What exactly is a politics of radical feminism and lesbianism?

[Cleita]

The woman whom Al Franken is interviewing right now about the new smear book on Hillary Clinton just said that the author implied this political stance came out of Wellesley College.

Now I know conservatives think that women are a different species, but since when is radical feminism only attributed to lesbians? All of us women want the same thing, both straight and gay. We want the same freedoms, liberties and opportunities the penis units in our society have. We aren't a separate species but human beings like everyone else.

And also FYI I don't care what kind of sex the Clintons have with or without each other. It's really a matter between them alone and privately.

Whatever they have agreed to within their marriage contract is none of our business.

Edited for grammar.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. Those seeking equality are always called "radicals".

And, usually derided, attacked and feared by those in power.

[Cleita]

I think it's time for a new wave of feminism.

Swedish women, who have more equality than we do, have formed a feminist party and it has proved to be very popular. Maybe a party of women might be able to accomplish what the Democrats can't.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. Can we straight white males join?

As it is, my disgust with our "leaders" marshmallow opposition has led me to plan on voting Green. But, I'll vote for anyone who is devoted to peace, equality, and human rights.

[Cleita]

8. In Sweden men are allowed so I suppose we would

allow like minded men and welcome them aboard. Someone has to kill the spiders. :-)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. My wife takes care of the spiders.

She's such a softy that she captures them and puts them outside. Unless they're big and mean looking. Then I'm allowed to display my machismo and whack them. She's even got me feeling a bit sorry for them before I murder them.

[Cleita]

16. Actually, I always did too.

I have a brush that scoops them up gently and they can't fight their way out of it until I get outside. Then I shake it in a bush to free them.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Well, you and my wife will never make it as "compassionate conservatives".

Who seem to revel in killing.

[jobycom]

23. My wife squishes them. I'm the one who rescues them

One of our biggest fights was when she mushed a spider I was trying to save. I had named it and was playing with it, and she did it just to upset me. I'm still mad about it!

[Cleita]

30. I don't do it so much out of compassion as

the fact that they are good for the garden even the poinsonous ones. Also, even the Black Widows, which are all over the place are afraid of you and most spiders don't like light, so I find them pretty harmless if you know their habits. Now I have different view of ants and snails and have no compunction about nuking them. I throw the snails out on the road and let the crows feast on them.

[jobycom]

32. I nuke the ants, though I feel bad. Cockroaches are my bane

I have a genuine phobia of them, and it's the one I've so far not conquered (I used to have a phobia of spiders, but overcame it, thanks in part to the little guy my wife smushed). Those I let my wife handle, and I don't ask questions when I hear the toilet flush.

Of course, with four cats, I don't find many roaches. Not alive, or whole, anyway.

[Cleita]

34. I don't have any roaches because the spiders take care of them.

Even the ones that arrive in deliveries from warehouses down south don't last very long.

[jobycom]

47. Well, I am down south, so they don't have far to travel for me.

They get big, too. I got swarmed by them as a kid, and it has left me terrified of them. It's irrational, and I can conquer it when I have to, but it's a real strain.

[icymist]

45. Good for you jobycom!

The spider just wanted to live and enjoy life. Let it go outside.

[icymist]

42. Hey, Go for it! n/t

[RaleighNCDUer]

2. Well, women ARE a different species,

and judging by my ex-wives and girlfriends they're all crazy, to boot.

Unless, of course, it's just me...

:(

[Cleita]

5. Unless you have been looking for wives in the barnyard, they

aren't a separate species. It could just be you :-)or that you are looking for love in all the wrong places.

[jobycom]

24. Maybe he's a farmboy in Georgia, like whatsisname Horsley. nt.

[RaleighNCDUer]

44. OK, maybe not a different species

but definitely a whole different sex, to quote Jack Lemmon (Masie? in Some Like It Hot).

But I'm starting to figure them out. The age-old question "what do women want?" -- respect, consideration, equality. And someone else.

The story of my life.

[jobycom]

3. Who knows? I'm a hetero male and I'd match my feminism against

any lesbian out there.

