Sororities and Feminism

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Titchou

True - that's why I said "theorectically".....but at least if they would pay for it in these cases, it puts the onus back on the individual, not the corporation or the insurance company

Well, on a really basic feminist level, I have a major problem with the idea that birth control is solely the responsibility of women. Last time I checked, it takes two.

I know that you and I are really on the same side of this issue, I'm just pretty passionate about access to birth control, as it is a major contributing factor to workplace equality.

[Titchou]

Same here. And this is just one of many reasons drove me from the Catholic Church. And yes, it does take 2 and I offer that if male birth control medicine had been easier to invent, we'd still be waiting for it today. Then again, you do have to consider the biology of it all.

[DGTess]

Why is any treatment without a co-pay by government edict? Such is tantamount to the government prioritizing health-care options.

I oppose any law that dictates something must be offered without co-pay.

[Titchou]

True, I don't really care about the co-pay...just that the option to get the drug is there and in line with other meds.

[AGDee]

Really excellent example. A feminist extremist wouldn't have stood by her man.

[Titchou]

And a Google search brought a link where he called Catholic nuns feminazis!

[peppermint23]

In some ways yes, in some ways no. Some chapters more so, others less.

In and of themselves, strong organizations run, headed and founded by intelligent, determined women for hundreds of years is an ode to women in and of itself.

If anything I'd say sororities are "womanist", or pro-female, more or less, as generally all of our ideals co-align with philanthropy, sisterhood and strong moral codes and creeds.

On the other hand, I've read disturbing accounts of racism in Greek life, particularly in southern schools, though I'm sure it exists across the board. Greek life is not exclusively "white", but it tends to ultimately favor white, cis-gendered, straight women. There are definitely areas of Greek life to critique, and I think discussions like these are essential and important and should not be stamped out.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

I've seen this everywhere from Ivy League campuses to top-10 party schools. There are hot chapters and fat/ugly chapters.

Welcome to LIFE. The fact of the matter is, attractive people tend to be friends with other attractive people, and vice versa. The difference is, as you get older/move to different places, what you find attractive may change.

I'm sure some of the chapters of hot tan (tanning is not hot by the way) skinny women are also this way because they have inferiority complexes and have to keep validating that the look they've chosen is the "right" one.

[SWTXBelle]

Were Nora Ephron the only self-proclaimed feminist to have some litmus test for being a feminist, I wouldn't have mentioned it. If I really wished to call myself a feminist I would, but I have no interest in labeling myself with that term. I do, however, get tired of the "Why aren't younger women calling themselves feminists?" articles and essays - it's because of the feminist gate-keepers who wish to advance some political agenda rather than simply promote equality.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Were Nora Ephron the only self-proclaimed feminist to have some litmus test for being a feminist, I wouldn't have mentioned it. If I really wished to call myself a feminist I would, but I have no interest in labeling myself with that term. I do, however, get tired of the "Why aren't younger women calling themselves feminists?" articles and essays - it's because of the feminist gate-keepers who wish to advance some political agenda rather than simply promote equality.

Okay, setting abortion aside, what do you think that feminists politicize that is unrelated to equality?

[SWTXBelle]

The problem with that question is that there are feminists who regard ALL issues as relating to equality. This leads to the "Republicans can't be feminists" argument, or "stay at home moms can't be feminists", or "those who refuse to support gun control can't be feminists", or just about any issue that can be seen through that particular lens. Admittedly, one of the problems is defining "equality".

The difference between a political party (which has a platform and elected leadership) or the Catholic Church (which has its catechism and hierarchy) is that feminism is not an institution. It should be more inclusive given the general nature of its denotative meaning. To argue that anti-abortionists can't be feminist is to commit the logical fallacy of begging the question - it is predicated on the idea that abortion is only an issue regarding the mother and that the father and the unborn baby (or fetus) have no rights. That is an entirely different argument (which I am not interested in getting into), but my point is that one can believe in the equality of women without supporting abortion. If there were to be a Feminist Political Party then I would accept the right of the members to dictate what a Feminist is required to believe. To the best of my knowledge, the late Nora Ephron was never elected spokeswoman for feminists.

Feminists hurt themselves and thus the quest for equality by making issues shibboleths for acceptance.

[HQWest]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

The problem with that question is that there are feminists who regard ALL issues as relating to equality. This leads to the "Republicans can't be feminists" argument, or "stay at home moms can't be feminists", or "those who refuse to support gun control can't be feminists", or just about any issue that can be seen through that particular lens. Admittedly, one of the problems is defining "equality".

Feminists hurt themselves and thus the quest for equality by making issues shibboleths for acceptance.

Yes and when one statement or one issue or one remarkable person is the sole deciding factor you inevitably give rise to extremism.

In this case, it is arguably defying labels rather than the ideals. This then comes back to one argument against Greek life, namely the idea that self-identifying with a label limits freedom or independence?

ETA: Assumably we are asserting our rights to assemble with others of our own ideals and interests?

[squirrely girl]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

... it's because of the feminist gate-keepers who wish to advance some political agenda rather than simply promote equality.

Why do you see the political as somehow separate from the personal?

[adpimiz]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

Why do you think you have this association? Have you ever seen a woman say/do something like this?

I'm not sure how to multi-quote on my iPhone, but my answer to this would be what 33girl just said. The crazy feminists make themselves the loudest. Just like some people think that republicans = crazy religious, crazy anti gay, "legitimate rape" comments, etc., some people think that feminists = crazy women who hate men.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by adpimiz

I'm not sure how to multi-quote on my iPhone, but my answer to this would be what 33girl just said. The crazy feminists make themselves the loudest. Just like some people think that republicans = crazy religious, crazy anti gay, "legitimate rape" comments, etc., some people think that feminists = crazy women who hate men.

Please cite one who as any sort of platform as large as, say, Todd Akin.