Thursday, October 30, 2014

Emerald Web - The Stargate Tapes 1979-1982

http://www.finderskeepersrecords.com/shop/emerald-web-the-stargate-tapes/

Sharing social circles and spiritual ideologies with artists such as Iasos, Connie Demby and Deuter, whilst splitting label release schedules with Laraaji, Laurie Spiegel and Wendy Carlos, the unique Florida raised soul mate duo known as Emerald Web released their privately pressed debut LP at an axis where post-prog rock met proto-new age and ambient electronic music. At the turn of the 1980s Bob Stohl and Kat Epple embarked on a ten-year spir- itual journey playing at planetariums and laser shows above the same Californian silicon city that devised the early computer music software, unify- ing their state of the art modular synth soundscapes and organic compositions of flutes, bells and field recordings and furnishing a self-pressed cassette tapeography of inimitable Emerald Web music for their self-funded Stargate label. Having first communicated via the medium of music as flute players at a South Florida jam session the future space music luminaries would be instru- mental in assisting synthesiser companies via feedback and consultancy in developing instruments such as the Lyricon wind synth (favoured by Suzanne Ciani and Bruno Spoerri) and various sponsored machines for Arp, Buchla, EML, Computone and Orchestron. Named after a laser show formation and combining influences from science fiction films, fantasy novels and a broad musical spectrum including Tangerine Dream, Vangelis, It’s A Beautiful Day and Goro Yamaguchi, Bob and Kat would balance day jobs as synth program- mers as well as TV and film soundtrackers under the moniker BobKat Productions (counting microscope nature documentarian Carl Sagan amongst their clients) with evening synthesiser shows at galleries, spiritual centres and even punk clubs. This compilation album comprises early tracks from Emerald Web’s debut vinyl release and the following four rare cassette only albums on Stargate Records from 1979-1982 before the band recorded their bestselling (and Grammy nominated) albums for labels affiliated with Germany’s Kuckuck and Larry Fast before Bob Stohl’s sad and untimely death in 1989.

http://avalancheofamillionhearts.blogspot.fi/2014/02/emerald-web.html

https://www.youtube.com/user/markusfuller/videos

https://www.youtube.com/user/markusfuller/videos

Sunday, October 26, 2014

The Feminist Movement (Women's Lib)


The Feminist Movement (Women's Lib)

The Feminist Movement (Women's Lib)

Postby dogman » Thu May 01, 2014 1:50 pm
The feminist movement was social programming by the CIA, the Ford Foundation and other globalist organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations. The CFR is a creation of John D. Rockefeller and is run by his grandson, David Rockefeller. This is all well documented. Ms. Steinem herself has admitted this, although she didn’t want the information to get out in the 1970’s. Under “Operation Mockingbird” the CIA infiltrated the US media organizations and recruited writers and broadcasters to control what we refer to as the “main stream media.” The CIA has been practicing spying on dissidents since the 1950’s in what they call COINTELPRO operations, or “Counter Intelligence Programs.” Cord Meyers of the CIA recruited Steinem into the CIA in 1958. Her job was to direct “activists” in a group called the “Independent Research Service.”

The following some snips from an article published in The Village Voice on May 21, 1979.

http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listse rv.aol.com/msg02217.html

“Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem”

by Nancy Borman

The near-total blackout on the Steinem/Random House censorship story is reminiscent of the level of enthusiasm Redstockings encountered when they first tried to get coverage for the story of Steinem and the CIA.

Their 16-page tabloid "press release" charging that Steinem had covered up a 10-year association with the CIA and that Ms. magazine, which she had founded, was endangering the women's liberation movement struck the 1975 MORE conference like a new war coming over the wire. The hotel was abuzz and people snatched up the releases, but when it came to actually writing the story, nearly everyone bowed out. One reporter criticized the women for not obtaining Steinem's side of the story before publishing the release. Others skimmed the material and dismissed it as old news, which was partially true. Still others thought it was McCarthyistic both in tone and casual conclusions.

In 1967 both the New York Times and the Washington Post carried interviews with Steinem in the wake of Ramparts' expose of CIA funding of the National Student Association and other organizations. Steinem was the founder and director of one of those groups, Independent Research Service, for which she had solicited and obtained CIA money to carry out covert operations at Communist youth festivals in Vienna and Helsinki in 1959 and 1952. Unlike most of the other principals in the scandal, who had repudiated their past work with the agency and turned over information to the press, Steinem defended her secret deal with the CIA, calling the undermining of the youth festivals "the CIA's finest hour."

There’s a lot more background in the article, but I’ll let you go to the link above and read it yourself. Basically, Gloria Steinem was part of the CIA's "Operation Mockingbird."