I think Republicans honestly cannot fathom anything outside of themselves. That's why their politics is so greedy--they want money for themselves, they want oil for themselves, they want all rights for themselves, and anyone who stands in their way is meant to be trampled on. It's also why they assume any liberal who supports equality for everyone must belong to one of the oppressed groups that they include in their equality. They can't conceive that anyone other than a woman could be for feminist equality, or a gay or lesbian for such rights, etc. It's why Republicans win by playing to people's basest instincts, and Democrats lose by doing the same thing. Democrats see a higher goal, and only support those who seek that higher goal. (usually).

[Cleita]

7. You make me happy with your views.

A Redneck (I assume Republican) once said to my late husband that if women didn't have pussies, there would be a bounty on them. I suppose this is how they view their women. They marry to have a whore, a housekeeper and a birth machine.

[jobycom]

20. Only the housekeeper and birth machine

The whore they'd rather not marry.

That was never my idea of a good relationship. I grew up redneck, and saw it all around me, and hated it.

[Shoeempress]

4. Didn't you get the Repuke memo? Women are to be

subservient to their men, never have a thought, reproduce like a copy machine stuck on high or never ever get married or have sex.

[Cleita]

10. Aren't all the unattractive, unmarried ones supposed

to take care of their elderly parents when the time comes, but no one has ever mentioned who was supposed to take care of them, when they got old.

[Warpy]

13. Didn't you get that memo?

After we care for our parents, we're supposed to walk out in the snow and die of exposure so that our married siblings can sell the house and split the profits.

[uppityperson]

9. I think "radical feminism" refers to women are better than men idea

The term "radical feminism" seems to have 1 commonly held application for intolerance, and 1 less commonly held application for tolerance.

I have noticed this is a term applied to those who think women have been down so long, it is time for them to be on top of the heap and men down at the bottom. "Radical feminism" is an inaccurate term applied this way, but this is how I have heard it refered to.

There are people who think this way, though most of us think that people should be treated with the same freedoms, liberties and opportunities no matter what sex they are and the term "radical feminism" should mean this instead.

Intolerance for others can take many different forms, and it doesn't matter what group you are intolerant of or for, it is still intolerance.

[Cleita]

11. Consider this opinion.

Since women bring life into the world both male and female, giving women the ability to choose bringing life into the world, puts males at a distinct disadvantage. The giver of life becomes a formibable force of nature and I think should be worshipped. :-) I am all for radical feminism then. Maybe it's our turn to rule the world for the next five thousand years.

[uppityperson]

21. I have heard this opinion, refer to myself as a humanist

I have heard this opinion and many others over my life, and have brought life into the world, and could use some worshipping. I took to calling myself a humanist yrs ago, as I have the opinion that while men and women are different, we all deserve the same rights and opportunities. Yes, I am a feminist, and have worked (for pay and volunteer) over the yrs in women's issues (which ulitmately are humanities issues, but immediate focus is on women). However, I use humanist now. Semantics can be a funny thing.

I grew up in a predominately female family and we all just did both m/f traditional things because we had to and this is just how things were. I used to think that m/f differences were all social, then I had a son and had to struggle with there being inate differences. Yes, there are m/f from all ranges of beliefs and behaviors, but it was a real problem to accept my child playing with his dolls by giving them rides on his trucks. However, he used to get upset with people when he was in preschool and still loved pink and they'd call him a girl. "Pink is the most beautiful color there is and everyone should wear it!" lisped is quite something. (My opinion on pink is that this is the 1st color we all notice before being born, and is the favorite of most small children.)

[Cleita]

26. Also, this is the socialization issue.

When I was a child wearing pink by males was considered queer. This of course started the whole homophobia brainwashing in little boys. I also grew up mostly around girls, especially when I was a teenager, so I thought nothing of shlepping a trunk full of clothes up three flights of the stairs of a dorm when I was in college, but I wasn't prepared, when I went out into the world, for working for men who were less educated than me, but still make twice what I did. I wasn't prepared for the full range of chauvinistic attitudes that hit me like bricks then in the early sixties.

[uppityperson]

31. I got asked "aren't you afraid he'll grow up gay?" when in pink

All I could do was snort and say "what?" Then my 4 yr old would go into his pink is good speech and I'd follow up with more of a discussion. I got this question from some surprisingly liberal folks too.

Intolerant attitudes still hit me and I am speaking up more, the older I get. Wrinkles and age help some, soon I'll be fighting ageism too. I have found auto shops to use where it doesn't matter what sex you are, but it has taken a bit of searching.

