honeymoon with the WHOLE family?

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

You don't agree that criminalizing pre-marital sex would be an anti-feminist action?

is it still pre-marital sex if they don't intend to marry?

[jordanianprincess 0]

Feminism is a diverse collection of social theories, political movements and moral philosophies, largely motivated by or concerned with the experiences of women. Most feminists are especially concerned with social, political and economic inequality between men and women; some have argued that gendered and sexed identities, such as "man" and "woman," are socially constructed. Feminists differ over the sources of inequality, how to attain equality, and the extent to which gender and gender-based identities should be questioned and critiqued. In simple terms, feminism is the belief in social, political and economic equality of the sexes and the movement organised around the belief that gender should not be the pre-determinant factor shaping a person's social identity, or socio-political or economic rights.

Feminist political activists commonly campaign on issues such as reproductive rights (including the right to safe, legal abortion, access to contraception and quality prenatal care), violence within a domestic partnership, maternity leave, equal pay, sexual harassment, street harassment, discrimination and rape. Many feminists today argue that feminism is a grass-roots movement that seeks to cross boundaries based on social class, race, culture and religion. They also argue that an effective feminist movement should be culturally specific and address issues relevant to the women of the society in question such as female genital cutting, or "clitorectomies", in Africa and the Middle East and the "glass ceiling" issue in developed economies. They also debate the extent to which certain issues such as rape, incest and mothering are universal. Themes explored in feminism include patriarchy, stereotyping, objectification, sexual objectification and oppression.

So how does this have anything to do with pre-marital sex?

[honeyblonde 0]

JP, Those are just a few reasons off the top of my head for why I think my husband is a feminist. I'm sure he could give you many much better ones.

I think a feminist is anyone who wants equal rights and treatment for women and men, but I have learned over the years that it can be a very subtle thing. That's why the things I named above are important to me as a person.

When our society obsesses with physical beauty (and women buy into that to set their personal value), it is totally ignoring other aspects of women such as their intelligence and personality. It is saying that a woman's only value is her beauty and turning her into an object. This is why I see my husband's viewpoint on this as a feminist viewpoint.

Since I came to Savannah I have dealt with sexual harrassment and discrimination quite often. I had one job where if I didn't get sexually harrassed on any given day I had to wonder if something was wrong. At that time I thought that sexual harrassment and discrimination were separate issues, and felt that as long as I was just being harrassed it was no big deal. I finally realized that if a man will harrass a woman, he will discriminate against her too.

I'll have to post an essay my son wrote this semester if you want to see how I view feminism. Sometimes our children can say what we want to say much better than we can.

It's funny you posted that - I was just reading it. What it has to do with pre-marital sex or any other sex outside of marriage is that it is about a woman's right to live outside of some pre-set social norms - to make decisions about her own body.

Edited October 13, 2006 by honeyblonde

[Veiled Princess 1]

That is the whole issue though. There are certain people here who feel that it should *not* be a personal choice. I would not call them feminists. Likewise I would not call anyone who slept around a feminist based solely on that behavior.

I think people are talking around each other here.

Well I don't call myself a feminist and sense I'm the only one advocating it not being a personal 'freedom' or 'liberty' (never did I say it shouldn't be a personal choice... everything is a choice... even if there are consequences to it), I'll assume this is directed at me (since everyone else is getting personal )

Anywho.... since I don't consider it a personal 'liberty' or 'freedom' for anyone regardless of gender then I don't see how that can exclude me from the feminist club if I should so care to join... it is nothing specifically against women having sex outside of marriage but against it being done at all... by anyone. Call me what you will... but anti-women's rights??? no way!

[jordanianprincess 0]

JP, Those are just a few reasons off the top of my head for why I think my husband is a feminist. I'm sure he could give you many much better ones.

I think a feminist is anyone who wants equal rights and treatment for women and men, but I have learned over the years that it can be a very subtle thing. That's why the things I named above are important to me as a person.

When our society obsesses with physical beauty (and women buy into that to set their personal value), it is totally ignoring other aspects of women such as their intelligence and personality. It is saying that a woman's only value is her beauty and turning her into an object. This is why I see my husband's viewpoint on this as a feminist viewpoint.

