[[Clara Schuman]], composer
*[[Louisa May Alcott]] (1832-1888). Writer and activist.
*[[Isadora Duncan]], the most famous dancer of her time.
*[[Pearl S. Buck]] (1892-1973). Won the 1938 [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature.
*[[Georgia O'Keefe]], major 20th century painter
*[[Jane Austen]], a famous early novelist
*[[Emily Dickinson]], American poet

=== Philosophy ===
*[[Hypatia]] c355-415, ancient Greek philosopher.
*[[Iris Murdoch]], who was also a novelist.
*[[Hannah Arendt]] was a German political theorist and writer. Her works include The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Condition, and Eichmann in Jerusalem.
*[[Martha Nussbaum]] is a distinguished professor in the University of Chicago's Law School, Divinity School, and philosophy department.
=== Politics ===
*[[Harriet Tubman]], an escaped slave and abolitionist who played an important role in the [[Underground Railroad]].
*[[Susan B. Anthony]], was an abolitionist, anti-abortionist, and campaigned for a woman’s right to vote.
*[[Queen Victoria]]. Queen of England for much of the 19th century
*[[Queen]] [[Elizabeth I]] of [[England]]
*[[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom]] [[Margaret Thatcher]]
*Empress Tsarina [[Catherine the Great]] of [[Russia]]
*Pharaoh [[Cleopatra]] of [[Egypt]]
*[[Prime Minister of Israel]] [[Golda Meir]]
*[[Prime Minister of India]] [[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Prime Minister of Pakistan]] [[Benazir Bhutto]], the first woman to lead an [[Islam|Islamic republic]]
*[[United States Supreme Court Justice]] [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court.
*[[Candace Owens]], Black activist, human rights spokesperson and entrepreneur
*[[Alaska]] governor [[Sarah Palin]], She was [[John McCain]]'s vice-presidential running mate.
*[[Phyllis Schlafly]], a founder of the modern conservative movement
*Mary May Simon, Canada’s first [[Aborigines| Indigenous]] governor general.

=== Sciences ===
See [[Women in Science and Mathematics]]

*[[Florence Nightingale]] was the first female member of the Royal Statistical Society and founder of modern nursing.
*[[Amelia Earhart]], the most celebrated of all women aviators.
[[File:Earhart.jpg|thumb|Amelia Earhart, aviator]]
*[[Rachel Carson]],marine biologist, conservationist, and author of the influential book, ''[[Silent Spring]]''.
*[[Sally Ride|Dr. Sally Kristen Ride]] was the first American woman in space. She had a doctorate in Physics (Stanford, 1978), as well as a BSc in Physics, BA in English in 1973, and a MSc in Physics.

===Nobel laureates ===
*[[Marie Curie]], in physicist with her husband (1903, )and chemistry (1911). Curie's daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1935.
*Barbara McClintock in 1983 for her research in genetics.
*[[Mother Theresa]], who won in 1979
*[[Toni Morrison]], prize in literature (1993)
*[[Alice Munro]], prize in literature (2013)
*Peace Prize 2014, [[Malala Yousafzai]], for her work “against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education”.
*[[Louise Glück]], American poet in 2020.

===Negative role models ===
Women in the entertainment and media industries, politicians, other public officials, and [[feminist]]s, because of their liberal, socialist, and other negative ideologies (like the foolish woman in Proverbs 14:1).

*[[Delilah]], who betrayed [[Samson]] to his enemies the [[Philistine]]s after weakening him by cutting his long hair
*[[Jezebel]], the wife of [[Ahab]], the corrupt king of the [[Northern Kingdom]]; she was so evil that her name has long since become associated with any woman who is evil and corrupt
*[[Margaret Sanger]], racist, eugenicist, and the founder of [[Planned Parenthood]]. She promoted contraception in order to end abortion.
*[[Eva Peron]], wife of [[Argentina|Argentine]] leader [[Juan Peron]]; she allowed [[Nazi]]s who had escaped from Germany following the fall of the Nazi regime to hide in Argentina
*[[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]], immoral atheist activist whose actions led to [[classroom prayer|the removal of prayer from public schools]]
*First Lady and [[Democrat]] presidential candidate [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]
*[[Nancy Pelosi]], Speaker of the House of the U.S. House of Representatives since 2002
*United States Supreme Court Justice [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]]. She wanted the law to treat women the same as men. She agreed with abortion.
*[[Ketanji Brown Jackson]], the first [[African American]] [[female]] appointed to the [[Supreme Court]], who refused to define what a woman is in confirmation hearings<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jackson-says-she-cannot-define-woman-at-confirmation-hearing</ref>

=== Violent women ===
*[[Catherine de Medici]], Queen of France (1547 to 1559), was ruthless and violent and is often regarded as the mastermind behind the [[Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre]], directed against the [[Huguenots]] (French Calvinist Protestants) in 1572, in which 30,000 Huguenots lost their lives
*[[Mary I|Mary Tudor]], “Bloody Mary”, the very first queen of England (1553 to 1558), is remembered as one of the most evil women in English history. Known for her persecutions of Protestants and the executions of over 300 subjects.<ref>[https://list25.com/25-most-evil-women-in-history/]</ref>

== Christianity and women's rights ==

''See also:'' [[Christianity and women's rights]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

[[File:Georges de La Tour Mary Magdalene.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Georges de La Tour, [[Mary Magdalene]].
 
 
[[Mary Magdalene]] and other women were the first individuals to [[Jesus Christ]] after his [[resurrection]].<ref>[https://www.everystudent.com/wires/women.html Women's rights], Everystudent.com</ref>]]
Dr. Jeff Myers in his book ''Understanding the Culture: A Survey of Social Engagement'' wrote about [[Christianity and women's rights]]:
{{Cquote|[[Christianity]] has done more for women’s rights than any other movement in history. Christianity sprouted in the seedbed of the [[Roman Empire]], whose soil was nourished with the blood of the innocent. To say that Rome was distinctly anti-woman is an understatement. Families typically kept all their healthy boys and their oldest healthy girl. Other daughters were left to die as infants. Surgical abortion was available, and women often died from it or were left maimed. Surviving girls were typically married off at age twelve and were pressured into remarriage when widowed.

Christians opposed these practices. They took in abandoned infants, condemned surgical abortion, allowed girls to remain unmarried until they were ready, and provided support for widows. Welcomed by the church rather than shunned, women converted to Christianity at a far higher rate than men and rose to positions of leadership.Unsurprisingly, this led to a surplus of Christian women who, in marrying pagan men, provided the early church “with a steady flow of secondary converts,” as Rodney Stark drily phrased it. Also, because they accepted rather than rejected all children, Christians gained a distinct population advantage in producing the next generation.

Furthermore, Christianity’s acceptance of women’s dignity led to cultural innovations all over the world. In India, for example, it was only when Parliament forced the British East India Company to allow Christian missionaries into India that the practice of suttee was questioned. It took decades, but these missionaries, together with indigenous Christians like Krishna Mohan Bannerjee, eventually succeeded in having this gruesome practice banned.

In [[China]], traditional culture held that tiny feet were a mark of status and beauty for women. In many parts of China, the feet of little girls were bound tightly to prevent them from growing. This broke the toes and bones in the arches of their feet, leaving many girls nearly crippled. In the 1600s, the Manchu emperors (who were not ethnically Chinese) tried and failed to stop the practice. In the late 1800s, however, Chinese Christian women, such as medical doctor Shi Meiyu, began agitating against this abuse of young girls and women and were eventually successful in making the practice illegal. Meiyu also exerted a transformational influence on China through her work in medicine and public health and the help she provided to opium addicts.

Historically in most cultures, women were often denied educational opportunities. Christian missionaries and indigenous Christian leaders changed that in country after country. In Japan, Nitobe Inazō, a scholar with five doctoral degrees and an innovator in Japan’s agricultural advancement, founded Tokyo Christian Women’s University and became its first president. Tsuda Umeko, a Japanese woman educated in the United States, became the private tutor of prime minister Ito Hirobumi’s children. She had such an influence on securing the right of women to education that Tsuda College, the most prestigious private women’s college in Japan, is named in her honor.<ref>[https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/womens-rights-advanced-christian-worldview-2000-years/ Women’s Rights: Advanced by a Christian Worldview for 2,000 Years]</ref>}}

The [[Pentecostal]] Assemblies of the World's more than 60 dioceses now has two women [[bishop]]s, Bishop Mona Reide and Bishop Gwendolyn G. Weeks ,"the first and second women to take on the full responsibilities of a bishop in the more than 100-year-old denomination".<ref>[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2017/07/27/2-women-picked-first-female-bishops-lead-pentecostal-denominations-dioceses/470135001/ ''Tennessean'']</ref>

== Women in the Bible ==
[[File:Mteresa.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Mother Teresa]]
Contrary to what many [[Liberals]], [[Atheists]], and [[Feminists]] like to say, the Bible does not devalue women. In fact, the [[Deuterocanonicals|Deuterocanonical]] law of the [[kinsman redeemer]] (whereby the entire gentile church was grafted in to God's family) is perhaps the earliest written law intended to protect women's rights. In the [[Book of Ruth]] a kind older man, [[Boaz]], looked after Ruth and her mother, and eventually married her, fulfilling his role as kinsman redeemer. He is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus.

=== Genesis ===
The Bible says that women, like men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]:
{{quotebox-float|So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=27|version=KJV}}
{{quotebox-float|But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.|book=Mark|chap=10|verses=6|version=KJV}}
[[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a [[rib cage|rib]] from [[Adam]], the first man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a helper for [[Adam]] when the [[animal]]s, which had been created for that purpose, proved unsuitable:
{{quotebox-float|And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=18-22|version=KJV}}
According to some biblical literalists, Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she convinced Adam to eat from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. As punishment for this, God declared that women shall experience great pain in childbirth.<ref>Genesis 3:16</ref>

=== New Testament statements on the role of women ===
[[File:Vermeer Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.jpg|thumb|300PX|[[Jan Vermeer]], Christ in the House of Martha and Mary.]]
Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref> Most of these things are not believed by even the [[Biblical inerrancy|strictest Christians]], and such views are considered extreme by even the most conservative Christians.

The [[New Testament]] contains several instructions regarding the role of women:
# Women are to dress modestly and not wear "broided hair, or [[gold]], or [[pearl]]s, or costly array."<ref>1 Timothy 2:9</ref><ref>Peter 3:2-6</ref>
# Women may learn in silence, but may not be permitted to teach men.<ref>1 Timothy 2:11-12</ref> Some interpretations limit this rule to the teaching of doctrine.
# Women are not permitted to speak in church.<ref>1 Corinthians 14:34-37</ref>
# Women are to be subservient to and follow the instructions of their husbands.<ref>Ephesians 5:22-24</ref><ref>Colossians 3:18</ref><ref>Titus 2:4-5</ref><ref>1 Peter 3:1-7</ref>
# Women "shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."<ref>I Timothy 2:15</ref>

These viewpoints are not widely accepted in secular, first-world nations, although some believers still adhere to them. However, Christians do not always agree on how literal or universal these directives are intended to be. For example, dressing modestly is interpreted by some [[Anabaptist]]s to mean that women should only wear black or dull colors and that dresses should cover the entire arms and legs, whereas most non-Anabaptist Christians consider the directive to modesty as simply meaning that garments should not be wrongly provocative. The directive that women should not speak in church is regarded by some as being literal for all situations, but due to other New Testament passages which indicate that women were allowed to publicly testify in the early church,<ref>1 Corinthians 11:5</ref> the most common Christian interpretation{{fact}} of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is that women in the Corinthian church were in the habit of conversing casually and gossiping during the church service, and that the apostle Paul was telling them not to do that. However, that interpretation is at odds with the following Scripture passage:

{{Bible quote|Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.|book=1Timothy|chap=2|verses=11-15|version=KJV}}

Another interpretation sees the silence of women being limited to the immediate context of the passage, namely the authoritative judgment of prophecy.

{{Bible quote|Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.|book=1Corinthians|chap=14|verses=29|version=KJV}}

Some Protestants{{who}} believe these verses can be taken out of context and applied too legalistically. They believe that the church can conform legitimately to modern [[egalitarian]] ideals without sacrificing the literal meaning of these passages.

===Strong and important women in the Bible===

Among the Bible's several strong and empowered women are [[Deborah]], the only female judge and ruler of [[Israel]]; [[Judith]]; and [[Queen Esther]], heroine of the [[Book of Esther]]. [[Ruth]], the [[Moab]]itess woman in the [[Book of Ruth]], claimed [[Boaz]] as a husband under the law of the kinsman redeemer and gave birth to what became the [[House of David]]. In the New Testament, [[Mary Magdalene]] and other women are disciples of Christ with whom He seems to have close friendships. The [[Virgin Mary]] is heavily revered in the [[Roman Catholicism|Catholic]] and [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.

== Atheism and women ==

[[File:women.jpg|thumbnail|right|300px|Studies indicate that women in the Western World tend to be more religious than men.<ref>Multiple references:
*Kosmin, Barry A., et al. (2008). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110904110346/http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf "American nones: Profile of the no religion population"]. American Religion Survey website [Trinity College, Hartford, CT]. Retrieved from Internet Archive.
*Britt, Robert Roy (February 28, 2009). [http://www.livescience.com/7689-women-religious-men.html "Women more religious than men"]. Live Science website.
*Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>]]
''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Atheism and women's rights]]

Surveys throughout the world and other data indicate that women are less inclined to be [[atheism|atheists]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.
*Carter, Stephen L. (March 27, 2015). [http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-27/the-atheism-gap "The atheism gap"]. ''BloombergView''.
*[http://blog.oup.com/2014/09/atheism-feminism/#sthash.0yIBbelF.dpuf Atheism and Feminism], ''Oxford University Press'' blog</ref>
<ref name="PZ">Myers, P.Z. (June 29, 2010). [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/06/29/the-woman-problem/ "The woman problem"]. Pharyngula [blog].</ref>

In 2016, Atheist Alliance International (AAI) conducted an annually reoccurring atheist census project and found:
{{Cquote|At the time of writing, the Atheist Census Project recorded that on average worldwide 73.2% of respondents were male. The result is consistent with other research... As such, the focus of many scholarly papers has been on seeking to explain this persistent observation."<ref>[https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-aai/position-statements/1206-aai-position-statement-gender-balance.html AAI Position Statement - Gender Balance]</ref>}}

In November 2010, ''Discover Magazine'' published survey results published by the World Values Survey which showed significant differences between the percentage of men and women who are atheists for various countries with men outnumbering women in terms of adopting an [[atheist worldview]].<ref>Khan, Razib (November 18, 2010). [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/11/sex-differences-in-global-atheism-part-n/ "Gene expression; Sex differences in global atheism, part N"]. Discover magazine website.</ref>

==References==
<references />

== See also ==
*[[Conservative women]]
*[[Women in Science and Mathematics]]
*[[Men]]
*[[Egalitarian]] and [[complementarian]] theology

[[Category:Human Beings]]

Talk:Feminism

2022-08-28T19:57:09Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Does the Bible forbid women from wearing pants? */ Disagree?

Talk:Feminism

2022-08-28T18:42:57Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Does the Bible forbid women from wearing pants? */ Further comment on what the Bible actually says.

{{bias}}
==article problems==
Second Wave did not "resurge"-the feminism that emerged out of the later 80's/early 90's is Third Wave.

Also, feminism, contrary to what many people think, does not revolve around abortion. Feminist work also involves issues such as affordable access to childcare and prevention of domestic violence, just to name a couple. Couldn't this article reflect that rather than lumping all of feminism into one category of ideology?

