To make matters worse, women were barred from owning things, doing things, all kinds of legal rights -- not by the laws of nature but by those of man. If men are collectively blamed for the sins of some upper-class men, why does feminists (including some women) escape criticism for every restrictive law passed with feminist support? The chosen example also highlights the feminist hypocrisy, while providing strong support against the hypothesis of multiple feminisms. Some few upper-class women felt they were being denied what they feel entitled to - yet there is no mention of their denial of the rights of others, such as girls or men, outside of the domain of feminism. The fact that laws are passed based upon the bullshit claims people make about sexual abuse is not exactly a measure of the influence of feminism When the claims are made by feminists, employing feminist "theory", and sponsored by the state, passed by a government favoring enforced feminist "equality", I'd call it a measure of feminist influence. What do you require? An actual feminist Saudi Arabia to admit to major feminist influence? Or would considering the evidence of anti-pedophilia and feminism in Scandinavia be sufficient? I find it curious that some self-proclaimed BLs favor feminism, a major source of the oppression of men, in particular pedophiles, and children. Is it a historical accident - given the lack of BL rights, the increased age of consent didn't matter? A case of lacking attraction to younger boys? A hope that whatever the feminist restrictions are, they will not hit male/male relationships as hard? |