“Operation Mockingbird”

This CIA operation was the infiltration of corporate media in an effort to take over major news outlets. Deborah Davis’ book, “Katharine the Great : Katharine Graham and Her Washington Post Empire,” shows that the CIA “owned” journalists of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other media outlets. A quote from Ms. Davis’ book.

“By the early 1950´s, the CIA owned respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communication vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all according to a former CIA analyst."

The CIA admitted in 1982 that reporters on the CIA payroll had acted as case officers for field agents. Philip Graham, who published the Washington Post, ran the operation until his suicide in 1963. Graham has been quoted as saying, “you could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple of hundred dollars a month.” Allen Dulles of the CIA oversaw the operation.

Here’s a link to an article by writer, Alex Constantine on Operation Mockingbird that gives a good overview of the project.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCH O/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html

Tales from the Crypt: The Depraved Spies and Moguls of the CIA's Operation MOCKINGBIRD

Here’s a link to an article about Operation Mockingbird.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JF Kmockingbird.htm

There are numerous links in the about article on a lot of the prominent players in this project.

There is ample documentation on the internet and in books making the CIA-Steinem connection and Operation Mockingbird. Do the research if you’re still skeptical about this issue.

The next big question is “why.” Why would the CIA want to infiltrate the mainstream media? If you read enough about Operation Mockingbird, the original impetus was to counteract communist groups and provide propaganda that would produce loyalty to the American government. It sounds innocent enough, but it got twisted into a total control of what is supposed to be a “free press.” It hasn’t been “free” for decades. Another interesting topic to research is the CIA’s “family jewels” information released on June 26, 2007 under a Freedom of Information request. It documents the CIA’s meddling in US media and the illegal wiretapping of journalists and dissidents. Here’s a link to a site that has all the details.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSA EBB222/index.htm

Another big “why” question, is why did the CIA want to infiltrate and guide the women’s liberation movement? Nicholas Rockefeller, of the powerful Rockefeller family, had befriended filmmaker Aaron Russo, during the 1990’s. According to Russo, Rockefeller had told him that the Rockefeller Foundation had helped to fund the feminist movement. 
There were several reasons for this. One, it got women into the work force. This provided more income for taxation. 

Second, it got kids in government funded schools at an earlier age for indoctrination. 
The intent was to break up the traditional family and the acceptance of the government as the primary family. Here’s an article on Russo and his memories of his relationship with Nick Rockefeller.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/ja nuary2007/290107rockefellergoal.htm

Russo reveals a lot more than just the manipulation of the women’s liberation movement in this article. There are also a few videos of Aaron Russo being interviewed about his relationship with Nick Rockefeller. Here’s a link to a 15-minute clip from the interview.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid 
=1263677258215075609&q=aaron+russo&total= 
414&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex= 2
User avatar
dogman
 
Posts: 4477
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 8:22 am

Re: The Feminist Movement (Women's Lib)

Postby dogman » Thu May 01, 2014 1:53 pm
GLORIA STEINEM: HOW THE CIA USED FEMINISM TO DESTABILIZE SOCIETY
By Henry Makow Ph.D. 

July 1, 2002 

“In the 1960’s, the elite media invented second-wave feminism as part of the elite agenda to dismantle civilization and create a New World Order."

Since writing these words last week, I have discovered that before she became a feminist leader, Gloria Steinem worked for the CIA spying on Marxist students in Europe and disrupting their meetings. She became a media darling due to her CIA connections. MS Magazine, which she edited for many years was indirectly funded by the CIA. 

Steinem has tried to suppress this information, unearthed in the 1970’s by a radical feminist group called “Red Stockings.” In 1979, Steinem and her powerful CIA-connected friends, Katharine Graham of the Washington Post and Ford Foundation President Franklin Thomas prevented Random House from publishing it in “Feminist Revolution.” Nevertheless the story appeared in the “Village Voice” on May 21, 1979. 

Steinem has always pretended that she had been a student radical. “When I was in college, it was the McCarthy era,” she told Susan Mitchell in 1997, “and that made me a Marxist.” (Icons, Saints and Divas: Intimate Conversations with Women who Changed the World 1997. p 130) Her bio-blurb in June 1973 MS. Magazine states: “Gloria Steinem has been a freelance writer all her professional life. Ms magazine is her first full-time salaried job.” 

Not true. Raised in an impoverished, dysfunctional family in Toledo Ohio, Steinem somehow managed to attend elite Smith College, Betty Friedan’s alma mater. After graduating in 1955, Steinem received a “Chester Bowles Student Fellowship” to study in India. Curiously, an Internet search reveals that this fellowship has no existence apart from Gloria Steinem. No one else has received it. 