Since I came to Savannah I have dealt with sexual harrassment and discrimination quite often. I had one job where if I didn't get sexually harrassed on any given day I had to wonder if something was wrong. At that time I thought that sexual harrassment and discrimination were separate issues, and felt that as long as I was just being harrassed it was no big deal. I finally realized that if a man will harrass a woman, he will discriminate against her too.

I'll have to post an essay my son wrote this semester if you want to see how I view feminism. Sometimes our children can say what we want to say much better than we can.

Liz with all due respect, the things you are saying about Abdel show him to be a supportive husband and NOT a feminist. Sexual harrasment is indeed one of things that feminism is about but I don't see how that ties into Abdel being a feminist. He is supportive of your views and I would hope he would think any kind of harrasment towards his wife is wrong but that doesnt make him feminist. Reading books and his preference for body image doesnt make him a feminist. You said earlier he doesnt like the whole body image of rail thin women, there are some women born that way and they are also feminists. There are plenty of men who are obsessed with body image as well. There is no unequality in that.

[honeyblonde 0]

That is the whole issue though. There are certain people here who feel that it should *not* be a personal choice. I would not call them feminists. Likewise I would not call anyone who slept around a feminist based solely on that behavior.

I think people are talking around each other here.

Well I don't call myself a feminist and sense I'm the only one advocating it not being a personal 'freedom' or 'liberty' (never did I say it shouldn't be a personal choice... everything is a choice... even if there are consequences to it), I'll assume this is directed at me (since everyone else is getting personal )

Anywho.... since I don't consider it a personal 'liberty' or 'freedom' for anyone regardless of gender then I don't see how that can exclude me from the feminist club if I should so care to join... it is nothing specifically against women having sex outside of marriage but against it being done at all... by anyone. Call me what you will... but anti-women's rights??? no way!

You're right VP - that doesn't mean you're not a feminist. I would say it makes you someone who doesn't want to be tolerant of other viewpoints (gee, something I've been accused of here!), but it doesn't mean you aren't a feminist - as long as you agree that it should be equal for both men and women.

There are a whole lot of things I don't think people should do too, but that doesn't mean I advocate making them illegal. When you allow any religion to impose their viewpoints on everyone in a society you end up with Calvin's Geneva or the Afghanistan of the Taliban. I don't agree with any organized religion, but I would never advocate making any religion illegal.

[chri'stina 190]

JP, Those are just a few reasons off the top of my head for why I think my husband is a feminist. I'm sure he could give you many much better ones.

I think a feminist is anyone who wants equal rights and treatment for women and men, but I have learned over the years that it can be a very subtle thing. That's why the things I named above are important to me as a person.

When our society obsesses with physical beauty (and women buy into that to set their personal value), it is totally ignoring other aspects of women such as their intelligence and personality. It is saying that a woman's only value is her beauty and turning her into an object. This is why I see my husband's viewpoint on this as a feminist viewpoint.

Since I came to Savannah I have dealt with sexual harrassment and discrimination quite often. I had one job where if I didn't get sexually harrassed on any given day I had to wonder if something was wrong. At that time I thought that sexual harrassment and discrimination were separate issues, and felt that as long as I was just being harrassed it was no big deal. I finally realized that if a man will harrass a woman, he will discriminate against her too.

I'll have to post an essay my son wrote this semester if you want to see how I view feminism. Sometimes our children can say what we want to say much better than we can.

Liz with all due respect, the things you are saying about Abdel show him to be a supportive husband and NOT a feminist. ....

[Veiled Princess 1]

You don't agree that criminalizing pre-marital sex would be an anti-feminist action?

If it was only a crime for women to engage in premarital sex then yes... if it's a crime across the board for both men and women equally then no.

True...but I think only one person said they don't think it should be an available personal choice. If I'm correct it was VP but I am not even sure what she meant in her posts so I could be wrong.

I never said anything shouldn't be a personal choice... I said I don't believe it should be considered a 'right' or 'freedom' or 'liberty'.

Everything is a personal choice... even if it's against the law... you choose to abide by or not abide by the law.

[Veiled Princess 1]

I would say it makes you someone who doesn't want to be tolerant of other viewpoints (gee, something I've been accused of here!), but it doesn't mean you aren't a feminist - as long as you agree that it should be equal for both men and women.

There are a whole lot of things I don't think people should do too, but that doesn't mean I advocate making them illegal. When you allow any religion to impose their viewpoints on everyone in a society you end up with Calvin's Geneva or the Afghanistan of the Taliban. I don't agree with any organized religion, but I would never advocate making any religion illegal.