----
Removed opinion.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:10, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

This article contains a lot of irrelevant information. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 04:18, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

A big problem with feminism is its desire to erase sex distinctions. Masculinity and femininity are no longer seen as God-given traits, or even ideals. [[Women in the military]], the so-called [[equal pay for equal work]] law; the forced muzzling of that Harvard president who dared suggest that women and men might not be equally suited to academic careers in math and science.

The idea that there's nothing sacred about the male-female relationship obviously provides support for [[gay rights]] agitation and same-sex "marriage". If there's nothing special about a man, then what does a woman need one for? She can have a "wife" too (as Garry Trudeau once put it). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:20, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't think the addition of the Rush Limbaugh "femi-nazi" comment is particularly relevant, largely because it's based on the wholly erroneous assumption that all feminists are pro-abortion. To include anything based on that assumption mischaracterizes the late 20th c/early 21st c "post feminist" era, where women who self-identify as feminists are far more likely to fall within a broad spectrum of ideals than one cookie cutter. [[User:Fsm1975|Fsm1975]] 23:32, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I just found this. This gives a leading source for a definition.
:Hillary Clinton received the endorsement of the National Organization for Women, a group of a half-million members who support feminist candidates for elective office. Asked whether she saw herself as a feminist, Clinton said by the standard definition, yes. "If you look in the dictionary, the word feminist means someone who believes in equal rights for women in society, in the economy, the political process -- generally believes in the equality of women," she said. "And I certainly believe in the equality of women." [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 14:35, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

::I’m curious why a person who would not accept a philosopher of science as a credible source for an entry on science would accept the definition of a politician/lawyer as definitive in terms of a philosophical/social/academic movement. Let alone why you would think she would be a “leading source for a definition”. Not that I object to the content of her definition, but the strongest claim I think you can support with it is “some politicians endorsed by [[NOW]] believe feminism means…” An interesting, but not especaly useful or informative claim.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:48, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

==Defining feminism==

Cut from intro:

:However there is no broad consensus among [[feminists]] (followers of feminism) about how gender equality ought to be understood. In recent years this has led many feminists to argue that, because there are so many different and mutually exclusive philosophies and philosophers that are called feminist, it is more appropriate to speak of feminisms (plural) than feminism (singular) <ref>Feminisms [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/]</ref>. For this reason it is difficult, if not impossible, to state any belief universally held by all feminists.

This sounds like a refusal to be categorized, defined or otherwise pinned down. But it's the job of an encyclopedia to define and categorize. How can we solve this problem? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 16:06, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

:The way I would suggest handling it is to take seriously the distinctions feminists make among themselves. (For example there is a clear split between the pro- and anti- pornography feminists (I’m still working on a RD of the [[pornography]] article as per our previous discussion btw) ). If we are going to really flesh out this article we ought to have a number of feminisms represented here—just as we don’t lump all creationists together but observe the very real distinction between Young and Old Earth Creationists.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:44, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

==Abortion poll==

The page I linked to had a whole series of polls. The two most recent polls said that 16% of the American public favored retaining unlimited rights to abortion, and 39% favored abortion being 'legal in most cases'. Of the remainder, 31% favored it being illegal in 'most' cases and 12% illegal in all cases. In other words, 55% favor it being legal in all or most cases and 43% favor it being illegal in all or most cases, with 2% unsure either way. The other poll referred to the retention of the rights granted under Roe v Wade and 62% favored this. This should be reflected in the article because as it stands the article misrepresents the facts. Please tell me why you think we should misrepresent facts clearly laid out in a neutral opinion poll --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:38, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

: Can you explain why abortion polling data is so relevant to this article? What is the point? It is an article about Feminism, not abortion politics.
: You put in a statement that the majority of Americans the current law on abortion rights, but in fact the most recent poll at the cited source says that only 16% support that right. So I corrected that. Now you want various other poll results. What is the point? People can follow the link to the polls if they wish. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:05, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::The statement about feminist support for abortion rights was in the original version of the article I saw. I linked to the poll to provide a citation on an issue that the original article said was of great importance to many feminists, and made it clear that these rights were opposed by many conservatives and some feminists. My original simple statement about 'majority' support for the right to a legal abortion in all or some cases was made convoluted by another editor and I attempted to clarify it. It has now been totally distorted by you. In addition to the 16% support you keep citing, you omit to say that an additional 39% support abortion rights 'in most cases'. Shall we say that only 12% of people - presumably conservatives - oppose abortion? This would be equally valid by your measure of validity. People can certainly follow the link, but it is dishonest to misrepresent its content in the way you are doing.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:16, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::: What is dishonest? It is an article about feminism, not about conservative abortion views. Maybe an article about abortion can explain the polls in detail, I don't know. The feminist organizations that support abortion rights want abortion to be legal in all cases. The 16% figure is the most relevant one. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:29, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::In that case, since there is no evidence that only feminists support abortion in all cases (we know that some are opposed) the relevant figure is the 62% who support the retention of rights under Roe v Wade, which I think we can agree was agreed by most feminists to be a landmark case on this issue. I suggest we cite that instead, which gives a clearer figure both of general feminist support for abortion rights and the degree to which that issue is supported by the population as a whole. The figure was quite unequivocal on the poll, and is probably less confusing than the other poll. I propose substituting that one. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 19:15, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: Could you give me an example of a feminist organization that opposes abortion rights in some cases? I think that the Roe v Wade poll is more confusing because it reflect not just opinions on abortion, but also opinions about legal theories. I wonder how many people even know what the legal consequence of overturning Roe v Wade would be. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 19:32, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::Sure - [ http://www.feministsforlife.org/] are probably the best-known group, but you can find other organisations listed on [http://www.gargaro.com/fem.html] and quotes from a variety of other sources on [http://www.geocities.com/livefreecritique/modernfeminists.html]. Personally, I don't think the Roe v Wade poll is confusing, because most people associate that case with abortion rights and would be unlikely to consider abstract legal theories in that context. Roe v Wade is cited as an event of significance in a timeline of women's rights on [http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html] and certainly supported by the majority of feminists - see [http://www.feminist.org/courts/roe.asp] and [http://www.now.org/press/01-04/01-22.html]. I feel that it is important to demonstrate the extent to which majority feminist thinking is supported by opinion among the country as a whole over this issue, hence my wish to cite either the full figures of the first poll or the limited figures over Roe v Wade of the second. The second set are probably clearer and easier.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 20:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::: There are certainly lots of feminists who are very happy with abortion law. But if you want to argue that a majority of the people agree with a majority of the feminists, then the Roe v Wade poll doesn't do it. A lot of people are for or against Roe v Wade for a lot of reasons. If you want opinions on abortion, the best polls are the ones that ask abortion questions. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 20:37, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::The language on the poll numbers, as it stands, is misleading. Currently the language is “As of April 2007, women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases, and according to a recent poll, 16% of the American public favor the retention of this right.” This is simply not the case, women have a right to abortions in most cases, but it is not unlimited. Parental notification laws, parental consent laws, laws banning third trimester abortions except when necessary to protect the health or life of the mother – all of these laws are (currently) constitutional (laws banning second trimester abortions except when necessary for the life or safety of the mother are also probably, but less clearly, allowable). That means that 16% of people favor an expansion of the right to an abortion, not keeping it the same. 39% seem to favor “keeping it the same” as there is currently a right to abortion in most, but not all cases.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 20:42, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: I agree that the numbers as currently stated are misleading. In that case, given that RSchlafly opposes using the Roe v Wade poll I think the fairest and most representative thing to do is to cite the full figures of the first poll, which is the most recent one in any case, and let people make their own minds up about the extent to which majority feminist thinking on this issue has influenced thinking in the population in general. I will edit accordingly.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:00, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Interestingly enough, even Roe v. Wade didn’t go as far as to say that a woman had a right to an abortion in all cases. It said that a woman had a right to an abortion in the first trimester, in the second trimester a woman has a right to an abortion unless the state can show a really good reason why she should be allowed to have one, and a state could outlaw almost all third trimester abortions. (The Casey decision which is the leading case at the moment, relaxed constraints on what the state could ban). So under current law more abortions can be outlawed than could be under Roe v. Wade and even under Roe it was not the case that “women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases”.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Thank you, that's very helpful and I hope my editing of the paragraph has reflected that. Please clarify if it seems inaccurate. It sounds as if law in the US is, in practice, quite similar to law in the UK, where abortions are illegal after 24 weeks unless there are life-threatening reasons, although in practice only a minute percentage of abortions are performed after 20 weeks.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:13, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::Your restatement in the article looks right to me. Just to be clear though, I am only talking about what women have a constitutionally protected right to (at the moment, I suspect that this will change in the near future). I’m not sure what the law is in any given state—the Supreme Court simply says “this is the most you can outlaw” in many states more abortions are allowed than the bare minimum. And I have no idea what the actual numbers look like here (actually I suspect that those numbers are not attainable here, given how tightly guarded medical records are).--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::: No, it is just not the case that abortion is limited by trimesters under USA law. Not under Roe, and not under Casey. USA law is not like UK law. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 22:03, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

==Why the deleted quotations?==

RobS - it is not very polite to delete another editor's work that is relevant to the article without discussing it first. I reverted your original edit so that it could be discussed. I should be grateful if you would be kind enough to do that here.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:36, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:answers.com is a wikimirror site. It is an invalid citition. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:06, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

::Well that's no problem. It's an extremely famous quotation and I have plenty of other sources for it. The other quotation from Pat Robertson is not from answers.com so I presume that is OK. If that's your only problem with it, I will restore it with a different source. It would have been mannerly of you to have asked me if I had another source for it rather than just deleting it though. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:10, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

==South End Press==
My apologies, but we can't use bigotted and hate filled extremist publishers for references. A blockquote from the mainspace cites a book published by South End Press, which also published this proven and debunked piece of trash. [http://www.southendpress.org/2004/items/OldNazis] The reference will be removed, and the editor is hereby warned to refrain from making further insertions from such hatefilled extremist sources. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:07, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

==To much emphasis on abortion==
I think that this artical is focused mainly on abortion which is not it is for.

::Agreed. I suggest cutting out all abortion references except one: Give it a bullet point in the list of goals, and no more. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== Misandry ==
This article has clearly mistaken the definition of femanism for misandry. There are more even-minded, considerate, and heterosexual feminists that can be counted, where as this article only lists those who qualify as man-haters. Honestly I think this kind of blatent bias is what's ruined Conservapedia, and really the entire country, but there's no reason to suggest that feminism goes against any of the values that we all share, and I suggest we completely overhall this entire article and include a section regarding feminist inspired misandry and the differences between the two practices. I also don't think there is any reason to suggest that feminism is a sin and in any way connected to homosexual behavior, which seems to be what this article implys. I'm not so quick to put females who wish to be heard in the same boat as abominations, and I wish I could say the same for all of the Conservapidia editors.
--[[User:YoungConservative|YoungConservative]] 15:43, 2 February 2008 (EST)YoungConservative

:What you say was true, back when the feminists really were seeking legal equality - before the radical feminists hijacked it for their attacks on family life, hate of tradition, and abortionist agenda. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== "boys being cheerleaders for it" ==

Is it not the case that George W. Bush was a cheerleader at Yale back in the day? [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 13:24, 2 March 2008 (EST)

: Could be. Many prominent men were once cheerleaders ... for ''boys'' playing football, not girls.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:27, 2 March 2008 (EST)

== Excessive quotes? ==

I'm not sure if I'm alone here in thinking that there are far too many quotes in this article? They make the layout rather bloated and do not seem to provide much in the way of information. Might I go ahead and perhaps remove some of the less relevant quotes? Thanks. --[[User:TJ|Crookles]] 15:32, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: No, please don't delete factual information, unless you see a clear [[rule]] violation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:27, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::There are no rule violations, but the quotations are not explained, not formatted, and are longer than the rest of the sections of the article put together. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:14, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::: The quotations illustrate what feminists really think, and that is informative.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:34, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::::Have you looked at them though? Some of them don't make sense, some are (supposedly) by feminists and others are ''about'' feminists (with no clear distinction), a lot of them are redundant, there is no formatting, and some of them contain poorly-censored swear words. It might be informative, but it does not look good in an encyclopedia for 75% or so of the article to be made up of unclear, unreferenced quotations. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:54, 3 March 2008 (EST)

I just put bullet points on those quotes, and it really seems like a terribly excessive list. Does anyone else think that some editing could be done to this to make it seem a little less over-the-top? [[User:Reaganite|Reaganite]] 18:05, 9 March 2008 (EDT)

== The list of feminist views ==

Is it just me or goes the top list of feminist views come accross as humourous rather than factual , i laughed when i read it because it sounds funny and witty rather than serious and factual. I think the tone needs altering, i can imagine liberals having a field day over it. --[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 18:58, 3 March 2008 (EST)

It really smacks of parody, and of course, there were no references. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 19:57, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: Both you are clueless if you don't realize what modern feminists think. By the way, "Realist2", "across" has only on "c" and we spell "humorous" without the "our" in [[America]]. Maybe you don't have many feminists in your country. America does.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:35, 3 March 2008 (EST)
::Why did you remove my reference to feminists wanting tougher penalties for rapists? Surely they do (it was the only referenced point on the list). [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:06, 4 March 2008 (EST)

If your can only edit by insulting others spelling or the spelling for the country they come from it shows a distinct lack of tolerance. I am here to be constructive so please dont put others down its not very christain at all. Also how would i know what feminists think ... funny enough im not even a woman so it would be very hard to put myself in that thought of mind. However writing with sarcasm or does not improve the article. I never said whats written is incorrect , i said the tone needs changing, didnt you read or inderstand that Aschlafly? I can say it in spanish if it helps lol. :-)--[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 13:38, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Where in her book did Hillary Clinton say that children should be raised by a "village" RATHER THAN their parents? [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 15:05, 5 March 2008 (EST)

I am removing the part about refusing to admit the wrongness of their ideology; it could be said about any ideology, but it is not listed on the Creationism or Christianity pages (or the Aethism one). [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 22:29, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
Aschlafly- why was my edit reverted? [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 21:51, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

: Because [[censorship]] of the truth is not allowed here. This is not Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:38, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

::How is removing an unsourced statement censorship? I would not take seriously any encyclopedia in which that statement appeared without evidence. [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 07:16, 18 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm really not sure about this list: I think this focuses too much on the radical feminists - the bra-burning, men-hating feminists from the sixties and seventies. But hasn't feminism developed, become more mainstream? For example, I'd consider myself a (conservative) feminist, and almost all of my girlfriends are too. We'd reject all or almost all of the points listed in the article:
- Yes, of course men and women are different; physically and mentally. We certainly don't believe in falsely imposing equality of outcomes - only of opportunity.
- Oppose chivalry? Nope. It's charming that a few men still open doors, give up seats for us. I don't know anyone who would complain about that.
- View traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal? Nope.
- Belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family? No-one I know.
- shirk traditional gender activities, like baking? I really don't understand this one. You're a feminist if you don't bake biscuits? Or is this a synecdoche for wider home-making activities?
- support affirmative action for women? Again, no. Affirmative action does no good in the short, medium or long-term. That's more a liberal value than a feminist one, wouldn't you say?
- prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do - This is straying into the dungaree-wearing radical lesbian feminist stereotype. Most feminists don't care what other women wear, as long as they're not wearing the same outfit as you at a cocktail party.

Look, I could go on, but my point is that this article paints feminism as the ''bête noire'' of conservative values and, while this may be true of more radical / historical feminism, it's too simplistic to cover the very, very large number of women worldwide who identify as feminists and conservatives.[[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 07:34, 21 January 2011 (EST)

==Difficulty of defining feminism==

It's not easy to define [[feminism]]. Is it "organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests"? Must one support [[equal rights]] to be a feminist?