In 1958, Steinem was recruited by CIA’s Cord Meyers to direct an “informal group of activists” called the “Independent Research Service.” This was part of Meyer’s “Congress for Cultural Freedom,” which created magazines like “Encounter” and “Partisan Review” to promote a left-liberal chic to oppose Marxism. Steinem, attended Communist-sponsored youth festivals in Europe, published a newspaper, reported on other participants, and helped to provoke riots. 

One of Steinem’s CIA colleagues was Clay Felker. In the early 1960’s, he became an editor at Esquire and published articles by Steinem which established her as a leading voice for women’s lib. In 1968, as publisher of New York Magazine, he hired her as a contributing editor, and then editor of Ms. Magazine in 1971. Warner Communications put up almost all the money although it only took 25% of the stock. Ms. Magazine’s first publisher was Elizabeth Forsling Harris, a CIA-connected PR executive who planned John Kennedy’s Dallas motorcade route. Despite its anti establishment image, MS magazine attracted advertising from the crème of corporate America. It published ads for ITT at the same time as women political prisoners in Chile were being tortured by Pinochet, after a coup inspired by the US conglomerate and the CIA. 

Steinem’s personal relationships also belie her anti establishment pretensions. She had a nine-year relationship with Stanley Pottinger, a Nixon-Ford assistant attorney general, credited with stalling FBI investigations into the assassinations of Martin Luther King, and the ex-Chilean Foreign Minister Orlando Latelier. In the 1980’s, she dated Henry Kissinger. For more details, see San Francisco researcher Dave Emory. 

Our main misconception about the CIA is that it serves US interests. In fact, it has always been the instrument of a dynastic international banking and oil elite (Rothschild, Rockefeller, Morgan) coordinated by the Royal Institute for Internal Affairs in London and their US branch, the Council for Foreign Relations. It was established and peopled by blue bloods from the New York banking establishment and graduates of Yale University’s secret pagan “Skull and Bones” society. Our current President, his father and grandfather fit this profile. 

The agenda of this international cabal is to degrade the institutions and values of the United States in order to integrate it into a global state that it will direct through the United Nations. In its 1947 Founding Charter, the CIA is prohibited from engaging in domestic activities. However this has never stopped it from waging a psychological war on the American people. The domestic counterpart of the “Congress for Cultural Freedom” was the “American Committee for Cultural Freedom.” Using foundations as conduits, the CIA controlled intellectual discourse in the 1950’s and 1960’s, and I believe continues to do so today. In “The Cultural Cold War,” Francis Stonor Saunders estimates that a thousand books were produced under the imprint of a variety of commercial and university presses, with covert subsidies. 

The CIA’s “Project Mockingbird” involved the direct infiltration of the corporate media, a process that often included direct takeover of major news outlets. “By the early 1950’s,” writes Deborah Davis, in her book “Katherine the Great,” the CIA owned respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communication vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all.” In 1982 the CIA admitted that reporters on the CIA payroll have acted as case officers to agents in the field. Philip Graham, publisher of the Washington Post, who ran the operation until his “suicide” in 1963, boasted that “you could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple of hundred dollars a month.” 

I was born in 1949. Idealists in my parent’s generation were disillusioned when the Communist dream of universal brotherhood turned out to be a shill for a brutal despotism. My own generation may discover that our best instincts have also been manipulated and exploited. There is evidence that the 60’s drug counter culture, the civil rights movement, and anti-war movement, like feminism, were CIA directed. For example, the CIA has admitted setting up the (National Student Association as a front in 1947 http://www.cia-on-campus.org/nsa/nsa2.html). In the early 1950’s the NSA opposed the attempts of the House Un American Activities Committee to root out Communist spies. According to Phil Agee Jr., NSA officers participated in the activities of SNCC, the militant civil rights group, and Students for a Democratic Society, a radical peace group. 

According to Mark Riebling, the CIA also may have used Timothy Leary. Certainly the agency distributed LSD to Leary and other opinion makers in the 1960s. Leary made a generation of Americans turn away from active participation in society and seek fulfillment “within.” In another example of the CIA’s use of drugs to interfere in domestic politics, Gary Webb describes how in the 1980’s, the CIA flooded Black ghettos with cocaine. 

I won’t attempt to analyze the CIA’s motivation except to suggest what they have in common: They demoralized, alienated and divided Americans. The elite operates by fostering division and conflict in the world. Thus, we don’t realize who the real enemy is. For the same reason, the CIA and elite foundations also fund the diversity and multicultural movements. 

Feminism has done the most damage. There is no more fundamental yet delicate relationship in society than male and female. On it depends the family, the red blood cell of society. Nobody with the interests of society at heart would try to divide men and women. Yet the lie that men have exploited women has become the official orthodoxy. 

Man loves woman. His first instinct is to nurture (“husband”) and see her thrive. When a woman is happy, she is beautiful. Sure, some men are abusive. But the vast majority have supported and guided their families for millennium. 

