S.P.A.R.C.

Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center
crazy gamesriddles and jokesfunny picturesdeath psychic!mad triviafunny & odd!pregnancy testshape testwin custodyrecipes

Author Topic: Article - It's all about revenge, not equality  (Read 2192 times)

Bolivar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 264
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Article - It's all about revenge, not equality
« on: Dec 28, 2004, 12:48:47 PM »

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Winnipeg/Lydia_Lovric/2004/12/27/79 8107.html

Mon, December 27, 2004

It's all about revenge, not equality

By Lydia Lovric

One of the biggest lies perpetuated by modern-day feminists is the
contention that feminism is about equality. Feminists aren't interested in
equality. What they want is revenge.

Apparently, breaking down barriers and smashing glass ceilings is laudable
only when women are the beneficiaries. Equality is not a two-way street for
these feminists. It's more of a one-way street with a dead end. That's why
the movement is going nowhere in the eyes of many young women, including myself.

Recently, a group of women decided to file a complaint with the B.C. Human
Rights Tribunal. They weren't too happy about the fact that an exclusive
Vancouver golf club boasts a male-only lounge. They said it was sexist. And
they're right. But that doesn't mean that this lounge should be forced to
accept female members.

Equality is not about getting ovaries into any and every boys' club. Women
in this country have the right to form their own clubs (whether it be co-ed
or just for ladies) and that's what equality is about. The law should only
provide opportunity. It's up to the individual to do the rest.

So if women in Vancouver want a posh place to eat meals and chat about golf, then they have every right to create their own establishment. They also have the option to bar men or admit them. And while feminists want the right to barge into all-male establishments, it seems that what's good for the goose is not so good for the gander.

When Ralph Gordon Stopps tried to take advantage of a free 10-day membership at a local gym club, he was denied entry. The basis for this rejection? Genitalia. It appears that Mr. Stopps has the wrong "parts" to become a member of "Just Ladies Fitness."

Where are the feminists now? Why aren't they standing up for Mr. Stopps and the outrageous discrimination he has faced based purely on sex? Why is it OK to have fitness clubs for women only, but a group of male golf buddies can't sit around and talk about how Tiger Woods' game has gone downhill ever since he tied the knot?

The truth is, feminists will never defend someone like Mr. Stopps. Feminists
want to eat their cake while the men in the world dine on Timbits.

Don't believe me? Brigitte LeBlanc, a 14-year-old Moncton girl, wasn't
satisfied playing hockey with the boys. She wanted more. So she petitioned
the New Brunswick Human Rights Commission to grant her the right to use the boys' locker room. Astonishingly, she won.

Surely, there are a few 14-year-old boys out there who wouldn't mind gaining entry to the girls' locker room. But you can bet that day will never come. We have a greater chance of hearing Carolyn Parrish praise the Bush
administration.

But I digress. Time and time again, we have women demanding access to boys' teams and boys' clubs.

Remember Robyn Waite? She's the Ontario high school girl who plays
quarterback on the boys' football team. Before her, there was Justine
Blainey and Hayley Wickenheiser, who fought for and won the right to skate
with the boys. And the LPGA wasn't good enough for Annika Sorenstam, so she decided to tee off with the men during a 2003 PGA tournament.

It seems that every time a female voice challenges a male team, the guys are eventually forced to swing open their door and welcome the newest member. But the door doesn't swing both ways.

Female athletes continue to have the luxury of maintaining girls' teams and
girls' clubs. Guys no longer have that right. And that's discrimination.

When Brian Kontak realized that he couldn't earn a living playing in the
PGA, he wanted to try his luck with the LPGA. The women were not amused.

Now, there's a boy in Wisconsin who wants to compete on his high school's
gymnastic team. Only problem is that his school doesn't have a team for
boys. So, hoping to earn a scholarship in order to attend college, Keith
Michael Bukowski wants the chance to spring vault and somersault with the
ladies. Kudos to the young lad for making a point, but hopefully he's not
holding his breath.

The truth is, equality isn't so important for feminists when the person
seeking parity is a guy. Equal treatment only applies when it benefits
women. And that's why feminism just doesn't add up.


Brent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 969
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
    • http://www.deltabravo.net
Excellent article - thank you! nm
« Reply #1 on: Dec 28, 2004, 01:57:11 PM »


MYSONSDAD

  • Sr. Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Summed up nicely, in a tidy article...(NM)
« Reply #2 on: Dec 28, 2004, 11:05:09 PM »

"Children learn what they live"

cathy

  • Private Reserve
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1965
  • Karma: 204
    • View Profile
I wouldn't say "revenge"....
« Reply #3 on: Dec 31, 2004, 07:51:16 AM »
I have always thought it was about "superior" rights - regardless of what minority group or "oppressed" group you are talking about.  And how do we factor in ability?  Let's face it - men and women are wonderfully different and do not typically have the same abilities/strengths.

But yeah - I have to agree with this article - and would take it further to include other groups as well.  "Equal rights" is a twisted notion, and typically only flows in one direction.
 

cathy

  • Private Reserve
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1965
  • Karma: 204
    • View Profile
I wouldn't say "revenge"....
« Reply #4 on: Dec 31, 2004, 07:51:16 AM »
I have always thought it was about "superior" rights - regardless of what minority group or "oppressed" group you are talking about.  And how do we factor in ability?  Let's face it - men and women are wonderfully different and do not typically have the same abilities/strengths.

But yeah - I have to agree with this article - and would take it further to include other groups as well.  "Equal rights" is a twisted notion, and typically only flows in one direction.
 


kitten

  • Guest
RE: I wouldn't say
« Reply #5 on: Dec 31, 2004, 11:32:02 AM »
"Feminism" is about control.  It's about having the ability to control a man to the point of getting him to take care of you because it is your RIGHT as a woman to be able to sleep in everyday and shop with his dime and not have to show him that you appreciate it because afterall that's what men are for.  It's about a woman's RIGHT to become a high powered executive and use a man for his sperm so that the need to experience pregnancy can be fulfilled while at the same time maintaining indepence by not allowing the man to know his child or that he may even have one.  And then leaving the baby with a nanny all day.
It becomes about revenge when the man gets tired of being used, realizes that he wants to be loved and treated with respect and when he can't get that from his wife, goes elsewhere.  It becomes about revenge when the man finds out he has a child and wants to be a daddy.  Next thing he knows, he now has all of the financial responsibility for a child he will never know.
"Feminism" is about control and a woman's RIGHT to do what SHE wants regardless of who gets hurt.
I think these women resent being women and don't like themselves much.  I am proud to say I will never label myself a feminist, I am proud to be a woman and all that womanhood stands for.  I teach my daughters the same.  

 

Copyright © SPARC - A Parenting Advocacy Group
Use of this website does not constitute a client/attorney relationship and this site does not provide legal advice.
If you need legal assistance for divorce, child custody, or child support issues, seek advice from a divorce lawyer.