Are there feminists who want women to "get more" than men, just as their are minority advocates who are want their group to "get more" than people in other groups? (Is feminism thus a kind of "group selfishness"?)

Is "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes" consistent with the Bible?

Is it possible to believe that men and women are "equally valuable" but made (in the image of God) to be inherently different? That is, are [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]] equally valuable qualities? Or what?

Are there currents in feminism which seek to advance women's interests but which '''do not''' assert that men and women are (or should be) "equal" in all respects?

What, then, is the proper relationship between men and women? Specifically, in the family, what are the proper roles? (How much leeway is there?)

Do all feminists oppose the "stay at home mom" phenomenon? (Or is that only [[Simone de Beauvoir]]?) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:55, 4 March 2008 (EST)

==Ridiculous Number of Quotes==

About three quarters of this article is made up of selected quotes from selected feminists, often those who do not represent mainstream feminism and are radicalised in their views. There are also a couple of unsubstantiated quotes from anti-feminists which appear to be used to represent fact rather than a person's opinion. Perhaps we could cut down on these or move them to another article ([[Quotes by Radical Feminists]] and [[Quotes by Anti-Feminists]]) in order to make this one a bit more encyclopedic. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:50, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

=="Ideological Edits"==

''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should raise children rather than the child's father and mother[5]''

The supporting reference for this is the title of a book, however the book itself states that it states a village (ie a large number of people - teachers, doctors etc) '''in addition''' to parents to successfully raise a child. Not once does the book say that parents are to be denied the main role in raising their children.

''prefer for role-reversal, like girls playing football and boys being cheerleaders for it, or men baking cookies for women''

Unsupported, mainstream feminism believes in equal roles, that is women can play football and boys can be cheerleaders, they do not believe in role reversal (ie boys cannot play football and women cannot be cheerleaders).

''prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do''

Unsupported, this is a radical view at best.

''Quotes from fictional characters''

The quotes from a character within a fiction book do not provide any valid insight into the mindset of a feminist, even if that book was written by a feminist.

Hope this clears it up, ready for reversion of reversion. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:59, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:Sorry, but conservatives believe that no one other than the parents should have the primary role in establishment of values, etc. Perhaps instead of pushing your liberal POV in editing a conservative encyclopedia, you could work as hard finding additional citations that you will approve of, illustrating the point. You cannot deny what is factual, that Feminism is a vehicle for liberal change of the social order, and the destruction of the traditional family. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:12, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

::This article is not about conservative beliefs, it is about the beliefs of feminists, and it appears that they are currently being misrepresented (the present revision states that feminists believe a village should raise children '''instead''' of parents, whereas the truth is that feminists believe a village should '''support''' parents in raising children). Could you please point out which of my points you believe to not be factually correct? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:15, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:::"Liberal POV" or not, I don't think fictional characters make very reliable as references. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:04, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::I await a response. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 18:07, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

GySom, the changes you made, apparently to make the article more ideologically neutral, would be a fine thing on Wikipedia, where they like to keep the public sheltered from facts, but not on CP, where we actually offer a choice, not an echo to the so-called "wisdom" of the crowd. From my experience here, I would suggest you concern yourself less with seeking out articles to make neutral, and spend your time creating new articles, helpful content that is both Christian and conservative friendly, because that is the stated goals and perspective of this encyclopedia and its Founders. Leave it to Wikipedia, and the dishonest presentations there, to "cleanse" topics near and dear to the liberals hearts. If you wish to make the changes you have, please provide proof that Feminists don't think that way. Responsive enough? --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:34, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Hang on, are you asking me to prove a negative? Asking someone to prove that mainstream feminism does not accept something is akin to proving that there are no invisible unicorns on Mars. It is up to the person making the claim to support it, not my job to weed through every single quote that a feminist has made and then provide an analysis to show that mainstream feminism does not support a claim that is made, it is the job of the person making the claim to support it. Let me lay out the changes I think should be made:

:*Mainstream feminists do not believe a village should raise a child instead of his or her parents, they believe that parents should be supported in their role by others (this I can actually support, by my recollection the book in the reference specifically states that parents should play the main role in raising their children).
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe in role reversal, they believe in the destruction of roles (that is, instead of believing that boys should not be allowed to play football and girls should not believe in cheer leading, they believe that boys and girls should both be able to play football or cheer lead should they desire)
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe that women should not wear dresses and should wear pants
:*A series of quotes from a ''fictional character'' in a book does not provide any insight into modern feminism

:If you have an argument about one of those points please make it, I don't need to hear about how I'm an evil liberal who should run away to Wikipedia as this gets us nowhere. It is conservative ideology to tell the truth no matter what it is, therefore it is imperative to truthfully represent the views of mainstream feminism on this encyclopedia. I guess my edits were ideological after all, just not in the way you think. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 19:48, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::Indeed, I am asking you to prove your assertion, GySom. You made the changes, now back them with proof. ''What Feminists believe is well known''. Do you demand proof of God? That there is air? The Feminist agenda is the complete re-ordering of the nuclear family, its denigration. That has been proved countless times. Your own points above show that Feminists reject completely God's own creation, the differences between men and women. Please stop with these silly distracting arguments promoting liberal ideals! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:59, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::If it has been proven countless times then there should be no problems with finding supporting evidence for it. I am not asking for proof of God or proof of air because the existence of these two is not being debated, rather we are discussing whether or not mainstream feminism believes in the three points I removed, and whether the forth should be included. I notice that you have only taken objection to the first point (regarding families), it is therefore acceptable to alter the information relating to the last three? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:05, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::Well, I am not a sysop here, so I certainly cannot stop you from doing so. If you change it back, and the Administrators and/or Andy are fine with it, so be it. I am not going to engage you in some endless discussion about the falsities and naivety of your assumptions, GySom! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:17, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::I am very open to hearing about the "falsities and naivety of my assumptions" and changing my mind if sources are produced, however at the moment it appears that there are no sources supporting the claim that feminists believe parents should not raise their children (the current cite says the opposite) and it appears that nobody has taken objection to the rewording of the claim that feminists favour role reversal or the removal of the claim that feminists shun dresses or the quotes from the fictional character. I will change the last three points, and leave the first open for now for continued discussion with yourself or others.

:::::Please, I am not trying to invite conflict, I just feel that this claim is not supported and therefore needs to be changed. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:24, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

*Yes, to be sure, I am certain those are your intentions! I stand by what I said above, but I have taken the liberty of asking Andy, Conservative and some others to review this. I hope that helps you out. Godspeed to you! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:26, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::I look forward to it, I was hoping that two users could have a civil discussion without going and calling in the big guns, but sadly this could not be the case. For those reviewing it here are my arguments:
::#The claim that feminists believe a village should raise a child '''instead''' of his/her parents is unsupported by the reference, those who read the book will find that it suggests that a village should '''support''' parents in raising their child, but that parents should play the main role
::#The claim that feminists believe in role reversal is wrong, feminists believe in the destruction of roles altogether
::#The claim that feminists believe that dresses should not be worn is a radical belief at best, and there are no cites supporting it
::#Quotes from a ''fictional character'' should never be used to make a point for or against feminism.
::Of these only number 1 was argued, and during this discussion there was no mention of why the source was correct, nor were any other sources raised. Numbers 2 and 3 were not argued, and number 4 was supported by HelpJazz. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 21:56, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::In response to your four points above:

:::#The thesis of the book is clear: "it takes a village to raise a child," and by its very terms that denies the exclusive role played by parents in raising children. The point in this entry is correct and you have not proposed alternative language that would be more accurate.
:::#No, feminists do crave role reversal, as in men baking cookies and women assuming traditionally male jobs. I'll add an example.
:::#I've added an example in response to your point about dresses.
:::#Your point here is not clear, and I'll look again at the entry.
:::Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:10, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually Andy, could we use your wording just there to clarify it?
*''believe that "it takes a village to raise a child" and deny the exclusive role played by [[parents]] in raising children.''
[[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 23:16, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Thankyou for your reply.
:#The thesis of the book is that it takes a village as well as the parents to raise a child, at the moment the entry reads that it takes a village rather than the parents, so yes the exclusivity of the role is denied, but not the role itself (by memory the book states that parents have a significant and unique role to play). I did have alternate language in my original edit: ''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should assist parents in raising children'' or something along those lines that clarifies that the position taken by the book is not to replace the parents - edit conflict, not adjusted for Feebasfactor's comment
:#There may be some confusion between role reversal and the destruction of roles. Role reversal in your example would be men baking cookies and women being expected not to bake cookies, and women taking traditionally male jobs with men being expected not to take those jobs. By the destruction of roles it is expected that both men and women have an equal right to bake cookies, and that both men and women have an equal right to take whatever job they want to, I believe the latter is closer to the desire of mainstream feminists to have equal roles and to breakdown the concept of gender, rather than pushing for a matriarchal society.
:#I'm not entirely happy that a one line quote from a blog in response to another article can be used to represent mainstream feminism, but it's your encyclopedia
:#There are quotes from a fictional character, I don't see why these should be in the article (using the same logic someone could use quotes from a fictional American president in a book to criticise America).
:Hope this clears it up. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:19, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Aren't the fictional quotes a tiny percentage of the quotes, and aren't they by a feminist author?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"''? Though I have met many feminists, I have never met a woman, ever, who felt that women should only wear pants. I know women who do not wear pants, because they feel the Bible calls them to wear only skirts, though this is not true for all of the Christian women I know, or even a majority of them. Most women, feminist or not, dress according to what they will be doing. If they will be hiking in the woods giving a lesson on the forest habitat, they will probably wear jeans. If they are going to a wedding or a funeral, they will almost certainly wear a dress. Some women personally prefer to wear dresses more than pants, or vice versa, but most women, feminist or not, don't feel that everyone should dress as they do. If the article is going to state that feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"'', then there should be a really good citation to show this. Certainly you can find many articles where women discuss the pros and cons of pants and/or dresses, but I've never seen anything that supported the claim made here. An example to the contrary would be the A Dress A Day blog<ref>A Dress A Day[http://www.dressaday.com/dressaday.html]</ref>, whose author writes regularly about the joys of wearing dresses; I'm quite certain she would consider herself a feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 23:22, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I've added another cite, and frankly am surprised that anyone would dispute this feminist preference to dress like men in order to make an ideological statement.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::::The whole pants thing was a big deal at the time because there were people & institutions who felt that women should *never* wear pants - restaurants that wouldn't serve women wearing pants, schools that wouldn't allow girls to wear pants (even in freezing cold weather - and skirts in those days were *short*!), and so on. Feminists of the time believed that women should be allowed to wear pants if they wished. (Not that they *should* wear pants.) Nowadays, most American women, feminist or not, wear both pants and skirts, just because we like to, or for practical reasons, not for political reasons. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:17, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::Cites about baking cookies and wearing pants are from 1970's, not modern feminism? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:55, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::: The 1970s is "modern". Perhaps a time period should be added to the entry? By the 1960s "modern" feminism was in full bloom.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:01, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::::Is the goal of the entry to describe feminism as it is understood today by the majority of women who consider themselves feminists? (I'm assuming this would be the best approach, though of course the history is of interest as well.) The radical femimism of the '60's and '70's was, well, radical, but I think that the kind of extreme views described in this article would be foreign to most women today who consider themselves feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:08, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

<- The section of the article in dispute is written in the present tense (''"Specifically, modern feminists tend to"'' as opposed to ''"Specifically, modern feminist tended to"'') after having described the era of the 1970's in the past tense, therefore the points should describe those beliefs held by mainstream feminists today. I'm not too sure many modern mainstream feminists favour wearing pants or role reversal, just as we don't see burning bras or (too many) claims that all sexual relationships in marriage are rape. In short, what was mainstream in the 1970's appears to now be classified as radical compared to the views of modern feminists, which appear to be more about breaking down gender inequality and the like. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 00:14, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I agree - though I would add that many of the ideas discussed in the 70's were radical feminism (not mainstream feminism) even then.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:20, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]], Thank you for your grammar edit! It really helps! While we're cleaning up this article, here's another item that might need to be changed. I don't think the statement that feminists ''"oppose single-sex schooling"'' is accurate. There are rather a lot of feminists at all-girl colleges like Smith and Bryn Mawr and Mount Holyoke. Also, I can't see your recent changes on the main article page, only the history page - I don't know if it's me or Conservapedia. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:27, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:It's stupid to argue about this sort of thing on an article discussion page. Just add a quote from a feminist who supports it. This goes for girls' schools, dresses, stay-at-home moms and all the other stuff above. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::: Can't. Article's locked, at least it is for me.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:00, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::Are we trying to use the view of one feminist to represent the views of all, or are we accurately trying to report on the collective views of mainstream feminism? If it's the latter then a single quote from one feminist won't do the job. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:21, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I have unlocked the article so that the requested source can be added. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:07, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Feminism and choice==

Feminists say they '''only want choice''' while actually asserting various "shoulds" and "oughts".

Wearing dresses is strongly discouraged by feminists; dressing like men is strongly encouraged. Indeed, all sorts of feminine behavior in the workplace is discouraged, and we '''all''' know that [[Simone de Beauvoir]] condemned the [[choice]] of woman staying home to raise her and her husband's children.

What we object to here is the [[liberal deceit|pretense]] that feminism supports women choosing either traditional female roles or modern "liberated" ones. They use coercion quite openly. Pretending that they do not is something you can do on your own blog, using your [[freedom of press]] to tell lies. You can't do it here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:16, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:According to her article she made those views in 1949, we are trying to discuss the views of modern feminists, or more specifically those around in 2008. As has been stated above, these are different to the views held in the past. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:24, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Ed Poor explains this extremely well. I don't know what TheGySom is referencing about 1949, but that is surely "modern" also. [[Feminism]] plainly represents views about how women ''should'' act, and women who disagree with that ideology are ostracized and ridiculed by the more militant feminists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:39, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Simone de Beauvoir wrote her controversial book ''The Second Sex'' in 1949. It is relevant to the history of feminism, but in no way should be used as a source to describe the views of mainstream twenty-first century feminists, as it was written almost 60 years ago. We've come a long way since then - most of today's feminists weren't even born when the book came out. I'm a woman, I have friends who are feminist and friends who definitely aren't, none of them have ever tried to encourage or discourage me from wearing dresses. Some of my friends wear only dresses/skirts for religious reasons (Christian or Jewish), but I've never met a woman who would not wear dresses for political reasons. The idea just doesn't ring true to me. Certainly for some activities or professions pants are a more practical and/or more safe choice, and some women tend towards pants or tend towards dresses for themselves, but those are not political or ideological choices, they are a matter of personal style and/or practicality. Feminists in the '70's fought for the right to wear pants in places and situations where it had not previously been allowed, mostly for practical and personal style reasons. I'm not trying to be argumentative here - just to give a woman's perspective. So far, the only sources in support of the idea that feminists encourage dressing like men have been offhand comments in blogs. Can we find some more solid sources for this idea if it is to be included in the article?--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I'm sure there are millionaire communists who say they have no desire to interfere with private property, and that they don't know any other communists who do either. And they would be right about themselves and their friends, but wrong about the ideology of communism.