Since when does having a set of laws as a society automatically equate someone with a terrorist organization????? Those laws have existed in this society since it's founding and have only recently been overturned... has the taliban been running America for all these years????

I don't think it should be a personal freedom or liberty because I believe it negatively affects the society as a whole... and I've beat that horse to death in explaining why I feel that way.... when it negatively affects me it's no longer your issue of privacy or personal liberties.

[Jenn! 918]

I'm kind of sick of talking about this now.

But I'll just say that I do view any laws that would take away a woman's sexual freedoms, regardless of whether the laws also apply to men, as being anti-feminist. By the strict definition of feminism as being equality between women and men, then it would not be anti-feminist. I do understand that point. I think I just embrace a wider definition of feminism as being the supporting of women's choices.

ETA:

I don't even know where feminism first came up in this thread. My issue was with taking away personal liberties, not even specifically those of women. Whether it's "feminist" or not is really beside the point.

Edited October 13, 2006 by jenn3539

[LaL 418]

I don't think it should be a personal freedom or liberty because I believe it negatively affects the society as a whole... and I've beat that horse to death in explaining why I feel that way.... when it negatively affects me it's no longer your issue of privacy or personal liberties.

Well here in the United States we are established as a society of individuals. Its the basis of everything we stand for that includes personal freedoms (choices) that other's do not have to subscribe to. Many things can affect one in a negative way, however it does not mean that the laws should change, it could just mean tolerance could be elevated.

I don't know, I think what our country is founded on is so very important - personal freedom. Many people from very conservative backgrounds have found ways to assimilate without giving up their fundamentals.

Shouldn't our melting pot allow for such freedoms? Freedom to choose how to live your life?

[Veiled Princess 1]

I'm kind of sick of talking about this now.

But I'll just say that I do view any laws that would take away a woman's sexual freedoms, regardless of whether the laws also apply to men, as being anti-feminist. By the strict definition of feminism as being equality between women and men, then it would not be anti-feminist. I do understand that point. I think I just embrace a wider definition of feminism as being the supporting of women's choices.

I don't support the right for a woman to choose to kill me or any other innocent person either.... does that also classify me as anti-feminist???

ETA: again... everyone has choices... no one can take that away... the question is should there be a legal consequence for this particular choice... I say yes and I'm apparently the only one

Edited October 13, 2006 by Veiled Princess

[Jenn! 918]

I'm kind of sick of talking about this now.

But I'll just say that I do view any laws that would take away a woman's sexual freedoms, regardless of whether the laws also apply to men, as being anti-feminist. By the strict definition of feminism as being equality between women and men, then it would not be anti-feminist. I do understand that point. I think I just embrace a wider definition of feminism as being the supporting of women's choices.

I don't support the right for a woman to choose to kill me or any other innocent person either.... does that also classify me as anti-feminist???

ETA: again... everyone has choices... no one can take that away... the question is should there be a legal consequence for this particular choice... I say yes and I'm apparently the only one

I think we already went over the killing angle, no?

I'm talking choices such as what a woman does with her body or what she chooses as her life's work, etc.

Edited October 13, 2006 by jenn3539

[LaL 418]

ETA: again... everyone has choices... no one can take that away... the question is should there be a legal consequence for this particular choice... I say yes and I'm apparently the only one

leila - i am sooo confused about your argument. You state it should be ok for law to not recognize a marriage (ie: married in eyes of god only), but law should govern pre-marital sex and therefore have legal reprecussions? you stated earlier the laws have not been upheld for marriage, but now suggesting legal consequences for pre-martial sex?

if a marriage is unknown to the LAW then it is still premarital sex - again - according to the LAW!

[Jenn! 918]

ETA: again... everyone has choices... no one can take that away... the question is should there be a legal consequence for this particular choice... I say yes and I'm apparently the only one

leila - i am sooo confused about your argument. You state it should be ok for law to not recognize a marriage (ie: married in eyes of god only), but law should govern pre-marital sex and therefore have legal reprecussions? you stated earlier the laws have not been upheld for marriage, but now suggesting legal consequences for pre-martial sex?

if a marriage is unknown to the LAW then it is still premarital sex - again - according to the LAW!

Yes, I am very confused by this still as well.