[jobycom]

56. Innate differences

I have two daughters, and no sons, so I can't speak to the innate differences in males, but I can say that most of what we think of as gender is just conditioning. I stayed home and raised my daughter while my wife worked, and I was very conscious of gender assumptions. I raised her as devoid of them as I could. Rather than buying her dolls, I bought her bears. I chose shows to watch that had fewer identifiable gender stereotypes, like Little Bear or Rupert. I also chose clothing that was neutral.

When I went shopping or to the park, people would assume that the neutral clothing meant she was a boy, and would treat her like a boy. I would never correct them. I had deliberately chosen a name that could go either way, too, so they couldn't tell from the name.

The difference between the way people, especially mothers, treated her when they thought she was a boy and when they realized she was a girl was astounding. When they thought she was a boy, she could play on the monkey bars, stand in shopping carts, throw tantrumes, and get away with just about anything. When they realized she was a girl, they would rescue her from the monkey bars and shopping carts (and glare at me--the obviously careless father whose wife would not approve of the way I was hadnling her child while I was, they assumed, watching her for the day), try to hush her tantrums, and scold her with their voice for anything unladylike she did. I literally had to be rude to some of them to get them to back off.

Their tones of voice changed, too. For the boy, they spoke playfully, almost as though the child were a superior. For the girl (same kid) their voice became patronizing, and their actions subtly different. These were the same people, a lot of times, who would treat her one way, then act completely differently when they realized she was a girl.

My daughter until she was five told people she was a boy. I never told her that, but I didn't correct her when she said it. My father raised a fuss about it the first time he heard her say that, and practically yelled at her, telling her she was a girl. She would just smile at him, like he didn't know what he was talking about. Finally, she asked me. I told her "You can be anything you want to be." My father, to his credit, caught on, and shut up.

To her, being a boy meant being treated the way people treated her when they assumed she was a boy. When she finally understood that there were other differences, she made the transition with no hangups, since we didn't dwell on it either way. In fact, her teachers always talk about how well-adjusted she is.

[bloom]

60. That is an interesting experience

I tried to not dwell on gender differences, either...

One thing that sticks in my mind was seeing a little girl of about 2 years old -visiting someone at the apartments where we lived - whose mother insisted she always wear frilly dresses and never get mussed up.

I couldn't imagine raising a child like that. It seemed like child abuse.

[Terran]

17. Here's a possibly useful link

that defines "feminism" and links to discussion of a number of subtypes, including radical feminism. I certainly don't think that merely advocating equality is anything radical, and that conforms with what I just read here.

http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Feminism#Subtypes_of_feminism

As you might guess, I'm no expert in feminism, but I do consider myself one.

[militaryWife]

12. the agenda is radical alright

I believe they want acceptance........crazy, ain't it????? And maybe a little equal protection under the law......the very definition of radical!

(sorry, don't know how to do that little sarcasm icon), oh, wait :sarcasm:, is that it????????

mw

[Cleita]

15. I think we want more than a little protection under the law, but

the same protection given to all. And welcome to DU militarywife.

:toast:

[Jose Diablo]

19. "Penis Unit"?

What is the message of this term? Would this be kinda like calling a woman a 'vagina unit'. Or even worse, use a term thoroughly rejected by most on this board.

Or is it that seeing how I am a man, I shouldn't bring this up?

[Cleita]

22. Uhm, that phrase always elicits a response.

I will stop using it, when you stop using terms like bitch, bitch-slapping, hag, sow etc. etc..

When we ask for equality, we also want equality in the terms we use to define maleness.

[Jose Diablo]

25. Consider it done

But the truth is, I don't recollect ever using the terms you mentioned. Maybe you are thinking of someone else.

[Cleita]

28. I wasn't talking to you in the original post but everyone who

would read this but thanks for the response.

[Jose Diablo]

49. Oh, I see

the use of the term was designed to draw-out a response. Isn't that what is referred to as 'flame bait', starting a thread that has little useful information and mostly hot air.

Even the term 'radical feminist' could be looked at as a term used by someone opposed to women having equal treatment and as such is like bait used to fish for a fight.

Actually, as I think more and more about the OP, is it really about saying women deserve to be treated better, or is it to meant to degrade men in general? And if a man objects to the general degrading of men, does that mean he also objects to women receiving respect and equal treatment? Do you see how a post constructed in this way could cause a problem?