:::: Likewise here. The ''[[sine qua non]]'' of modern feminism is for women to act like men. Why would clothes be excluded from that? They aren't. I've already provided two references and there are probably more, but I'm getting the sense that no amount of citations will persuade you because you know what you and your friends think about clothes. I suggest you spend some time researching this and ask women familiar with the feminist agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:26, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Name Changes==
The article says that feminists ''"refuse to take the husband's last name when marrying, despite the confusion and complexity that causes"''. However, the article used as a citation seems to be saying the opposite. It is an article about the complexity of such decisions for 21st century women, and how there are many different approaches to changing one's name, and how quite a few feminists are now changing their name to, one way or another, include their husband's name. (The author, who is marrying soon, begins the article with 8 of her own options, including hyphenation, etc.) The article goes on to give quite a few examples of feminist women who made various choices, for a wide variety of reasons. Based on the cited article, I think a more accurate statement for our article would be ''"feminists are likely to take a number of factors into consideration when deciding whether or not to change their last name to their husband's when they marry."'' Two relevant quotes from the article: ''"...they are doing what they can, making meaning of their own, focusing on what they do with their lives as much as what they do with their names. And by the way, isn't that the whole idea of feminism?"'' and ''"Hey, I'm a stay-at-home mom who took her husband's name and earns a fraction of our household income but none of that makes me any less of a feminist. Because for me, feminism is about respecting women and men and being able to make whatever lifestyle choices you want."'' <ref>"(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller. [http://dir.salon.com/story/mwt/feature/2003/10/16/names/index.html]</ref> I did not make this change, even though the article is now unlocked, because I'd like input from others first - I think that, together, we can make this a better article.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 21:40, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

== References ==

<references/>

==Question for the Editor--==
I just found my way to your site via Google, and read "Feminism." I noticed that your editorial policy says that you're not allowing the use of material that isn't accurate. That site says that early feminists were "suffragettes." The suffragettes were English, in fact -- in the use, the folks who supported the right to vote for women were suffragists, from Woodrow Wilson to good ol' Theodore Roosevelt. Your writers also have no idea that the term "feminist" at times has been somewhat conservative (hey! surprise!), as when the National Women's Party supported an Equal Rights Amendment while most women opposed it. In the meantime, in the twentieth century, some Republican women would have been comfortable calling themselves "feminists," from Margaret Chase Smith to Oveta Culp Hobby. The term has had somewhat varied meanings over the course of the century, and any accurate description should reflect that. Interested readers could check out Catherine Rymph's Republican Women, published by the very reputable U.North Carolina Press. {{unsigned|Mm444}}

== Unsourced quotes ==

There are tons of unsourced quotes in this article, and I will go through the list to see how many I can actually source. I will remove those quotes I couldn't find any info on, and I'll post them here so others can re-add them if they do find reliable sources. The key words are: Where was it said, and when. Evidence should be supplied. Quote-sites that simply say "She said so." are off-limits.

*"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." - Robin Morgan
I couldn't find anything more than just anti-feminist comments and "Men Rights" sites. No mention of where or when she supposedly said so. (Update: Found a site that says it's from "Sisterhood is Powerful". --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:56, 16 April 2008 (EDT))

A somewhat special case is the next one:
*"I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero-sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary-vested-interest-power. But then, I have great difficulty examining what men in general could possibly do about all this. In addition to doing the sh*twork that women have been doing for generations, possibly not exist? No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" - Robin Morgan
I found out that this quote comes from her introduction to the 1970 book "Sisterhood is Powerful". I also found this [http://www.feministcampus.org/network/chat/morgan04232003.asp snippet] about the quote:
{{cquote|Halimat: Following is a quote from you. Assuming that you weren't misquoted, do you still feel this way? How are women to get ahead without collaberation from those who currently hold the majority of legislative power? "I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero- sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary- vested-interest-power."

Robin Morgan: That quote is from the early 1970s and fortunately both the movement and I have matured in terms of developing a much more sophisticated range of tactics and strategies, due to our enormous numbers, than we ever could have imagined back in the late 60s and early 70s. While it is still true that "pale males" are at the top of the "food chain" - more men are changing every day. They're more involved with their children and families and on every level, from slowly learning to use Ms. through to adopting and adapting to anti-sexual harrassment workplace rules, men have been changing. It's not enough by far, but it is a start. And it's the power of the women's movement that has brought them even this far.}}
I'll leave the quote in the article, but I will also link to that interview so people can get a more modern reflection on the quote. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:03, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

One more from Robin Morgan:
*"Women are not inherently passive or peaceful. We're not inherently anything but human."
It's a really nice quote, so I regret that I couldn't find any proper sourcing for it. :/ --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:42, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Took out two (for now) from Dworkin:
*"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig."<nowiki><ref></nowiki>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp From] her book "Ice and Fire"<nowiki></ref></nowiki>
"Ice and Fire" is a ''novel''. As in ''fiction''. As such, I won't treat this as her own quote, just like I don't claim that authors like King or Clancy endorse every sentence from their books as their own views.
*Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman."
This quote is [http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp attributed] to "Liberty", but I couldn't find it in her Bibliography, so I'll cut it until somebody actually figures out whether it's a book (and whether it's fiction or non-fiction) or a paper or something. Citing made-up books sounds vaguely unlikely, but I'd rather be safe than sorry. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 17:27, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Dworkin again:
*"To be rapeable, a position that is social, not biological, defines what a woman is."
Couldn't find any proper sourcing, only quote pages that simply say she said it, but not where or when. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 18:00, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==Quotations and flowing prose==

There are way too many quotations here. Sure, we've proved the point. There's a lot of nasty things that were said by genuine, card-carrying feminists. But quotes don't make an article.

I want to know the roots of feminism, what it originally tried to do, what else it started to do, and how it did (and does) differ from simply "making sure women don't get mistreated". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:11, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
:Agree with the "way too many quotations" bit. A few quotes from several eras to illustrate how feminism developed and matured would be nice. If that's not possible, just crop it down. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:17, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
::It probably wouldn't hurt to review this. I am also pleased Miles that you have chosen a constructive approach of finding and adding references instead of just complaining. There is a greater chance of seeing constructive changes occur under that format than merely confronting. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:40, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==I think we have misrepresented Jilly Cooper==

I think Jilly Cooper, the veteran right-wing journo and toff, would be surprised to find herself identified as a feminist and downright astonished to be labelled a member of SCUM. Somebody has got a little confused here. (Or else they are being mischievious).

== Suggestion for separation ==

I personally feel it would be beneficial to make two articles on this subject. What's described here is what many call "radical feminism" whereas average everyday feminism is quite different. I'm not an expert in this field, but I can assure you that the generalizations made here are on the most extreme examples of feminists. -EternalCritic

I agree, much of what is addressed here under the heading of "feminism" would more properly be described as "radical feminism" (of the all women should be lesbians/all heterosexual intercourse is rape slant), and much of the substantive article seems to be un-cited impressions that appear to be sourced in popular culture (for example, if the ideological doctrine is too difficult to define, how can it be said that *all* feminists balk at chivalry or belittle family women?). Can the lengthy list of sound-bite quotations (from which the reader is apparently supposed to cobble together an idea of what feminism is) be removed to ultimately be replaced with an attempt to seriously engage with the tenants of feminism with a stronger focus on peer-reviewed academia reflecting a broader overview of the field rather than a relatively small group of extremists? -- [[User:BillyWest|BillyWest]] 11:28, August 28 2011

== Reversion explained ==

The edit summary to the last edit said, "I changed some awkward phrasing. I also think the bullets should be made into one coherent paragraph. Thoughts?" In fact, that edit introduced liberal bias and censored conservative truth. It was fully reverted even though it did also include some harmless stylistic changes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:20, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

== Citations? ==

I'm not clear on the policy. In the list of quotes, there are some that don't have real citations like:

"The nuclear family must be destroyed ... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process" - Linda Gordon

and

"Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women ... We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men ... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft" (from "The Declaration of Feminism" November, 1971)

I think these need real citations or they should be removed. Also, quotes about feminists should be in a separate section than quotes from feminists. Pat Robertson is mixed in with a bunch of feminists right now, under the "Other" heading.

--[[User:AdamBurns|AdamBurns]] 18:47, 16 December 2009 (EST)

== Enough quotations? ==

This article could make a more mature examination of feminism than putting up a bunch of quotations. --[[User:Marxian21|Marxian21]] 22:53, 22 January 2010 (EST)

== "No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" ==

I cannot find the phrase in either of the two references given. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:12, 30 January 2010 (EST)

:Please feel free to delete that phrase, then.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:18, 30 January 2010 (EST)
::I would, but TK has already reverted someone who edited it out--and I don't want to anger him. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:22, 30 January 2010 (EST)

== Reversion explained ==

Modern feminists are overwhelmingly pro-abortion, and even those who are not pro-abortion are still anti-motherhood.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:54, 1 June 2010 (EDT)

==Full rewrite==

I like the quotes, and we certainly need a conservative critique of modern "radical" feminism, but the movement has also had its good points. There are even places/issues where currents in contemporary feminism match up with conservative ideas.

The idea that men shouldn't use their power to abuse women is a longstanding conservative idea (see [[Chivalry]]), although this is nothing more than the general idea that no one, male or female, should abuse his power; it doesn't matter if it's man to woman, white to black, rich to poor, educated to ignorant, etc. However, many feminists bristle at the idea of accepting '''any''' help from men (such help seen as condescending at best). Most conservative Christians oppose [[pornography]] and [[sexual slavery]], and so on. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:23, 8 September 2010 (EDT)

I am trying to make this page compatible with a little Amazon Alexa Mod I cooked up, so far when It reads it,
There were multiple spelling errors, and when she spoke it sounded more like a rant then an actual informative conservative essay. Also the bulleted list doesn't play and the alexia device just stops playing, I believe the hardware isn't used to bullet points not being with-in heading or heading font so the Device just tries to reload the text in pure html using Wikipedias default source php (which I deleted to make my own.)
I understand that I need to be of higher standing, so can someone edit the article so it doesn't sound like a gigantic rant without any sources.
--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] [[User talk:Reevestehsnek|Talk]] 10:59, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:Sorry, we don't change pages so Amazon Alexa handles them better. That's Alexa's problem, not ours. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:48, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::I wasn't clear I made a mod for an alexa device that uses conservapedia as its source, but its obvi you don't care about all the hard hours of work it took to actual remove the php through bluetooth and rewrite the script using BSD. {{unsigned|Reevestehsnek}}
:::I'm not saying that at all, and that sounds like a great accomplishment that I could not do myself.

:::What I '''am''' saying is that this is not a sufficient reason for making major changes to the article. We simply cannot change an article's wording and point of view because it runs better through a speaking device. Articles are generally created to be read, and it's unusual for people to have them spoken to them by a device. Wording and point of view changes should only be made based on their own merits. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:09, 8 November 2018 (EST)

== feminism and obesity ==

feminism and obesity: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html I will leave it up to others decide what constitutes feminism as I am taking a break from Conservapedia barring any news events. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:03, 5 February 2011 (EST)

== Create a feminism and obesity article ==

Consider creating a [[Feminism and obesity]] article at Conservapedia and cite this material: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:08, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

:The blog you want cited makes a ''huge'' leap in its conclusions. Being a working mother does not automatically translate into being a feminist. I would guess the majority of working women are in the job market because there is a need for a second income to support a family, given the cost of basic necessities such as rent, food, gasoline, electricity, medical costs, clothing, etc. I know that is the case in my situation. We can't pay for the basics on my husband's salary alone. We haven't had a vacation in years. Most of my friends are in the same situation. And the blog completely ignores the single working mother - what is she supposed to do? Not work? --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 11:01, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

I agree that this article is no good, even though I wish it were true.
--[[User:corneliuscalvin|corneliuscalvin]] 7:56, 26 November 2012 (PDT)

:Can't talk now. of the World happening. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 23:01, 26 November 2012 (EST)

== No Christian feminism? ==

I think that this article would be served well if a section on [[Christian feminism]] was included. Maybe a new article on it would be better.[[User:Mr. Guye|Mr. Guye]] ([[User talk:Mr. Guye|talk]]) 19:15, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:That seems like a good idea, but an article on it would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view. But there's also the fact that the same term can have a different meaning for different people -- what one person considers Christian feminism can be completely different than what another person does. We would need to define the term clearly, but I think we'd be talking about second- and third-wave feminism, adherents of which have theologically and socially left-wing views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:47, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:::No, there is no requirement that a Conservapedia article discussing the topic of Christian feminism "would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view." There are no such requirements on content at Conservapedia, and no one, except perhaps Andy, has the authority to enforce such a requirement. All that is required is that "Conservapedia is a politically conservative, Christian encyclopedia project". Though many of our members are not Christians and are not politically conservative, they are required to edit in a manner consistent with the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]]. To require otherwise would turn this wiki into a Wikipedia-style "mobocracy" rather than a "best of the public" project.

:::The concept of feminism covers a lot of ground. There are conservative feminists, Christian feminists, and Republican feminists. Not all feminists subscribe to some of the silly excesses that one sometimes sees looking around on the internet and various media outlets. Many conservative feminists, for example, fully support encouraging girls to go into STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects.

:::So feel free to write sensible content on this topic. I look forward to reading it.

:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:49, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::::SamHB, they have found that promoting the idea that women are underrepresented in STEM fields and that this has to be corrected has the effect of telling women that STEM is not feminine/girly and thus women are more likely to avoid those fields. In other words, the policy is probably backfiring. See: http://review.chicagobooth.edu/economics/2017/article/how-promoting-stem-fields-women-can-backfire

::::Women tend to be more likely to be conformists and not mavericks.

::::Over and over again, liberals fail to take into account the unintended consequences of their social engineering! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:48, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::Once Christian denominations filly embrace the notion of female pastors, their memberships almost invariably spiral downward. That should surely be mentioned in relation to "Christian feminism".

::"But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve." - 1 Timothy 2:12-13[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:15, 2 December 2017 (EST)
:::Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I don't think Mr. Guye was even talking about female pastors when he was talking about Christian feminism, just something akin to, say, the Suffragettes, many of whom were Christian women who would NEVER advocate the pill, let alone abortion. But yes, we probably should note that bit somewhere either way. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:35, 2 December 2017 (EST)
::::What percentage of so-called "Christian feminists" believe that a wife is to obey her husband and that a husband is the head of the family? At least in its present form "Christian feminism" is just another endeavor to infect Christianity with unbiblical ideas. As far as the suffragette movement, I don't know if any of them were Christian women who held biblical Christianity views related to women. I do know that various suffragettes burned down churches.[https://www.christiantoday.com/article/suffrage-the-churchs-rocky-relationship-with-rebellion/67361.htm]

::::Christianity was at the forefront of various movements like abolition, child labor laws, etc. etc. Christendom is also known for its favorable views on the treatment of women (husbands loving their wives like Christ loved the church, etc. etc.), but it is not known for leading the charge as far as feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:48, 2 December 2017 (EST)

