Still the women who head these organizations (NOW and others) tend to ignore women who disagree with them and continue to act as if they speak for all women — though that must be getting harder and harder.
>>>Said Christina Hoff Sommers, an author and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institue: "Women have achieved parity with men in most fields. You'd think feminists...would be celebrating but in many ways they've never been more despondent."
Actually, this isn't so hard to understand. Groups like NOW were founded to combat various inequities (real or imagined) in society. Yet when such inequities disappear, what do such groups do then?
In a sense, these groups becomes victims of their own success; now that the problems they sought to fix ar fixed, their very existence is no longer necessary. Yet instead of gracefully disbanding, they seek to retain their power and influence by insisting that nothing has truly changed. They actually try to continue to justify their continued existence by denying their own past successes. That's what I think is happening here.
Hmm, the second-to-last sentence should be "They actually try to justify their continued existence by denying their own past successes." Sorry 'bout that. :-)
+J.M.J+
>>>Said Christina Hoff Sommers, an author and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institue: "Women have achieved parity with men in most fields. You'd think feminists...would be celebrating but in many ways they've never been more despondent."
Actually, this isn't so hard to understand. Groups like NOW were founded to combat various inequities (real or imagined) in society. Yet when such inequities disappear, what do such groups do then?
In a sense, these groups becomes victims of their own success; now that the problems they sought to fix ar fixed, their very existence is no longer necessary. Yet instead of gracefully disbanding, they seek to retain their power and influence by insisting that nothing has truly changed. They actually try to continue to justify their continued existence by denying their own past successes. That's what I think is happening here.
In Jesu et Maria,
Hmm, the second-to-last sentence should be "They actually try to justify their continued existence by denying their own past successes." Sorry 'bout that. :-)
In Jesu et Maria,