I love this quote and am definitely in the Camille Paglia mold of 'feminists'. I highly recommend her intro chapter in Sexual Personae if anyone is interested - it's a good summation of her take on things. And, to my mind, *highly* accurate."White middle-class girls at the elite colleges and universities seem to want the world handed to them on a platter. They have been sheltered, coddled, and flattered. Having taught at a wide variety of institutions over my ill-starred career, I have observed that working-class or lower-middle-class girls, who are from financially struggling families and who must take a patchwork of menial off-campus jobs to stay in school, are usually the least hospitable to feminist rhetoric. They see life as it is and have fewer illusions about sex. It is affluent, upper-middle class students who most spout the party line - as if the grisly hyperemotionalism of feminist jargon satisfies their hunger for meaningful experience outside their eventless upbringing. In the absence of war, invent one."
Great point and, for me, quite true.The thing about feminism is that it's a part of leftism, sometimes far leftism. So on top of the negative connotations, there is the heavy association with left politics so any NT women who is a moderate or right-of-center might see a conflict before them, even if they agree with most feminist goals and achievements.
When a certain (formerly - yay!) powerful section of 'feminists' decided that any woman who didn't agree with their rigid ideology was stupid and/or brainwashed by men and/or self-hating. Way to totally invalidate the whole "women should get to make THEIR OWN choices' agenda!When did feminism become such a dirty dirty word?
The first group meeting I attended was built around the notion that men hate women. There was debate, but the group leaders were all of the belief that men, in general, hate women, and that women are too unaware of this. My problems began in that very first meeting when I rejected the idea that men hate women.