:::::Well, I do know that Susan B. Anthony specifically condemned abortion and the pill and stated that would make women even more enslaved, and I do know that Christians also do not support abortion and the pill (in fact, among us Catholics, it's considered a mortal sin), so there's that to consider. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 09:53, 2 December 2017 (EST)
==First-wave feminism was good?==
This article makes it sound like first-wave feminism was good and its doctrines were just simply corrupted in the 1960s. As it turns out, first-wave feminists were anti-Christianity and anti-man too, as pointed out by Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire and [[John Doyle]].[https://youtu.be/sgJoJsaI1WY][https://youtu.be/ME-JIO8_cic] Elizabeth Cady Stanton once said that the Bible and the church were the two greatest stumbling blocks in the way of women's emancipation. Susan B. Anthony was a religious skeptic, and other early feminists held similar views too. In fact, many were free lovers, like Victoria Woodhull. I strongly recommend that the early section saying liberals just twisted the term be deleted. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 20:22, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:But the early feminists were [[pro-life]], right?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:45, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::The Bible says wives must submit to their husbands (Pauline epistles and the Apostle Peter taught this). No doubt this was anethema to first wave feminists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:04, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure if they were truly anti-Christianity, they'd be all in favor of unlimited abortion on demand even back then (especially when the Church was ALWAYS against abortion), and yet, as demonstrated with [[Susan B. Anthony]], several of them were AGAINST abortion. I know [[Vladimir Lenin]] [https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/11/17/november-1920-2020-a-century-of-abortion-in-russia/ certainly was all in for unlimited abortion], being notorious for literally legalizing unlimited and unrestricted abortion in the USSR and being the first state leader to EVER do so, even having the audacity to claim THIS emancipated women, and was such that even the likes of [[Margaret Sanger]], herself no pro-life adherer, was reportedly aghast at it. Besides, my idea of having my hypothetical wife submitting to me would be closer to [https://youtu.be/xtO-AHuEhJc?t=428 what Geldoblame advocated for everyone under his rule] from ''Baten Kaitos'', and I'm pretty sure even Jesus and his disciples NEVER advocated for that kind of submission (even less so when Geldoblame used THAT as justification for committing mass murder against a mining community by torching it simply because they withheld ore shipments thanks to his draconian labor statutes that left them dangerously overworked). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:03, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:Being pro-life does not necessarily make one pro-Christianity. Victoria Woodhull was against abortion and she was a Marxist and practically a communist. Also even Sanger claimed to be against abortion if I am not incorrect, saying birth control got rid of the need for it. Planned Parenthood did not start to endorse the legalization of abortion until 1969, and abortion did not even start to become popular until after Roe v. Wade. That was really more of the Overton Window being shifted in conservatism's direction back then than feminism being conservative. It just really goes to show how much ground we've lost. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 22:42, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::Maybe so, but the anti-Christians most certainly tended to be very much anti-life, as Lenin and even Trotsky proved there (not to mention the Bolsheviks), and even the Jacobins, their ideological ancestors, were known to practice abortion in the most crude manner (specifically, bayonetting pregnant women, and/or using wine pressers to crush them). And since Marx was brought into it, Marx himself advocated massively for abortion as well, as did Engels, all in their plan to "abolish the family." And what better way to abolish the family than to destroy reproduction. If she was a Marxist, it only shows she didn't know Marx all that well, as otherwise, she'd be all in favor of abortion like her idol Marx. And let's not forget that this view of pro-abortion has been going on since 1923 with [https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/marxist-roots-abortion-joseph-hippolito/ Dr. Antoinette Konikow], who was a fellow traveler of Trotsky during the Russian Revolution, AND committed several abortions in the Boston area specifically as part of her Marxist advocacy. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:49, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:That may be true, but some anti-Christians are more radical than others. Also America was more conservative than Russia at the time of the Russian Revolution, so something like abortion would definitely be seen as morally unacceptable in that time regardless of where you were on the political spectrum. But my main point is if Stanton said Christianity got in the way of feminism, and she was the founder of American feminism and first-wave feminism, I just don't know how you can say feminism wasn't anti-Christian even back then. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 23:27, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::I've heard of some feminists getting back to the Christian faith. Victoria Woodhull, for one actually renounced the free love bits and advocated strongly for the Christian concept of motherhood later in life (too bad she didn't quite own up to how she did badly during that time, though). Besides, technically speaking, there have been PLENTY of Founding Fathers in America who were significantly anti-Christian, including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and apparently even John Adams. By that same logic, America ITSELF is anti-Christian from conception. In fact, [[Christopher Ferrara|Christopher A. Ferrara]] actually makes this argument in his book ''Liberty: The God that Failed''. I guess you could also argue that liberty in itself was anti-Christian. For that matter, I'd argue [[Freedom of Religion]] is ultimately anti-Christian as well. The Israelites tried that bit back in the day, and that led directly towards the [[Babylonian Exile]], per God's direction. And Russia was still conservative enough to have abortion be deemed explicitly illegal until Lenin and his Bolsheviks took over (there's a reason why the USSR under Lenin was the first country in all of history to actually make unlimited abortion legal, to the extent that STALIN of all people threw a bone to us pro-lifers by outlawing abortion for a year). I'd mention divorce, but Robespierre and the French Revolution beat Lenin to that bit. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:33, November 9, 2021 (EST)

== Fatherless children ==

Does only feminism cause this? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 10:28, January 24, 2022 (EST)
:Re-reading the section "Cultural Marxism", it seems out of place in an article on feminism. Isn't it about men who abandon their children? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 13:24, March 11, 2022 (EST)

==Bias?==
I thought feminists went out of business with [[vaccine mandate]]s (''my body my choice'') and [[transgender]]s taking over girls sports. Not to mention rape in prisons by transgenders. It's the law now. We've finally reached full equality. What more is there to debate? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 20:18, May 28, 2022 (EDT)

== Pants ==

I'm puzzled by the linking of pants and feminism. I suppose it is an assertion by women of their independence but hardily any women, whatever their age, wears a dress where I live, though there's a few more in hot weather (I'm envious). Isn't more a matter of convenience than ideology? It's the norm and so non-partisan. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:49, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
:Phyllis Schlafly was a conservative woman who defeated the feminists by preventing the passage of the [[Equal Rights Amendment]]. I have never seen a picture of her wearing pants. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:50, August 7, 2022 (EDT)

:What has this to do with the fact that most women of all ages wear trousers in North American? This has far more to do with comfort and convenience than feminism. I suspect that more women wear dresses in more liberal Europe. Personally I find women more attractive in dresses but I would not be so arrogant to insist that any woman has to wear one! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 13:52, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
::There's too much feminism in the USA and the fruits are not positive. 13th highest divorce rate in the world.[https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/divorce-rates-by-country] Lots of women taking depression pills. And there are surveys which show that women are now LESS happy post feminism. Thank God that the religious have a higher fertility rate, Roe vs. Wade was overturned and that the Bible is not pro-feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:10, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
:::Have you read the essay: [[Essay: Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)|Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)]]. In 22nd century North America, the majority of women may be wearing dresses. In all likelihood, should Jesus tarry, the majority of women in North America will not be pant-wearing, feminist whores!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:16, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

::Oh dear!--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:57, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

===Does the Bible forbid women from wearing pants?===
According to the [[ United Church of God]] it does not.

::Does Deuteronomy 22:5 forbid women from wearing pants? No, it doesn't. In fact, clothing “that pertains to a man” at the time the verse was written would not have been understood to mean pants. Men in the Middle East through the history of the Old and New Testaments did not ordinarily wear pants, trousers or slacks; they wore robe-like garments. And in many cultures such as in China, women have commonly worn pants. The scripture more specifically addresses and forbids transvestism and cross-dressing.
::The underlying principle certainly applies to today. Men should dress in an appropriately masculine manner and women should dress in an appropriately feminine manner. Clothing manufacturers make pants designed for men, and pants, slacks and pantsuits designed for women. The Bible emphasizes modesty, and for women, slacks are often more modest than a short skirt.
::God does not intend for this scripture to be understood in an extreme or unreasonable way. For example, it’s perfectly fine for a woman to wear her husband’s old shirt when she’s painting or to put on her male friend’s jacket when she’s cold.<ref>[ https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/bible-questions-and-answers/does-the-bible-forbid-women-from-wearing-pantsPosted on Jan 27, 2011 by United Church of God ]</ref>
--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:37, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

:::A sensible and intelligent reading of the Bible and history, --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:42, August 28, 2022 (EDT)

Talk:Feminism

2022-08-28T18:37:54Z

RobLeonardWoo: /* Pants */ Response to Conservapedia's misogyniistic rant

{{bias}}
==article problems==
Second Wave did not "resurge"-the feminism that emerged out of the later 80's/early 90's is Third Wave.

Also, feminism, contrary to what many people think, does not revolve around abortion. Feminist work also involves issues such as affordable access to childcare and prevention of domestic violence, just to name a couple. Couldn't this article reflect that rather than lumping all of feminism into one category of ideology?

----
Removed opinion.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:10, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

This article contains a lot of irrelevant information. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 04:18, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

A big problem with feminism is its desire to erase sex distinctions. Masculinity and femininity are no longer seen as God-given traits, or even ideals. [[Women in the military]], the so-called [[equal pay for equal work]] law; the forced muzzling of that Harvard president who dared suggest that women and men might not be equally suited to academic careers in math and science.

The idea that there's nothing sacred about the male-female relationship obviously provides support for [[gay rights]] agitation and same-sex "marriage". If there's nothing special about a man, then what does a woman need one for? She can have a "wife" too (as Garry Trudeau once put it). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:20, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't think the addition of the Rush Limbaugh "femi-nazi" comment is particularly relevant, largely because it's based on the wholly erroneous assumption that all feminists are pro-abortion. To include anything based on that assumption mischaracterizes the late 20th c/early 21st c "post feminist" era, where women who self-identify as feminists are far more likely to fall within a broad spectrum of ideals than one cookie cutter. [[User:Fsm1975|Fsm1975]] 23:32, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I just found this. This gives a leading source for a definition.
:Hillary Clinton received the endorsement of the National Organization for Women, a group of a half-million members who support feminist candidates for elective office. Asked whether she saw herself as a feminist, Clinton said by the standard definition, yes. "If you look in the dictionary, the word feminist means someone who believes in equal rights for women in society, in the economy, the political process -- generally believes in the equality of women," she said. "And I certainly believe in the equality of women." [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 14:35, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

::I’m curious why a person who would not accept a philosopher of science as a credible source for an entry on science would accept the definition of a politician/lawyer as definitive in terms of a philosophical/social/academic movement. Let alone why you would think she would be a “leading source for a definition”. Not that I object to the content of her definition, but the strongest claim I think you can support with it is “some politicians endorsed by [[NOW]] believe feminism means…” An interesting, but not especaly useful or informative claim.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:48, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

==Defining feminism==

Cut from intro:

:However there is no broad consensus among [[feminists]] (followers of feminism) about how gender equality ought to be understood. In recent years this has led many feminists to argue that, because there are so many different and mutually exclusive philosophies and philosophers that are called feminist, it is more appropriate to speak of feminisms (plural) than feminism (singular) <ref>Feminisms [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/]</ref>. For this reason it is difficult, if not impossible, to state any belief universally held by all feminists.

This sounds like a refusal to be categorized, defined or otherwise pinned down. But it's the job of an encyclopedia to define and categorize. How can we solve this problem? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 16:06, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

:The way I would suggest handling it is to take seriously the distinctions feminists make among themselves. (For example there is a clear split between the pro- and anti- pornography feminists (I’m still working on a RD of the [[pornography]] article as per our previous discussion btw) ). If we are going to really flesh out this article we ought to have a number of feminisms represented here—just as we don’t lump all creationists together but observe the very real distinction between Young and Old Earth Creationists.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:44, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

==Abortion poll==

The page I linked to had a whole series of polls. The two most recent polls said that 16% of the American public favored retaining unlimited rights to abortion, and 39% favored abortion being 'legal in most cases'. Of the remainder, 31% favored it being illegal in 'most' cases and 12% illegal in all cases. In other words, 55% favor it being legal in all or most cases and 43% favor it being illegal in all or most cases, with 2% unsure either way. The other poll referred to the retention of the rights granted under Roe v Wade and 62% favored this. This should be reflected in the article because as it stands the article misrepresents the facts. Please tell me why you think we should misrepresent facts clearly laid out in a neutral opinion poll --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:38, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

: Can you explain why abortion polling data is so relevant to this article? What is the point? It is an article about Feminism, not abortion politics.
: You put in a statement that the majority of Americans the current law on abortion rights, but in fact the most recent poll at the cited source says that only 16% support that right. So I corrected that. Now you want various other poll results. What is the point? People can follow the link to the polls if they wish. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:05, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::The statement about feminist support for abortion rights was in the original version of the article I saw. I linked to the poll to provide a citation on an issue that the original article said was of great importance to many feminists, and made it clear that these rights were opposed by many conservatives and some feminists. My original simple statement about 'majority' support for the right to a legal abortion in all or some cases was made convoluted by another editor and I attempted to clarify it. It has now been totally distorted by you. In addition to the 16% support you keep citing, you omit to say that an additional 39% support abortion rights 'in most cases'. Shall we say that only 12% of people - presumably conservatives - oppose abortion? This would be equally valid by your measure of validity. People can certainly follow the link, but it is dishonest to misrepresent its content in the way you are doing.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:16, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::: What is dishonest? It is an article about feminism, not about conservative abortion views. Maybe an article about abortion can explain the polls in detail, I don't know. The feminist organizations that support abortion rights want abortion to be legal in all cases. The 16% figure is the most relevant one. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:29, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::In that case, since there is no evidence that only feminists support abortion in all cases (we know that some are opposed) the relevant figure is the 62% who support the retention of rights under Roe v Wade, which I think we can agree was agreed by most feminists to be a landmark case on this issue. I suggest we cite that instead, which gives a clearer figure both of general feminist support for abortion rights and the degree to which that issue is supported by the population as a whole. The figure was quite unequivocal on the poll, and is probably less confusing than the other poll. I propose substituting that one. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 19:15, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: Could you give me an example of a feminist organization that opposes abortion rights in some cases? I think that the Roe v Wade poll is more confusing because it reflect not just opinions on abortion, but also opinions about legal theories. I wonder how many people even know what the legal consequence of overturning Roe v Wade would be. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 19:32, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::Sure - [ http://www.feministsforlife.org/] are probably the best-known group, but you can find other organisations listed on [http://www.gargaro.com/fem.html] and quotes from a variety of other sources on [http://www.geocities.com/livefreecritique/modernfeminists.html]. Personally, I don't think the Roe v Wade poll is confusing, because most people associate that case with abortion rights and would be unlikely to consider abstract legal theories in that context. Roe v Wade is cited as an event of significance in a timeline of women's rights on [http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html] and certainly supported by the majority of feminists - see [http://www.feminist.org/courts/roe.asp] and [http://www.now.org/press/01-04/01-22.html]. I feel that it is important to demonstrate the extent to which majority feminist thinking is supported by opinion among the country as a whole over this issue, hence my wish to cite either the full figures of the first poll or the limited figures over Roe v Wade of the second. The second set are probably clearer and easier.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 20:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::: There are certainly lots of feminists who are very happy with abortion law. But if you want to argue that a majority of the people agree with a majority of the feminists, then the Roe v Wade poll doesn't do it. A lot of people are for or against Roe v Wade for a lot of reasons. If you want opinions on abortion, the best polls are the ones that ask abortion questions. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 20:37, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::The language on the poll numbers, as it stands, is misleading. Currently the language is “As of April 2007, women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases, and according to a recent poll, 16% of the American public favor the retention of this right.” This is simply not the case, women have a right to abortions in most cases, but it is not unlimited. Parental notification laws, parental consent laws, laws banning third trimester abortions except when necessary to protect the health or life of the mother – all of these laws are (currently) constitutional (laws banning second trimester abortions except when necessary for the life or safety of the mother are also probably, but less clearly, allowable). That means that 16% of people favor an expansion of the right to an abortion, not keeping it the same. 39% seem to favor “keeping it the same” as there is currently a right to abortion in most, but not all cases.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 20:42, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: I agree that the numbers as currently stated are misleading. In that case, given that RSchlafly opposes using the Roe v Wade poll I think the fairest and most representative thing to do is to cite the full figures of the first poll, which is the most recent one in any case, and let people make their own minds up about the extent to which majority feminist thinking on this issue has influenced thinking in the population in general. I will edit accordingly.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:00, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Interestingly enough, even Roe v. Wade didn’t go as far as to say that a woman had a right to an abortion in all cases. It said that a woman had a right to an abortion in the first trimester, in the second trimester a woman has a right to an abortion unless the state can show a really good reason why she should be allowed to have one, and a state could outlaw almost all third trimester abortions. (The Casey decision which is the leading case at the moment, relaxed constraints on what the state could ban). So under current law more abortions can be outlawed than could be under Roe v. Wade and even under Roe it was not the case that “women in the US have the right to abortion in all cases”.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

::::::Thank you, that's very helpful and I hope my editing of the paragraph has reflected that. Please clarify if it seems inaccurate. It sounds as if law in the US is, in practice, quite similar to law in the UK, where abortions are illegal after 24 weeks unless there are life-threatening reasons, although in practice only a minute percentage of abortions are performed after 20 weeks.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:13, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::Your restatement in the article looks right to me. Just to be clear though, I am only talking about what women have a constitutionally protected right to (at the moment, I suspect that this will change in the near future). I’m not sure what the law is in any given state—the Supreme Court simply says “this is the most you can outlaw” in many states more abortions are allowed than the bare minimum. And I have no idea what the actual numbers look like here (actually I suspect that those numbers are not attainable here, given how tightly guarded medical records are).--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::: No, it is just not the case that abortion is limited by trimesters under USA law. Not under Roe, and not under Casey. USA law is not like UK law. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 22:03, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

==Why the deleted quotations?==

RobS - it is not very polite to delete another editor's work that is relevant to the article without discussing it first. I reverted your original edit so that it could be discussed. I should be grateful if you would be kind enough to do that here.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 17:36, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:answers.com is a wikimirror site. It is an invalid citition. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:06, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

::Well that's no problem. It's an extremely famous quotation and I have plenty of other sources for it. The other quotation from Pat Robertson is not from answers.com so I presume that is OK. If that's your only problem with it, I will restore it with a different source. It would have been mannerly of you to have asked me if I had another source for it rather than just deleting it though. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 18:10, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

==South End Press==
My apologies, but we can't use bigotted and hate filled extremist publishers for references. A blockquote from the mainspace cites a book published by South End Press, which also published this proven and debunked piece of trash. [http://www.southendpress.org/2004/items/OldNazis] The reference will be removed, and the editor is hereby warned to refrain from making further insertions from such hatefilled extremist sources. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:07, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

==To much emphasis on abortion==
I think that this artical is focused mainly on abortion which is not it is for.

