Is the Child Free movement anti-feminist?

Sakura

• what you said was "men are hell-bent on polluting the planet.It's intentional. THe oil tankers that "accidentally" spill into the sea because they weren't made properly. THe nuclear power plants built in earthquake zones etc.... Men as a group are out to kill all life on the planet. It's written in the script of patriarchy... Men have done a right job on planet earth haven't they? Will they be happy until every last species is dead, every last lake and sea polluted, ever last woman's body polluted with pesticides?"

I interpreted this as saying that men are hell-bent on polluting the planet and it's intentional..... because that was what you said.

Now you say you were really talking about competence and I have missed the point 'as usual'?

No regime can stay in place without its collaborators garlicbutter. Every oppressed group of people understand this concept well.

But women-identified women know that collaborating with the oppressor in order to get a few crumbs thrown in your direction, although not great (and I wish women wouldn't do it) is understandable

BUt it's a far cry from becoming the oppressor yourself in a system is rigged against women.

30% is what the PRime Minister of Iceland says. Get 30% of the seats in parliament filled by women and you feel a shift of energy. Women no longer have to dance to mens' tune and are more willing to put women-identified opinions forward.

I didn't say Palin was a serial killer, I said she was a mistake-maker. Picking out one (incorrectly) perceived error from a sound point ... now that's what I call selective perception

Lucky I'm still wearing my tin hat ...

... Sakura: I am talking about the fact that men are incompetent at running the world. This is a proven fact.

Actually the incompetencies you describe are incompetencies of people running the world. Leaving aside the question of whether we're as incompetent as all that, these people are not all men, nor has the world ever been exclusively run by men.

My feminist issue is: the vast majority of people running the world are men, and that's unfair. There's really no logical reason to assume women would do a better job, but we deserve a fair shot at it.

Before somebody promotes the myth that women are all lovely, caring creatures incapable of making mistakes, I bring you: the many bloody massacres carried out by English Queens; Winnie Mandela, inventor and promoter of death by "necklace"; serial killers Aileen Wuornos and Beverly Allitt; high-profile mistake-maker Sarah Palin. Of those, only Palin could be accused of acting under patriarchal values.

I really do think it's bonkers to assert women are never corrupt, cruel, malicious or wrong. Being a woman and a feminist doesn't make me blind to reality.

oh and SGB, if I'm insane why are you listening to me?

what does that make you?

[ I include trans women because even though their goals are directly opposed to feminist goals, transsexuals are actually oppressed under the patriarchy. THe problem is they mistakenly believe it is feminists oppressing them )

Instead we have people dithering over whether aggregate male behaviour is that bad; people literally blind to the fact that their own goverment has caused a number of wars for spurious reasons in the past few years (most recently LIbya). We're not talking abotu a long time ago, we're talking about the decisions men are making right now. It's cognitive dissonance.

ANy time of peace is a respite from the perpetual state of war that is patriarchy.

I think we should all pin that on our fridge.

missing the point as usual HImalaya. I am talking about the fact that men are incompetent at running the world. This is a proven fact. To say otherwize is cognitive dissonance.

The sooner the patriarchy falls the better it will be for women, children, all life on the planet, lesbians and gays, trans women and anyone else who is suffering from the fucked up way men go about abusing their power.

CAn we have this revolution already?

The latest I read was that the earth is going to recover from global warming in a fairly short time scale, in terms of historical climatic fluctuation. It is a longer time scale than is meaningful to humanity, but still, we are only at real risk of destroying our own species, not the entire planet (unless there is a nuclear war).

I was unaware though, that more people have access to adequate medical care than in previous generations. I was under the impression that more people globally were dying of treatable conditions now, so I'm pleased to hear that is not the case. It is nice to hear some good news for a change.

If men hold all the strings of power and the are hellbent on destroying the earth they are doing a singularly bad job at it.

Some of them fought against Hitler (I guess they didn't get the memo?). The ones doing using the oil tankers to sytematically pollute the seas seem quite incompetent at sinking them. The ones in medicine seem to getting worse at letting disease desimate the population as the years go by.

Ah well, our sons, fathers, boyfriends, husbands, colleagues and friends may all be evil maniacs working on a dastardly mission to destroy the world, but at least they are not evil geniuses or we'd really have to get worried.

I think that many people who belong to dominant groups deliberately behave in ways that reinforce their dominance and someone else's subordinate position all the time. I see it most clearly in the dominant groups I belong to; it is easier to see if you belong to the group because people are less likely to keep up the facade in your presence if you have membership of that group.

It isn't all about complex systems, capitalism or religion. It is very premeditated ways that huge swathes of people choose to behave because it personally benefits them (although there are pros and cons to the personal consequences of provoking misery in others, but people seem more capable of seeing the pros). Many dominant groups would collapse if their less influential members didn't keep propping up the dominance with everyday acts.

And in a lesser way, many people don't challenge what they see happening every time it happens. I know I don't, because often the costs of challenging something, even within your own group, are huge.

So a lot of it is not the 'system' - it is ordinary people being hateful in a very ordinary way.

Oh I'm quite aware that some people do dreadful things in the pursuit of profit or power, or because they reckon their imaginary friend told them to do it. But insisting that All Men want to destroy women, children and the world whereas All Women are nurturing empathetic wombs on legs is ridiculous.

Ooops, sorry. Tinfoil hats are not worn by extreme feminists because tinfoil was invented By The Patriarchy. Maybe cowpat hats would do the trick.

It's sort of reassuring in a way that the tinfoil-hat brand of feminism is alive and well. The illuminati are just giant penises, after all.

You are probably right Ormirian. I had got the impression that madwomanintheattic didn't feel that men's intentions were ever deliberate towards oppressing women. But re-reading I think you are right she was just meaning the point about destroying the planet.

But they're not doing it entirely by accident are they?

Some of it must be intentional, by the law of averages.

The 'out to' comment was about men destroying life on this planet.

madwomanintheattic

"the 'out to' suggests deliberation. intent.

that's what i'm vehemently disagreeing with."

If you look at before women had a vote. Why didn't men turn round and say "What are we thinking of? Of course women should have the vote. There you go."? They didn't though did they? Women had to fight to get the vote. It wasn't handed to us. That was a very deliberate intent on the part of men to keep women in their place. If it wasn't deliberate why didn't they just right the wrong when asked or even before being asked? Why did women have to die in order to get it?