I like many of your threads, you contribute many many good ideas, but sadly I don't think the idea of respect and paying women the worth they contribute was really presented in the OP in the best of ways.

For example, you could have thrown out published statistics that show for an equivalent job, women are paid, say 40% less. I don't have the statistics or the sources to prove this, but I have worked in many industries and I know this to be true. Sure, the job descriptions are tailor made to allow men to be paid more, but looking deeper, women ARE paid less to do more. Thats the fact as I have seen it and have experienced it.

But like I said, I know you can do better presenting the concepts. Just my opinion, other could disagree of course.

I hope you don't take this in a way I didn't mean, I think you are first class writer, it's just this OP I don't care for.

[Cleita]

53. Make of it what you like, but don't twist the intent of the phrase

into something that it isn't, then that truely becomes flame bait. Funny how sexists don't like the atmosphere when the tables are turned on them. Now I am not saying you are one of those but your objections seems to protest too much.

I and all women live with sexist language all the time. All the things you say I should have done like stats and stuff, I have done many times over the years I have been here but the sexism remains.

[Jose Diablo]

59. Twisting?

You yourself have said:

"I will stop using it, when you stop using terms like bitch, bitch-slapping, hag, sow etc. etc..

When we ask for equality, we also want equality in the terms we use to define maleness."

You said you equate "penis unit" as a term equivalent to bitch, bitch-slapping, hag, sow, ect. ect., therefor I am not twisting anything whatsoever.

You stated you are using the term to define maleness. So why not just use the term men, or male? It is because you want to degrade maleness.

And then, what to make of this:

"Funny how sexists don't like the atmosphere when the tables are turned on them."

The implication is that I am a sexist. But of course, you then qualify the statement with this:

"Now I am not saying you are one of those but your objections seems to protest too much."

With the concluding implication that 'I protest too much'.

You bet there there is sexism here. But it not where you are placing it.

Take a hike and bye.

[Cleita]

62. So when women are spoken of in the third person as booty,

or their body parts referred to as "nice rack" or "great ass" don't you think we can use our own terms refering to men? We have been so beaten down semantically all we can come up with is "what a hunk".

I'm not being the language police here really as much as I am trying to make a point. I don't object to your sexist language. You should have freedom of speech, but allow me my sexist language, because I should have freedom of speech too.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. Methinks the lady was being ironic.

The allusion being to the usually perjoritive and demeaning terms used by us men to describe women and veil with the justification that a "nice piece of ass" is really a compliment.

[PurityOfEssence]

29. All women want the same thing?!

That's beyond ridiculous. Far too many women are willing to trade power for comfort. Statements like this make me scream. The ERA was defeated in Texas by WOMEN.

if you accept the premise that most humans are slovenly cowards, as I do, then it shouldn't be such a shock to see many women willing to give up power for "security". It's the gilded cage, and if it can be worked properly, it's a wonderful way to think you're avoiding the vicissitudes of life.

As for demanding that the Clintons adhere to our tastes on marriage, that's just conservatism writ large: ONLY MY VIEW IS ACCEPTABLE. Perhaps she's got a taste for her own sex and she knows he's a backwoods poon-hound born to stray. Perhaps they have an agreement to this effect; it's as moral and good a basis for a marriage as any other, including cold, pristine monogamy. If this is their deal, so be it.

What they agree upon is their own business, and unless it's not violated, it works as a personal system. To claim that "everyone's just like this" or that "all women want the same thing" is silly, anti-pluralist and naive. Many women want to be randy and have a devoted male mate; if the males go along with this private bargain, that's fine.

The "well, of course everyone's the same" argument always rankles me. That's the heart of conservatism: everyone's like me, and if they aren't, they're sick perverts who shouldn't be allowed to exist. Life is complex. It should be.

People are VERY different, and this transcends sexual lines. The deals made are the deals made.

Sadly, conservatives dismiss women as a different and inferior species, but extremists in the feminist camp do the same to men. Maybe the latter are less guilty due being the downtrodden, but they're not the less incorrect. People are great and suck in a pan-sexual way; the dominance of males gives a few breaks to women, but it doesn't erase the cynical maneuverings of many women.

Please avoid absolutes. All women DO NOT want the same thing. All men don't either. The best unions are based upon personal differences that complement their mate's, while aligning along a through-line of attitudinal similarity.

Dammit.