::Agreed. I suggest cutting out all abortion references except one: Give it a bullet point in the list of goals, and no more. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== Misandry ==
This article has clearly mistaken the definition of femanism for misandry. There are more even-minded, considerate, and heterosexual feminists that can be counted, where as this article only lists those who qualify as man-haters. Honestly I think this kind of blatent bias is what's ruined Conservapedia, and really the entire country, but there's no reason to suggest that feminism goes against any of the values that we all share, and I suggest we completely overhall this entire article and include a section regarding feminist inspired misandry and the differences between the two practices. I also don't think there is any reason to suggest that feminism is a sin and in any way connected to homosexual behavior, which seems to be what this article implys. I'm not so quick to put females who wish to be heard in the same boat as abominations, and I wish I could say the same for all of the Conservapidia editors.
--[[User:YoungConservative|YoungConservative]] 15:43, 2 February 2008 (EST)YoungConservative

:What you say was true, back when the feminists really were seeking legal equality - before the radical feminists hijacked it for their attacks on family life, hate of tradition, and abortionist agenda. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

== "boys being cheerleaders for it" ==

Is it not the case that George W. Bush was a cheerleader at Yale back in the day? [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 13:24, 2 March 2008 (EST)

: Could be. Many prominent men were once cheerleaders ... for ''boys'' playing football, not girls.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:27, 2 March 2008 (EST)

== Excessive quotes? ==

I'm not sure if I'm alone here in thinking that there are far too many quotes in this article? They make the layout rather bloated and do not seem to provide much in the way of information. Might I go ahead and perhaps remove some of the less relevant quotes? Thanks. --[[User:TJ|Crookles]] 15:32, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: No, please don't delete factual information, unless you see a clear [[rule]] violation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:27, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::There are no rule violations, but the quotations are not explained, not formatted, and are longer than the rest of the sections of the article put together. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:14, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::: The quotations illustrate what feminists really think, and that is informative.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:34, 3 March 2008 (EST)

::::Have you looked at them though? Some of them don't make sense, some are (supposedly) by feminists and others are ''about'' feminists (with no clear distinction), a lot of them are redundant, there is no formatting, and some of them contain poorly-censored swear words. It might be informative, but it does not look good in an encyclopedia for 75% or so of the article to be made up of unclear, unreferenced quotations. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:54, 3 March 2008 (EST)

I just put bullet points on those quotes, and it really seems like a terribly excessive list. Does anyone else think that some editing could be done to this to make it seem a little less over-the-top? [[User:Reaganite|Reaganite]] 18:05, 9 March 2008 (EDT)

== The list of feminist views ==

Is it just me or goes the top list of feminist views come accross as humourous rather than factual , i laughed when i read it because it sounds funny and witty rather than serious and factual. I think the tone needs altering, i can imagine liberals having a field day over it. --[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 18:58, 3 March 2008 (EST)

It really smacks of parody, and of course, there were no references. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 19:57, 3 March 2008 (EST)

: Both you are clueless if you don't realize what modern feminists think. By the way, "Realist2", "across" has only on "c" and we spell "humorous" without the "our" in [[America]]. Maybe you don't have many feminists in your country. America does.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:35, 3 March 2008 (EST)
::Why did you remove my reference to feminists wanting tougher penalties for rapists? Surely they do (it was the only referenced point on the list). [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:06, 4 March 2008 (EST)

If your can only edit by insulting others spelling or the spelling for the country they come from it shows a distinct lack of tolerance. I am here to be constructive so please dont put others down its not very christain at all. Also how would i know what feminists think ... funny enough im not even a woman so it would be very hard to put myself in that thought of mind. However writing with sarcasm or does not improve the article. I never said whats written is incorrect , i said the tone needs changing, didnt you read or inderstand that Aschlafly? I can say it in spanish if it helps lol. :-)--[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 13:38, 4 March 2008 (EST)

Where in her book did Hillary Clinton say that children should be raised by a "village" RATHER THAN their parents? [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 15:05, 5 March 2008 (EST)

I am removing the part about refusing to admit the wrongness of their ideology; it could be said about any ideology, but it is not listed on the Creationism or Christianity pages (or the Aethism one). [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 22:29, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
Aschlafly- why was my edit reverted? [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 21:51, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

: Because [[censorship]] of the truth is not allowed here. This is not Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:38, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

::How is removing an unsourced statement censorship? I would not take seriously any encyclopedia in which that statement appeared without evidence. [[User:Umlaut|Umlaut]] 07:16, 18 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm really not sure about this list: I think this focuses too much on the radical feminists - the bra-burning, men-hating feminists from the sixties and seventies. But hasn't feminism developed, become more mainstream? For example, I'd consider myself a (conservative) feminist, and almost all of my girlfriends are too. We'd reject all or almost all of the points listed in the article:
- Yes, of course men and women are different; physically and mentally. We certainly don't believe in falsely imposing equality of outcomes - only of opportunity.
- Oppose chivalry? Nope. It's charming that a few men still open doors, give up seats for us. I don't know anyone who would complain about that.
- View traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal? Nope.
- Belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family? No-one I know.
- shirk traditional gender activities, like baking? I really don't understand this one. You're a feminist if you don't bake biscuits? Or is this a synecdoche for wider home-making activities?
- support affirmative action for women? Again, no. Affirmative action does no good in the short, medium or long-term. That's more a liberal value than a feminist one, wouldn't you say?
- prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do - This is straying into the dungaree-wearing radical lesbian feminist stereotype. Most feminists don't care what other women wear, as long as they're not wearing the same outfit as you at a cocktail party.

Look, I could go on, but my point is that this article paints feminism as the ''bête noire'' of conservative values and, while this may be true of more radical / historical feminism, it's too simplistic to cover the very, very large number of women worldwide who identify as feminists and conservatives.[[User:Sophierabbitte|Sophierabbitte]] 07:34, 21 January 2011 (EST)

==Difficulty of defining feminism==

It's not easy to define [[feminism]]. Is it "organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests"? Must one support [[equal rights]] to be a feminist?

Are there feminists who want women to "get more" than men, just as their are minority advocates who are want their group to "get more" than people in other groups? (Is feminism thus a kind of "group selfishness"?)

Is "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes" consistent with the Bible?

Is it possible to believe that men and women are "equally valuable" but made (in the image of God) to be inherently different? That is, are [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]] equally valuable qualities? Or what?

Are there currents in feminism which seek to advance women's interests but which '''do not''' assert that men and women are (or should be) "equal" in all respects?

What, then, is the proper relationship between men and women? Specifically, in the family, what are the proper roles? (How much leeway is there?)

Do all feminists oppose the "stay at home mom" phenomenon? (Or is that only [[Simone de Beauvoir]]?) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:55, 4 March 2008 (EST)

==Ridiculous Number of Quotes==

About three quarters of this article is made up of selected quotes from selected feminists, often those who do not represent mainstream feminism and are radicalised in their views. There are also a couple of unsubstantiated quotes from anti-feminists which appear to be used to represent fact rather than a person's opinion. Perhaps we could cut down on these or move them to another article ([[Quotes by Radical Feminists]] and [[Quotes by Anti-Feminists]]) in order to make this one a bit more encyclopedic. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:50, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

=="Ideological Edits"==

''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should raise children rather than the child's father and mother[5]''

The supporting reference for this is the title of a book, however the book itself states that it states a village (ie a large number of people - teachers, doctors etc) '''in addition''' to parents to successfully raise a child. Not once does the book say that parents are to be denied the main role in raising their children.

''prefer for role-reversal, like girls playing football and boys being cheerleaders for it, or men baking cookies for women''

Unsupported, mainstream feminism believes in equal roles, that is women can play football and boys can be cheerleaders, they do not believe in role reversal (ie boys cannot play football and women cannot be cheerleaders).

''prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do''

Unsupported, this is a radical view at best.

''Quotes from fictional characters''

The quotes from a character within a fiction book do not provide any valid insight into the mindset of a feminist, even if that book was written by a feminist.

Hope this clears it up, ready for reversion of reversion. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 22:59, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:Sorry, but conservatives believe that no one other than the parents should have the primary role in establishment of values, etc. Perhaps instead of pushing your liberal POV in editing a conservative encyclopedia, you could work as hard finding additional citations that you will approve of, illustrating the point. You cannot deny what is factual, that Feminism is a vehicle for liberal change of the social order, and the destruction of the traditional family. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:12, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

::This article is not about conservative beliefs, it is about the beliefs of feminists, and it appears that they are currently being misrepresented (the present revision states that feminists believe a village should raise children '''instead''' of parents, whereas the truth is that feminists believe a village should '''support''' parents in raising children). Could you please point out which of my points you believe to not be factually correct? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:15, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

:::"Liberal POV" or not, I don't think fictional characters make very reliable as references. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:04, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::I await a response. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 18:07, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

GySom, the changes you made, apparently to make the article more ideologically neutral, would be a fine thing on Wikipedia, where they like to keep the public sheltered from facts, but not on CP, where we actually offer a choice, not an echo to the so-called "wisdom" of the crowd. From my experience here, I would suggest you concern yourself less with seeking out articles to make neutral, and spend your time creating new articles, helpful content that is both Christian and conservative friendly, because that is the stated goals and perspective of this encyclopedia and its Founders. Leave it to Wikipedia, and the dishonest presentations there, to "cleanse" topics near and dear to the liberals hearts. If you wish to make the changes you have, please provide proof that Feminists don't think that way. Responsive enough? --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:34, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Hang on, are you asking me to prove a negative? Asking someone to prove that mainstream feminism does not accept something is akin to proving that there are no invisible unicorns on Mars. It is up to the person making the claim to support it, not my job to weed through every single quote that a feminist has made and then provide an analysis to show that mainstream feminism does not support a claim that is made, it is the job of the person making the claim to support it. Let me lay out the changes I think should be made:

:*Mainstream feminists do not believe a village should raise a child instead of his or her parents, they believe that parents should be supported in their role by others (this I can actually support, by my recollection the book in the reference specifically states that parents should play the main role in raising their children).
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe in role reversal, they believe in the destruction of roles (that is, instead of believing that boys should not be allowed to play football and girls should not believe in cheer leading, they believe that boys and girls should both be able to play football or cheer lead should they desire)
:*Mainstream feminists do not believe that women should not wear dresses and should wear pants
:*A series of quotes from a ''fictional character'' in a book does not provide any insight into modern feminism

:If you have an argument about one of those points please make it, I don't need to hear about how I'm an evil liberal who should run away to Wikipedia as this gets us nowhere. It is conservative ideology to tell the truth no matter what it is, therefore it is imperative to truthfully represent the views of mainstream feminism on this encyclopedia. I guess my edits were ideological after all, just not in the way you think. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 19:48, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::Indeed, I am asking you to prove your assertion, GySom. You made the changes, now back them with proof. ''What Feminists believe is well known''. Do you demand proof of God? That there is air? The Feminist agenda is the complete re-ordering of the nuclear family, its denigration. That has been proved countless times. Your own points above show that Feminists reject completely God's own creation, the differences between men and women. Please stop with these silly distracting arguments promoting liberal ideals! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:59, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::If it has been proven countless times then there should be no problems with finding supporting evidence for it. I am not asking for proof of God or proof of air because the existence of these two is not being debated, rather we are discussing whether or not mainstream feminism believes in the three points I removed, and whether the forth should be included. I notice that you have only taken objection to the first point (regarding families), it is therefore acceptable to alter the information relating to the last three? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:05, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::Well, I am not a sysop here, so I certainly cannot stop you from doing so. If you change it back, and the Administrators and/or Andy are fine with it, so be it. I am not going to engage you in some endless discussion about the falsities and naivety of your assumptions, GySom! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:17, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::I am very open to hearing about the "falsities and naivety of my assumptions" and changing my mind if sources are produced, however at the moment it appears that there are no sources supporting the claim that feminists believe parents should not raise their children (the current cite says the opposite) and it appears that nobody has taken objection to the rewording of the claim that feminists favour role reversal or the removal of the claim that feminists shun dresses or the quotes from the fictional character. I will change the last three points, and leave the first open for now for continued discussion with yourself or others.

