The feminist movement is largely responsible for reshaping the way that American society is structured. In the past hundred years, a womans role in society has been completely redefined. Gone are the days when a woman could only aspire to be a nurse, a schoolteacher, or a homemaker. Now, women have attained an equal legal status with men, enjoying the same rights and protections that men do. Women have the same opportunities for self-advancement that men have, including the opportunity to get a higher education and have a career.



Despite these advancements, many self-proclaimed feminists are still unhappy. There is still loud complaining about the inequalities between men and women. I have heard several women reference the glass ceiling theory. For any who are unfamiliar with this idea, the glass ceiling theory states that American women are given the illusion of equality with men, but are still being oppressed and denied equal rights. Women are being treated unfairly, and remain victims of the men who run society. This is one of the milder claims associated with the feminist movement.



So-called radical feminists are also overtly attacking the institution of heterosexual marriage. In 1969, Marlene Dixon, a professor of sociology at the University of Chicago, made this assertion: The institution of marriage is the chief vehicle for the perpetuation of the oppression of women; it is through the role of wife that the subjugation of women is maintained. The following year, Robin Morgan, a prominent feminist author, referred to marriage as "a slavery-like practice. Furthermore, she stated, We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.



Feminists have waged a full-scale war on the traditional view of woman as wife and mother, claiming that women are enslaved by their husbands and children. Pregnancy has been construed as a horrible burden that men place on women. Rather than viewing pregnancy as a manifestation of the female identity, feminists view pregnancy as an inconvenience that limits opportunities for self-advancement. It is another tool that men use to oppress women, thus preventing them from realizing their educational and career goals.



Beyond simply asserting that women have the right to remain single and childless, many feminists assert that marriage and heterosexual intercourse actually dishonor women. Andrea Dworkin, an outspoken feminist activist, said the following about heterosexual sex: "Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." Leaders of N.O.W. (National Organization for Women), a prominent womens rights group, said the following: The simple fact is that every woman must be willing to be identified as a lesbian to be fully feminist." (The National NOW Times, January, 1988).



Women who espouse these positions are attempting to destroy traditional gender roles in our society. They claim that these gender roles are the source of oppression, and that women will be oppressed until those roles are dismantled. The only way to effectively dismantle those roles is to liberate women from their husbands and their children. To achieve these goals, radicals are lobbying for lesbian rights, advocating the extension of abortion rights, encouraging divorce as a means to solve marital conflicts, attempting to secure preferential treatment for women in the college application process, and supporting affirmative action legislation that requires businesses to hire equal numbers of men and women.



In 1996, the University of California Board of Regents proposed eliminating the use of gender as a factor in the college admissions process. The same idea appeared again in Proposition 209, which was placed on the California ballot in 1997. Two hundred thousand women attended an anti-209 rally to protest the following clause of the proposition: 1(a) The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting. The leaders of N.O.W labeled the proposition the biggest backward step ever taken in the process of achieving gender equality. Their biggest problem with the proposition was the suggested discontinuation of preferential treatment for women. They feared that women would be shut out of colleges and jobs due to the discontinuation of this practice.



Feminists are no longer seeking to promote gender equality and fairness. Rather than striving for equality, they are actually striving to take over the male role in society. It is debatable whether this is some twisted form of payback for years of inequality, or simply an attempt to glorify femininity. Regardless of their motives, feminists are harming the relationship between men and women. Men are being placed at an unfair disadvantage due to the preferential treatment accorded to women. Even if a man is more qualified for a job or acceptance into a university, a woman may be given the position or accepted instead. This creates and fosters resentment. The fact that women were discriminated against in the past is not a reasonable excuse to justify giving them preferential treatment today.



The shift in attitude toward childbirth has also affected the male role as a father. Legally, if a woman decides to have an abortion, the childs father has no right to protest her decision, even though he played an equal part in creating the child. Even if the father is willing to raise the child by himself, placing no responsibility on the mother whatsoever, he still has no right to protest her decision to abort it. This law lessens the role of the father, making him less of a parent than the mother, which is completely unjustifiable and unfair. Instead of being viewed as an equal participant in the process of creating and raising the child, the father is reduced to a bystander.



An extension of this idea is found in Valerie Solanas S.C.U.M. Manifesto. (Incidentally, S.C.U.M. stands for Society for Cutting Up Men, a radical feminist group that was founded by Solanas.) She writes, It is now technically feasible to reproduce without the aid of malesand to produce only females. We must begin immediately to do so. Retaining the male has not even the dubious purpose of reproduction. The male is a biological accident: the Y (male) gene is an incomplete X (female) gene, that is, it has an incomplete set of chromosomes. In other words, the male is an incomplete female, a walking abortion, aborted at the gene stage. To be male is to be deficient, emotionally limited; maleness is a deficiency disease and males are emotional cripples. Irresponsible literature such as the S.C.U.M. Manifesto further supports the notion that radical feminism is destructive and decidedly anti-male.



I believe the feminists had a right to protest the inequalities of the system back when women could not vote, could not own property, were not able to get a college education, and had extremely limited job prospects. None of these inequalities exist any more. Women have more opportunities today in America than at any previous time in history. Feminists are no longer attempting to achieve equality in the system; they are attempting to dismantle the system entirely, replacing it with a world in which women control everything. Radical feminists are a detriment and a threat to our society.
hello there & you too