[Cleita]

33. That's a page full and I agree with most of what you say.

I really think civil marriage contracts need to be rethought. I think people should enter into a marriage contract for specific reasons, outlined in the contract, and even for a limited amount of time if they wish. I could see this happening, where couples agree to a fixed time, if and whether to have children, whom they may have sex with. Now religious, traditional folks could have their church weddings, but they would still have to have a civil contract.

[PurityOfEssence]

57. Wouldn't that be great?

The fixed time bit is a bit dangerous, but there should certainly be provision for that. Committing to another is one of the great things a human can do, and although it doesn't take into account some of the "worse", it is a pledge to mutually support.

Having said all that, it's important to see that a clear agreement between individuals is as moral and good as some amorphous affiliation with grandiose proclamations of eternity and such when the individuals aren't really sincere about it. To pledge oneself to another with the provision of odd trysts here and there, but with the sincere heartfelt committment to the other is a damnsight more noble than glancing, cursory agreements with the standard assumption and no true personal involvement in making plain to one's mate the reality of the situation.

As for religion, I'll take a pass here; I consider it generally to be the province of the childish, shallow and cowardly. Though some may have deep abiding feelings for their maker and a profound allegiance to a particular faith, I feel that most are literally phoning it in. They're buying a system off the rack and hiding behind faith as a virtue, when it's a fault if the system hasn't been truly questioned and put to the test.

As for rattling the cages of patriarchal hegemony, I'm all for it.

Sorry if I was prickly; I love threads like this, and we'd probably find it hard to find much to disagree about over coffee.

[uppityperson]

35. True, some women may not want equality. What's the clinton rant?

Some women may not want the same freedoms, liberties and opportunities the men in our society have.

Is your clinton rant "As for demanding that the Clintons adhere to our tastes on marriage" towards the OP or at people who demand this as I don't see the OP demanding this, quite the oppposite. thanks.

[PurityOfEssence]

52. Nothing against the OP with this point or others

Conservatism is selfishness and the demand that all others adhere to a specific set of beliefs and actions. That's crap. People are different. People are REALLY different, and sometimes great relationships are established with this assumption. To demand that everyone adhere to a narrow set of actions is crap. The deal is between the two people.

My initial impulse was just to stick up my hand and differ with the assumption that "everyone wants the same thing". It just ain't so.

Obviously, the thread-starter agrees, and I've tangled with an issue that isn't really an issue.

There are through-lines with human behavior, but so many people want so many different things that it's best if they actually address them. Those who do are often met with such vehemence that my head spins.

Imposing one's beliefs on others is as silly as it is inaccurate. As we slide toward ever-greater puritanical tyranny, the toleration of "others" slips farther and farther away. What matters is the expressed agreement between people. Sadly, most people never really look their lover in the eye and discuss the big issues like life's paths, fidelity, reality of personal habits and day-to-day existence. If they did, there would be less heartache, but that would necessitate more honest self-awareness than exists at large.

We hide behind affiliation with a covenant (like marriage) or a belief system and completely miss the reality of defining what our lives should be and are. What's worse, we're taught a bunch of fairy tales that somehow get it into our heads that if we address nuts and bolts issues of daily living, we've somehow sinned against the soul of love. Most people never get into any introspection unless trying to recoup from a tragedy, and this is the root of much discord: people need to check in and ask themselves (and admit) what they really want on a day to day basis.

It's not bad to talk about these assumptions; it's supremely good, yet it's frowned upon as tampering with the wistful and unspoken beauty of pure love.

[Cats Against Frist]

36. It's a case of logical fallacy that stuck

I don't know which logical fallacy it is, but here's an analogy:

Diner says to cook: "gee, I don't like the way you fixed my hamburger."

Cook says: You hate me. You probably hate cows, too. You probably hate restaurants. Why don't you just get the fuck out of this restaurant, with our shitty cow burgers and go eat some chicken on a park bench you CHICKENAZI!!!

It's a common tactic for those who wish to deflect from an argument, or are otherwise trying to ignore the argument.

Feminist says, "you know, I think that male-constructed logic and culture might be a bit malecentric, and that women could benefit from equal rights, equal pay and equal opportunity."

Defensive Feminist hater says: "You just must be a fucking LESBIAN. You hate men. Every sexual encounter is rape. You hate civilization and order, and you want everyone to use the same bathroom and dress in metallic, unisex body suits."