:::::Please, I am not trying to invite conflict, I just feel that this claim is not supported and therefore needs to be changed. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 20:24, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

*Yes, to be sure, I am certain those are your intentions! I stand by what I said above, but I have taken the liberty of asking Andy, Conservative and some others to review this. I hope that helps you out. Godspeed to you! --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:26, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::I look forward to it, I was hoping that two users could have a civil discussion without going and calling in the big guns, but sadly this could not be the case. For those reviewing it here are my arguments:
::#The claim that feminists believe a village should raise a child '''instead''' of his/her parents is unsupported by the reference, those who read the book will find that it suggests that a village should '''support''' parents in raising their child, but that parents should play the main role
::#The claim that feminists believe in role reversal is wrong, feminists believe in the destruction of roles altogether
::#The claim that feminists believe that dresses should not be worn is a radical belief at best, and there are no cites supporting it
::#Quotes from a ''fictional character'' should never be used to make a point for or against feminism.
::Of these only number 1 was argued, and during this discussion there was no mention of why the source was correct, nor were any other sources raised. Numbers 2 and 3 were not argued, and number 4 was supported by HelpJazz. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 21:56, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::In response to your four points above:

:::#The thesis of the book is clear: "it takes a village to raise a child," and by its very terms that denies the exclusive role played by parents in raising children. The point in this entry is correct and you have not proposed alternative language that would be more accurate.
:::#No, feminists do crave role reversal, as in men baking cookies and women assuming traditionally male jobs. I'll add an example.
:::#I've added an example in response to your point about dresses.
:::#Your point here is not clear, and I'll look again at the entry.
:::Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:10, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Actually Andy, could we use your wording just there to clarify it?
*''believe that "it takes a village to raise a child" and deny the exclusive role played by [[parents]] in raising children.''
[[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 23:16, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:Thankyou for your reply.
:#The thesis of the book is that it takes a village as well as the parents to raise a child, at the moment the entry reads that it takes a village rather than the parents, so yes the exclusivity of the role is denied, but not the role itself (by memory the book states that parents have a significant and unique role to play). I did have alternate language in my original edit: ''believe that a "village" (i.e., others) should assist parents in raising children'' or something along those lines that clarifies that the position taken by the book is not to replace the parents - edit conflict, not adjusted for Feebasfactor's comment
:#There may be some confusion between role reversal and the destruction of roles. Role reversal in your example would be men baking cookies and women being expected not to bake cookies, and women taking traditionally male jobs with men being expected not to take those jobs. By the destruction of roles it is expected that both men and women have an equal right to bake cookies, and that both men and women have an equal right to take whatever job they want to, I believe the latter is closer to the desire of mainstream feminists to have equal roles and to breakdown the concept of gender, rather than pushing for a matriarchal society.
:#I'm not entirely happy that a one line quote from a blog in response to another article can be used to represent mainstream feminism, but it's your encyclopedia
:#There are quotes from a fictional character, I don't see why these should be in the article (using the same logic someone could use quotes from a fictional American president in a book to criticise America).
:Hope this clears it up. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:19, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Aren't the fictional quotes a tiny percentage of the quotes, and aren't they by a feminist author?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"''? Though I have met many feminists, I have never met a woman, ever, who felt that women should only wear pants. I know women who do not wear pants, because they feel the Bible calls them to wear only skirts, though this is not true for all of the Christian women I know, or even a majority of them. Most women, feminist or not, dress according to what they will be doing. If they will be hiking in the woods giving a lesson on the forest habitat, they will probably wear jeans. If they are going to a wedding or a funeral, they will almost certainly wear a dress. Some women personally prefer to wear dresses more than pants, or vice versa, but most women, feminist or not, don't feel that everyone should dress as they do. If the article is going to state that feminists ''"prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do"'', then there should be a really good citation to show this. Certainly you can find many articles where women discuss the pros and cons of pants and/or dresses, but I've never seen anything that supported the claim made here. An example to the contrary would be the A Dress A Day blog<ref>A Dress A Day[http://www.dressaday.com/dressaday.html]</ref>, whose author writes regularly about the joys of wearing dresses; I'm quite certain she would consider herself a feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 23:22, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I've added another cite, and frankly am surprised that anyone would dispute this feminist preference to dress like men in order to make an ideological statement.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

::::::The whole pants thing was a big deal at the time because there were people & institutions who felt that women should *never* wear pants - restaurants that wouldn't serve women wearing pants, schools that wouldn't allow girls to wear pants (even in freezing cold weather - and skirts in those days were *short*!), and so on. Feminists of the time believed that women should be allowed to wear pants if they wished. (Not that they *should* wear pants.) Nowadays, most American women, feminist or not, wear both pants and skirts, just because we like to, or for practical reasons, not for political reasons. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:17, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::Cites about baking cookies and wearing pants are from 1970's, not modern feminism? [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 23:55, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::: The 1970s is "modern". Perhaps a time period should be added to the entry? By the 1960s "modern" feminism was in full bloom.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:01, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::::::Is the goal of the entry to describe feminism as it is understood today by the majority of women who consider themselves feminists? (I'm assuming this would be the best approach, though of course the history is of interest as well.) The radical femimism of the '60's and '70's was, well, radical, but I think that the kind of extreme views described in this article would be foreign to most women today who consider themselves feminist.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:08, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

<- The section of the article in dispute is written in the present tense (''"Specifically, modern feminists tend to"'' as opposed to ''"Specifically, modern feminist tended to"'') after having described the era of the 1970's in the past tense, therefore the points should describe those beliefs held by mainstream feminists today. I'm not too sure many modern mainstream feminists favour wearing pants or role reversal, just as we don't see burning bras or (too many) claims that all sexual relationships in marriage are rape. In short, what was mainstream in the 1970's appears to now be classified as radical compared to the views of modern feminists, which appear to be more about breaking down gender inequality and the like. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 00:14, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I agree - though I would add that many of the ideas discussed in the 70's were radical feminism (not mainstream feminism) even then.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:20, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]], Thank you for your grammar edit! It really helps! While we're cleaning up this article, here's another item that might need to be changed. I don't think the statement that feminists ''"oppose single-sex schooling"'' is accurate. There are rather a lot of feminists at all-girl colleges like Smith and Bryn Mawr and Mount Holyoke. Also, I can't see your recent changes on the main article page, only the history page - I don't know if it's me or Conservapedia. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 00:27, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:It's stupid to argue about this sort of thing on an article discussion page. Just add a quote from a feminist who supports it. This goes for girls' schools, dresses, stay-at-home moms and all the other stuff above. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::: Can't. Article's locked, at least it is for me.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:00, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

::Are we trying to use the view of one feminist to represent the views of all, or are we accurately trying to report on the collective views of mainstream feminism? If it's the latter then a single quote from one feminist won't do the job. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:21, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:I have unlocked the article so that the requested source can be added. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:07, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Feminism and choice==

Feminists say they '''only want choice''' while actually asserting various "shoulds" and "oughts".

Wearing dresses is strongly discouraged by feminists; dressing like men is strongly encouraged. Indeed, all sorts of feminine behavior in the workplace is discouraged, and we '''all''' know that [[Simone de Beauvoir]] condemned the [[choice]] of woman staying home to raise her and her husband's children.

What we object to here is the [[liberal deceit|pretense]] that feminism supports women choosing either traditional female roles or modern "liberated" ones. They use coercion quite openly. Pretending that they do not is something you can do on your own blog, using your [[freedom of press]] to tell lies. You can't do it here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 06:16, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:According to her article she made those views in 1949, we are trying to discuss the views of modern feminists, or more specifically those around in 2008. As has been stated above, these are different to the views held in the past. [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 06:24, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Ed Poor explains this extremely well. I don't know what TheGySom is referencing about 1949, but that is surely "modern" also. [[Feminism]] plainly represents views about how women ''should'' act, and women who disagree with that ideology are ostracized and ridiculed by the more militant feminists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:39, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::Simone de Beauvoir wrote her controversial book ''The Second Sex'' in 1949. It is relevant to the history of feminism, but in no way should be used as a source to describe the views of mainstream twenty-first century feminists, as it was written almost 60 years ago. We've come a long way since then - most of today's feminists weren't even born when the book came out. I'm a woman, I have friends who are feminist and friends who definitely aren't, none of them have ever tried to encourage or discourage me from wearing dresses. Some of my friends wear only dresses/skirts for religious reasons (Christian or Jewish), but I've never met a woman who would not wear dresses for political reasons. The idea just doesn't ring true to me. Certainly for some activities or professions pants are a more practical and/or more safe choice, and some women tend towards pants or tend towards dresses for themselves, but those are not political or ideological choices, they are a matter of personal style and/or practicality. Feminists in the '70's fought for the right to wear pants in places and situations where it had not previously been allowed, mostly for practical and personal style reasons. I'm not trying to be argumentative here - just to give a woman's perspective. So far, the only sources in support of the idea that feminists encourage dressing like men have been offhand comments in blogs. Can we find some more solid sources for this idea if it is to be included in the article?--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 14:18, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: I'm sure there are millionaire communists who say they have no desire to interfere with private property, and that they don't know any other communists who do either. And they would be right about themselves and their friends, but wrong about the ideology of communism.

:::: Likewise here. The ''[[sine qua non]]'' of modern feminism is for women to act like men. Why would clothes be excluded from that? They aren't. I've already provided two references and there are probably more, but I'm getting the sense that no amount of citations will persuade you because you know what you and your friends think about clothes. I suggest you spend some time researching this and ask women familiar with the feminist agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:26, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

==Name Changes==
The article says that feminists ''"refuse to take the husband's last name when marrying, despite the confusion and complexity that causes"''. However, the article used as a citation seems to be saying the opposite. It is an article about the complexity of such decisions for 21st century women, and how there are many different approaches to changing one's name, and how quite a few feminists are now changing their name to, one way or another, include their husband's name. (The author, who is marrying soon, begins the article with 8 of her own options, including hyphenation, etc.) The article goes on to give quite a few examples of feminist women who made various choices, for a wide variety of reasons. Based on the cited article, I think a more accurate statement for our article would be ''"feminists are likely to take a number of factors into consideration when deciding whether or not to change their last name to their husband's when they marry."'' Two relevant quotes from the article: ''"...they are doing what they can, making meaning of their own, focusing on what they do with their lives as much as what they do with their names. And by the way, isn't that the whole idea of feminism?"'' and ''"Hey, I'm a stay-at-home mom who took her husband's name and earns a fraction of our household income but none of that makes me any less of a feminist. Because for me, feminism is about respecting women and men and being able to make whatever lifestyle choices you want."'' <ref>"(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller. [http://dir.salon.com/story/mwt/feature/2003/10/16/names/index.html]</ref> I did not make this change, even though the article is now unlocked, because I'd like input from others first - I think that, together, we can make this a better article.--[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 21:40, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

== References ==

<references/>

==Question for the Editor--==
I just found my way to your site via Google, and read "Feminism." I noticed that your editorial policy says that you're not allowing the use of material that isn't accurate. That site says that early feminists were "suffragettes." The suffragettes were English, in fact -- in the use, the folks who supported the right to vote for women were suffragists, from Woodrow Wilson to good ol' Theodore Roosevelt. Your writers also have no idea that the term "feminist" at times has been somewhat conservative (hey! surprise!), as when the National Women's Party supported an Equal Rights Amendment while most women opposed it. In the meantime, in the twentieth century, some Republican women would have been comfortable calling themselves "feminists," from Margaret Chase Smith to Oveta Culp Hobby. The term has had somewhat varied meanings over the course of the century, and any accurate description should reflect that. Interested readers could check out Catherine Rymph's Republican Women, published by the very reputable U.North Carolina Press. {{unsigned|Mm444}}

== Unsourced quotes ==

There are tons of unsourced quotes in this article, and I will go through the list to see how many I can actually source. I will remove those quotes I couldn't find any info on, and I'll post them here so others can re-add them if they do find reliable sources. The key words are: Where was it said, and when. Evidence should be supplied. Quote-sites that simply say "She said so." are off-limits.

*"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." - Robin Morgan
I couldn't find anything more than just anti-feminist comments and "Men Rights" sites. No mention of where or when she supposedly said so. (Update: Found a site that says it's from "Sisterhood is Powerful". --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:56, 16 April 2008 (EDT))

A somewhat special case is the next one:
*"I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero-sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary-vested-interest-power. But then, I have great difficulty examining what men in general could possibly do about all this. In addition to doing the sh*twork that women have been doing for generations, possibly not exist? No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" - Robin Morgan
I found out that this quote comes from her introduction to the 1970 book "Sisterhood is Powerful". I also found this [http://www.feministcampus.org/network/chat/morgan04232003.asp snippet] about the quote:
{{cquote|Halimat: Following is a quote from you. Assuming that you weren't misquoted, do you still feel this way? How are women to get ahead without collaberation from those who currently hold the majority of legislative power? "I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero- sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary- vested-interest-power."

Robin Morgan: That quote is from the early 1970s and fortunately both the movement and I have matured in terms of developing a much more sophisticated range of tactics and strategies, due to our enormous numbers, than we ever could have imagined back in the late 60s and early 70s. While it is still true that "pale males" are at the top of the "food chain" - more men are changing every day. They're more involved with their children and families and on every level, from slowly learning to use Ms. through to adopting and adapting to anti-sexual harrassment workplace rules, men have been changing. It's not enough by far, but it is a start. And it's the power of the women's movement that has brought them even this far.}}
I'll leave the quote in the article, but I will also link to that interview so people can get a more modern reflection on the quote. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:03, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

One more from Robin Morgan:
*"Women are not inherently passive or peaceful. We're not inherently anything but human."
It's a really nice quote, so I regret that I couldn't find any proper sourcing for it. :/ --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:42, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Took out two (for now) from Dworkin:
*"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig."<nowiki><ref></nowiki>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp From] her book "Ice and Fire"<nowiki></ref></nowiki>
"Ice and Fire" is a ''novel''. As in ''fiction''. As such, I won't treat this as her own quote, just like I don't claim that authors like King or Clancy endorse every sentence from their books as their own views.
*Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman."
This quote is [http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp attributed] to "Liberty", but I couldn't find it in her Bibliography, so I'll cut it until somebody actually figures out whether it's a book (and whether it's fiction or non-fiction) or a paper or something. Citing made-up books sounds vaguely unlikely, but I'd rather be safe than sorry. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 17:27, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Dworkin again:
*"To be rapeable, a position that is social, not biological, defines what a woman is."
Couldn't find any proper sourcing, only quote pages that simply say she said it, but not where or when. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 18:00, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==Quotations and flowing prose==

There are way too many quotations here. Sure, we've proved the point. There's a lot of nasty things that were said by genuine, card-carrying feminists. But quotes don't make an article.

I want to know the roots of feminism, what it originally tried to do, what else it started to do, and how it did (and does) differ from simply "making sure women don't get mistreated". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:11, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
:Agree with the "way too many quotations" bit. A few quotes from several eras to illustrate how feminism developed and matured would be nice. If that's not possible, just crop it down. --[[User:MilesM|MilesM]] 16:17, 16 April 2008 (EDT)
::It probably wouldn't hurt to review this. I am also pleased Miles that you have chosen a constructive approach of finding and adding references instead of just complaining. There is a greater chance of seeing constructive changes occur under that format than merely confronting. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 16:40, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

==I think we have misrepresented Jilly Cooper==

I think Jilly Cooper, the veteran right-wing journo and toff, would be surprised to find herself identified as a feminist and downright astonished to be labelled a member of SCUM. Somebody has got a little confused here. (Or else they are being mischievious).

== Suggestion for separation ==

I personally feel it would be beneficial to make two articles on this subject. What's described here is what many call "radical feminism" whereas average everyday feminism is quite different. I'm not an expert in this field, but I can assure you that the generalizations made here are on the most extreme examples of feminists. -EternalCritic

I agree, much of what is addressed here under the heading of "feminism" would more properly be described as "radical feminism" (of the all women should be lesbians/all heterosexual intercourse is rape slant), and much of the substantive article seems to be un-cited impressions that appear to be sourced in popular culture (for example, if the ideological doctrine is too difficult to define, how can it be said that *all* feminists balk at chivalry or belittle family women?). Can the lengthy list of sound-bite quotations (from which the reader is apparently supposed to cobble together an idea of what feminism is) be removed to ultimately be replaced with an attempt to seriously engage with the tenants of feminism with a stronger focus on peer-reviewed academia reflecting a broader overview of the field rather than a relatively small group of extremists? -- [[User:BillyWest|BillyWest]] 11:28, August 28 2011

== Reversion explained ==

The edit summary to the last edit said, "I changed some awkward phrasing. I also think the bullets should be made into one coherent paragraph. Thoughts?" In fact, that edit introduced liberal bias and censored conservative truth. It was fully reverted even though it did also include some harmless stylistic changes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:20, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

== Citations? ==

I'm not clear on the policy. In the list of quotes, there are some that don't have real citations like:

"The nuclear family must be destroyed ... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process" - Linda Gordon

and

"Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women ... We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men ... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft" (from "The Declaration of Feminism" November, 1971)

I think these need real citations or they should be removed. Also, quotes about feminists should be in a separate section than quotes from feminists. Pat Robertson is mixed in with a bunch of feminists right now, under the "Other" heading.

--[[User:AdamBurns|AdamBurns]] 18:47, 16 December 2009 (EST)

== Enough quotations? ==

This article could make a more mature examination of feminism than putting up a bunch of quotations. --[[User:Marxian21|Marxian21]] 22:53, 22 January 2010 (EST)

== "No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do" ==

I cannot find the phrase in either of the two references given. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:12, 30 January 2010 (EST)

:Please feel free to delete that phrase, then.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:18, 30 January 2010 (EST)
::I would, but TK has already reverted someone who edited it out--and I don't want to anger him. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 21:22, 30 January 2010 (EST)

== Reversion explained ==

Modern feminists are overwhelmingly pro-abortion, and even those who are not pro-abortion are still anti-motherhood.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:54, 1 June 2010 (EDT)

==Full rewrite==

I like the quotes, and we certainly need a conservative critique of modern "radical" feminism, but the movement has also had its good points. There are even places/issues where currents in contemporary feminism match up with conservative ideas.

The idea that men shouldn't use their power to abuse women is a longstanding conservative idea (see [[Chivalry]]), although this is nothing more than the general idea that no one, male or female, should abuse his power; it doesn't matter if it's man to woman, white to black, rich to poor, educated to ignorant, etc. However, many feminists bristle at the idea of accepting '''any''' help from men (such help seen as condescending at best). Most conservative Christians oppose [[pornography]] and [[sexual slavery]], and so on. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:23, 8 September 2010 (EDT)

I am trying to make this page compatible with a little Amazon Alexa Mod I cooked up, so far when It reads it,
There were multiple spelling errors, and when she spoke it sounded more like a rant then an actual informative conservative essay. Also the bulleted list doesn't play and the alexia device just stops playing, I believe the hardware isn't used to bullet points not being with-in heading or heading font so the Device just tries to reload the text in pure html using Wikipedias default source php (which I deleted to make my own.)
I understand that I need to be of higher standing, so can someone edit the article so it doesn't sound like a gigantic rant without any sources.
--[[User:Reevestehsnek|Reevestehsnek]] [[User talk:Reevestehsnek|Talk]] 10:59, 8 November 2018 (EST)
:Sorry, we don't change pages so Amazon Alexa handles them better. That's Alexa's problem, not ours. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:48, 8 November 2018 (EST)
::I wasn't clear I made a mod for an alexa device that uses conservapedia as its source, but its obvi you don't care about all the hard hours of work it took to actual remove the php through bluetooth and rewrite the script using BSD. {{unsigned|Reevestehsnek}}
:::I'm not saying that at all, and that sounds like a great accomplishment that I could not do myself.

:::What I '''am''' saying is that this is not a sufficient reason for making major changes to the article. We simply cannot change an article's wording and point of view because it runs better through a speaking device. Articles are generally created to be read, and it's unusual for people to have them spoken to them by a device. Wording and point of view changes should only be made based on their own merits. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:09, 8 November 2018 (EST)

== feminism and obesity ==

feminism and obesity: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html I will leave it up to others decide what constitutes feminism as I am taking a break from Conservapedia barring any news events. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:03, 5 February 2011 (EST)

== Create a feminism and obesity article ==

Consider creating a [[Feminism and obesity]] article at Conservapedia and cite this material: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:08, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

:The blog you want cited makes a ''huge'' leap in its conclusions. Being a working mother does not automatically translate into being a feminist. I would guess the majority of working women are in the job market because there is a need for a second income to support a family, given the cost of basic necessities such as rent, food, gasoline, electricity, medical costs, clothing, etc. I know that is the case in my situation. We can't pay for the basics on my husband's salary alone. We haven't had a vacation in years. Most of my friends are in the same situation. And the blog completely ignores the single working mother - what is she supposed to do? Not work? --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 11:01, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

I agree that this article is no good, even though I wish it were true.
--[[User:corneliuscalvin|corneliuscalvin]] 7:56, 26 November 2012 (PDT)

:Can't talk now. of the World happening. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 23:01, 26 November 2012 (EST)

== No Christian feminism? ==

I think that this article would be served well if a section on [[Christian feminism]] was included. Maybe a new article on it would be better.[[User:Mr. Guye|Mr. Guye]] ([[User talk:Mr. Guye|talk]]) 19:15, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:That seems like a good idea, but an article on it would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view. But there's also the fact that the same term can have a different meaning for different people -- what one person considers Christian feminism can be completely different than what another person does. We would need to define the term clearly, but I think we'd be talking about second- and third-wave feminism, adherents of which have theologically and socially left-wing views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:47, 1 December 2017 (EST)
:::No, there is no requirement that a Conservapedia article discussing the topic of Christian feminism "would have to be from a theologically conservative point of view." There are no such requirements on content at Conservapedia, and no one, except perhaps Andy, has the authority to enforce such a requirement. All that is required is that "Conservapedia is a politically conservative, Christian encyclopedia project". Though many of our members are not Christians and are not politically conservative, they are required to edit in a manner consistent with the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]]. To require otherwise would turn this wiki into a Wikipedia-style "mobocracy" rather than a "best of the public" project.

:::The concept of feminism covers a lot of ground. There are conservative feminists, Christian feminists, and Republican feminists. Not all feminists subscribe to some of the silly excesses that one sometimes sees looking around on the internet and various media outlets. Many conservative feminists, for example, fully support encouraging girls to go into STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects.

:::So feel free to write sensible content on this topic. I look forward to reading it.

:::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:49, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::::SamHB, they have found that promoting the idea that women are underrepresented in STEM fields and that this has to be corrected has the effect of telling women that STEM is not feminine/girly and thus women are more likely to avoid those fields. In other words, the policy is probably backfiring. See: http://review.chicagobooth.edu/economics/2017/article/how-promoting-stem-fields-women-can-backfire

::::Women tend to be more likely to be conformists and not mavericks.

::::Over and over again, liberals fail to take into account the unintended consequences of their social engineering! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:48, 3 December 2017 (EST)
::Once Christian denominations filly embrace the notion of female pastors, their memberships almost invariably spiral downward. That should surely be mentioned in relation to "Christian feminism".

::"But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve." - 1 Timothy 2:12-13[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:15, 2 December 2017 (EST)
:::Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I don't think Mr. Guye was even talking about female pastors when he was talking about Christian feminism, just something akin to, say, the Suffragettes, many of whom were Christian women who would NEVER advocate the pill, let alone abortion. But yes, we probably should note that bit somewhere either way. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:35, 2 December 2017 (EST)
::::What percentage of so-called "Christian feminists" believe that a wife is to obey her husband and that a husband is the head of the family? At least in its present form "Christian feminism" is just another endeavor to infect Christianity with unbiblical ideas. As far as the suffragette movement, I don't know if any of them were Christian women who held biblical Christianity views related to women. I do know that various suffragettes burned down churches.[https://www.christiantoday.com/article/suffrage-the-churchs-rocky-relationship-with-rebellion/67361.htm]

::::Christianity was at the forefront of various movements like abolition, child labor laws, etc. etc. Christendom is also known for its favorable views on the treatment of women (husbands loving their wives like Christ loved the church, etc. etc.), but it is not known for leading the charge as far as feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:48, 2 December 2017 (EST)

:::::Well, I do know that Susan B. Anthony specifically condemned abortion and the pill and stated that would make women even more enslaved, and I do know that Christians also do not support abortion and the pill (in fact, among us Catholics, it's considered a mortal sin), so there's that to consider. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 09:53, 2 December 2017 (EST)
==First-wave feminism was good?==
This article makes it sound like first-wave feminism was good and its doctrines were just simply corrupted in the 1960s. As it turns out, first-wave feminists were anti-Christianity and anti-man too, as pointed out by Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire and [[John Doyle]].[https://youtu.be/sgJoJsaI1WY][https://youtu.be/ME-JIO8_cic] Elizabeth Cady Stanton once said that the Bible and the church were the two greatest stumbling blocks in the way of women's emancipation. Susan B. Anthony was a religious skeptic, and other early feminists held similar views too. In fact, many were free lovers, like Victoria Woodhull. I strongly recommend that the early section saying liberals just twisted the term be deleted. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 20:22, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:But the early feminists were [[pro-life]], right?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:45, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::The Bible says wives must submit to their husbands (Pauline epistles and the Apostle Peter taught this). No doubt this was anethema to first wave feminists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:04, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure if they were truly anti-Christianity, they'd be all in favor of unlimited abortion on demand even back then (especially when the Church was ALWAYS against abortion), and yet, as demonstrated with [[Susan B. Anthony]], several of them were AGAINST abortion. I know [[Vladimir Lenin]] [https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/11/17/november-1920-2020-a-century-of-abortion-in-russia/ certainly was all in for unlimited abortion], being notorious for literally legalizing unlimited and unrestricted abortion in the USSR and being the first state leader to EVER do so, even having the audacity to claim THIS emancipated women, and was such that even the likes of [[Margaret Sanger]], herself no pro-life adherer, was reportedly aghast at it. Besides, my idea of having my hypothetical wife submitting to me would be closer to [https://youtu.be/xtO-AHuEhJc?t=428 what Geldoblame advocated for everyone under his rule] from ''Baten Kaitos'', and I'm pretty sure even Jesus and his disciples NEVER advocated for that kind of submission (even less so when Geldoblame used THAT as justification for committing mass murder against a mining community by torching it simply because they withheld ore shipments thanks to his draconian labor statutes that left them dangerously overworked). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:03, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:Being pro-life does not necessarily make one pro-Christianity. Victoria Woodhull was against abortion and she was a Marxist and practically a communist. Also even Sanger claimed to be against abortion if I am not incorrect, saying birth control got rid of the need for it. Planned Parenthood did not start to endorse the legalization of abortion until 1969, and abortion did not even start to become popular until after Roe v. Wade. That was really more of the Overton Window being shifted in conservatism's direction back then than feminism being conservative. It just really goes to show how much ground we've lost. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 22:42, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::Maybe so, but the anti-Christians most certainly tended to be very much anti-life, as Lenin and even Trotsky proved there (not to mention the Bolsheviks), and even the Jacobins, their ideological ancestors, were known to practice abortion in the most crude manner (specifically, bayonetting pregnant women, and/or using wine pressers to crush them). And since Marx was brought into it, Marx himself advocated massively for abortion as well, as did Engels, all in their plan to "abolish the family." And what better way to abolish the family than to destroy reproduction. If she was a Marxist, it only shows she didn't know Marx all that well, as otherwise, she'd be all in favor of abortion like her idol Marx. And let's not forget that this view of pro-abortion has been going on since 1923 with [https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/marxist-roots-abortion-joseph-hippolito/ Dr. Antoinette Konikow], who was a fellow traveler of Trotsky during the Russian Revolution, AND committed several abortions in the Boston area specifically as part of her Marxist advocacy. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:49, November 9, 2021 (EST)
:That may be true, but some anti-Christians are more radical than others. Also America was more conservative than Russia at the time of the Russian Revolution, so something like abortion would definitely be seen as morally unacceptable in that time regardless of where you were on the political spectrum. But my main point is if Stanton said Christianity got in the way of feminism, and she was the founder of American feminism and first-wave feminism, I just don't know how you can say feminism wasn't anti-Christian even back then. -[[User:Mr. Nationalist|Mr. Nationalist]] ([[User talk:Mr. Nationalist|talk]]) 23:27, November 9, 2021 (EST)
::I've heard of some feminists getting back to the Christian faith. Victoria Woodhull, for one actually renounced the free love bits and advocated strongly for the Christian concept of motherhood later in life (too bad she didn't quite own up to how she did badly during that time, though). Besides, technically speaking, there have been PLENTY of Founding Fathers in America who were significantly anti-Christian, including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and apparently even John Adams. By that same logic, America ITSELF is anti-Christian from conception. In fact, [[Christopher Ferrara|Christopher A. Ferrara]] actually makes this argument in his book ''Liberty: The God that Failed''. I guess you could also argue that liberty in itself was anti-Christian. For that matter, I'd argue [[Freedom of Religion]] is ultimately anti-Christian as well. The Israelites tried that bit back in the day, and that led directly towards the [[Babylonian Exile]], per God's direction. And Russia was still conservative enough to have abortion be deemed explicitly illegal until Lenin and his Bolsheviks took over (there's a reason why the USSR under Lenin was the first country in all of history to actually make unlimited abortion legal, to the extent that STALIN of all people threw a bone to us pro-lifers by outlawing abortion for a year). I'd mention divorce, but Robespierre and the French Revolution beat Lenin to that bit. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:33, November 9, 2021 (EST)

== Fatherless children ==

Does only feminism cause this? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 10:28, January 24, 2022 (EST)
:Re-reading the section "Cultural Marxism", it seems out of place in an article on feminism. Isn't it about men who abandon their children? --[[User:Jackin the box|Jackin the box]] ([[User talk:Jackin the box|talk]]) 13:24, March 11, 2022 (EST)

==Bias?==
I thought feminists went out of business with [[vaccine mandate]]s (''my body my choice'') and [[transgender]]s taking over girls sports. Not to mention rape in prisons by transgenders. It's the law now. We've finally reached full equality. What more is there to debate? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Z]] 20:18, May 28, 2022 (EDT)

== Pants ==

I'm puzzled by the linking of pants and feminism. I suppose it is an assertion by women of their independence but hardily any women, whatever their age, wears a dress where I live, though there's a few more in hot weather (I'm envious). Isn't more a matter of convenience than ideology? It's the norm and so non-partisan. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:49, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
:Phyllis Schlafly was a conservative woman who defeated the feminists by preventing the passage of the [[Equal Rights Amendment]]. I have never seen a picture of her wearing pants. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:50, August 7, 2022 (EDT)

:What has this to do with the fact that most women of all ages wear trousers in North American? This has far more to do with comfort and convenience than feminism. I suspect that more women wear dresses in more liberal Europe. Personally I find women more attractive in dresses but I would not be so arrogant to insist that any woman has to wear one! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 13:52, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
::There's too much feminism in the USA and the fruits are not positive. 13th highest divorce rate in the world.[https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/divorce-rates-by-country] Lots of women taking depression pills. And there are surveys which show that women are now LESS happy post feminism. Thank God that the religious have a higher fertility rate, Roe vs. Wade was overturned and that the Bible is not pro-feminism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:10, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
:::Have you read the essay: [[Essay: Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)|Andy Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly and the Amish. All they do is win against secular leftists (Rap song)]]. In 22nd century North America, the majority of women may be wearing dresses. In all likelihood, should Jesus tarry, the majority of women in North America will not be pant-wearing, feminist whores!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:16, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

::Oh dear!--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 16:57, August 8, 2022 (EDT)

===Does the Bible forbid women from wearing pants?===
According to the [[ United Church of God]] it does not.

::Does Deuteronomy 22:5 forbid women from wearing pants? No, it doesn't. In fact, clothing “that pertains to a man” at the time the verse was written would not have been understood to mean pants. Men in the Middle East through the history of the Old and New Testaments did not ordinarily wear pants, trousers or slacks; they wore robe-like garments. And in many cultures such as in China, women have commonly worn pants. The scripture more specifically addresses and forbids transvestism and cross-dressing.
::The underlying principle certainly applies to today. Men should dress in an appropriately masculine manner and women should dress in an appropriately feminine manner. Clothing manufacturers make pants designed for men, and pants, slacks and pantsuits designed for women. The Bible emphasizes modesty, and for women, slacks are often more modest than a short skirt.
::God does not intend for this scripture to be understood in an extreme or unreasonable way. For example, it’s perfectly fine for a woman to wear her husband’s old shirt when she’s painting or to put on her male friend’s jacket when she’s cold.<ref>[ https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/bible-questions-and-answers/does-the-bible-forbid-women-from-wearing-pantsPosted on Jan 27, 2011 by United Church of God ]</ref>
--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:37, August 28, 2022 (EDT)