Get the picture? It's just ridiculous fucking discourse taken to the nth degree -- perpetuated by brainwashing.

[Cleita]

39. That's all the conservatives have to throw back at the left...

faulty logic, based on faulty premises.

[barb162]

37. When I think of radical feminism

I think back to the great feminist "awakening" around 1970 when there were such amazingly articulate and brilliant writers as Shulamith Firestone, Germaine Greer, etal.

[Cleita]

38. That was the golden age that inspired us to get where we

are today. Now the younger women are ready to give it all back. It makes me sad.

[barb162]

46. I think the young ones aren't aware of what people went

through to get civil rights for women back then. They don't remember back alley abortions. They don't remember when the newspaper ads for jobs were separated "for women" and "for men." The young people don't know we aren't far away from losing reproductive rights. That Supreme Court...all it takes is probably one more judge to change and that's it! Adios to reproductive and other freedoms that women have had for the last 30 odd years. Also when you look at the way EEOC is being underfunded/staffed and the other crap going on, like the druggists refusing to fill birth control Rx, you can see the right is making all kinds of different attempts to curtail or fully stop women from controlling their own bodies.

[Cleita]

48. They are afraid of us. When we hold the power to

stop or create life, then we become goddesses, very powerful to the Cro-Magnon sub-conscience brain of men.

[barb162]

51. I think it is the subconscious

fears and other undercurrents in men (and some women). They want to go back to the way it was, like the 1950s, when "men were men" and "women were women"

There was an enormous backlash to the Lyndon Johnson years civil rights legislation that wasn't apparent to me for a long time. I believe as soon as LBJ signed the various pieces of legislation that the Dems lost huge numbers of voters. Those people shifted to the right/ GOP and stayed there. They worked quietly gaining power for many years under the radar. Reagan (a kinder and gentler America), Bush (both of them), the GOP-controlled Congress, the MSM, Limbaugh, fundies, etc., are all part of this backlash or use the backlash. It is a backlash fueled by change that came "too" fast for too many people.

[Cleita]

55. So I think we should form a feminist party and see where it leads

us. Unlike the Green Party, we will still advocate Democratic candidates in high office and try to run feminist candidates in local elections until we get the numbers to make a difference.

[barb162]

58. I think it is a good idea you have here!

[barb162]

40. and I forgot Susan Brownmiller

(I still have my first year of MS Magagine and it was so great to have a magazine that didn't include beauty tips, hair styling, how to keep a man, etc)

[geek tragedy]

41. A complete bullshit rightwing phrase. n/t

[davsand]

43. Can't speak for anybody else.

Hell, we women were not ALLOWED to speak at all not so long ago. I figure we've come at least a little ways that I am allowed an opinion now...

I dunno, does it make me a "radical" feminist that I don't accept anyone telling me I'm not allowed do something because of my gender? Does it make me a "radical" that I want the freedom to decide the occupancy of my own uterus (or vagina, for that matter?) I must be a "radical" because I dare to express a strong political stance or belief--right? Am I radical that I want to be paid fairly for my day's work?

Call me a radical then--and so be it. I don't want anything that isn't mine and I don't want shit handed to me. I want a level playing field, and I figure it isn't any body's business (except my partner) who or how I get my sexual jollies and what the result of those jollies might be.


Laura

[Cleita]

50. I remember at my first full time job having to spend all day

filing thick legal files in high heel shoes and a panty girdle. Fast forward thirty years and a young office boy was given the job of doing the same kind of filing for one day and he said to me that it was physically harder than doing a work out. I told him, he should be happy he wasn't expected to do it in a girdle and high heeled shoes.

[barb162]

54. I remember when I couldn't even wear dress pants to the office

I could only wear 2 piece dark suits, not even dresses.

[cap]

61. I'm not sure what radical feminism is any more...

I mean, what's the difference between feminism and radical feminism? Equal Pay for Equal Work -- feminism.
Work/Life Balance -- feminism.
Equal Advancement Opportunities -- feminism.

We've changed our minds about women in combat and same sex toilets.

Now, what's the radical part? What are the radicals demanding that's different from regular feminism?

[Cleita]

63. That's my point. Since when is it radical to seek

equal rights and recognition. It isn't radical at all. The real radicals are the ones who want women to be submissive and inferior, so that they are on top of the food chain, yet it requires the work of women to keep them there.