Feminists relentlessly advance the idea that our inherent male and female characteristics, crucial to our development as human beings, are mere “stereotypes.” This is a vicious calumny on all heterosexuals, 95% of the population. Talk about hate! Yet it is taught to children in elementary schools! It is echoed in the media. Lesbians like Rosie O’Donnell are advanced as role models. 

All of this is calculated to create personal confusion and sow chaos among heterosexuals. As a result, millions of American males are emasculated and divorced from their relationship to family (the world and the future.) The American woman has been hoodwinked into investing herself in a mundane career instead of the timeless love of her husband and children. Many women have become temperamentally unfit to be wives and mothers. People, who are isolated and alone, stunted and love-starved, are easy to fool and manipulate. Without the healthy influence of two loving parents, so are their children. 

Feminism is a grotesque fraud perpetrated on society by its governing elite. It is designed to weaken the American social and cultural fabric in order to introduce a friendly fascist New World Order. Its advocates are sanctimonious charlatans who have grown rich and powerful from it. They include a whole class of liars and moral cripples who work for the elite in various capacities: government, education and the media. These imposters ought to be exposed and ridiculed. 

Women’s oppression is a lie. Sex roles were never as rigid as feminists would have us believe. My mother had a successful business in the 1950’s importing watchstraps from Switzerland. When my father’s income increased, she was content to quit and concentrate on the children. Women were free to pursue careers if they wanted to. The difference was that their role as wife and mother was understood, and socially validated, as it should be. 

Until Gloria Steinem and the CIA came along.
User avatar
dogman
 
Posts: 4477
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 8:22 am

Re: The Feminist Movement (Women's Lib)

Postby dogman » Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:45 am
The terms "feminism" or "feminist" first appeared in France and the Netherlands in 1872 (as les féministes),[13] Great Britain in the 1890s, and the United States in 1904.[14][15][16] The Oxford English Dictionary lists 1894 for the first appearance of "feminist" and 1895 for "feminism".[17] The British Daily News introduced "feminist" to the English language in a report from France.[12] Before this time, the term more commonly used was "Woman's Rights". One professor of government uses the term feminism to label women's rights partisanship including that prior to the word feminism coming into vogue in 1913.[18]

People and activists who discussed or advanced women's equality prior to the existence of the feminist movement are sometimes labeled protofeminist.[8] Some scholars, however, criticize this term's usage.[6][19][why?] Some argue that it diminishes the importance of earlier contributions,[20] while others argue that feminism does not have a single, linear history as implied by terms such as protofeminist or postfeminist.[12]

Around 24 centuries ago,[21] Plato, according to Elaine Hoffman Baruch, "[argued] for the total political and sexual equality of women, advocating that they be members of his highest class, ... those who rule and fight".[22]

French writer Christine de Pizan (1364 – c. 1430), the author of The Book of the City of Ladies and Epître au Dieu d'Amour (Epistle to the God of Love) is cited by Simone de Beauvoir as the first woman to denounce misogyny and write about the relation of the sexes.[23] Other early feminist writers include Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa and Modesta di Pozzo di Forzi, who worked in the 16th century,[24] and the 17th-century writers Hannah Woolley in England,[25] Juana Inés de la Cruz in Mexico,[26] Marie Le Jars de Gournay, Anne Bradstreet, and François Poullain de la Barre.[24]

One of the most important 17th-century feminist writers in the English language was Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle-upon-Tyne.[27][28][29][why?]

The Age of Enlightenment was characterized by secular intellectual reasoning and a flowering of philosophical writing. Many Enlightenment philosophers defended the rights of women, including Jeremy Bentham (1781), Marquis de Condorcet (1790), and, perhaps most notably, Mary Wollstonecraft (1792).[30] Other important writers of the time that expressed feminist views included Catherine Macaulay[31] and Hedvig Charlotta Nordenflycht.

The English utilitarian and classical liberal philosopher Jeremy Bentham said that it was the placing of women in a legally inferior position that made him choose the career of a reformist at the age of eleven. Bentham spoke for complete equality between sexes including the rights to vote and to participate in government. He opposed the asymmetrical sexual moral standards between men and women.[32]

In his Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1781), Bentham strongly condemned many countries' common practice to deny women's rights due to allegedly inferior minds.[33] Bentham gave many examples of able female regents.

Marquis de Condorcet. Nicolas de Condorcet was a mathematician, classical liberal politician, leading French revolutionary, republican, and Voltairean anti-clericalist. He was also a fierce defender of human rights, including the equality of women and the abolition of slavery, unusual for the 1780s. He advocated for women's suffrage in the new government in 1790 with De l'admission des femmes au droit de cité (For the Admission to the Rights of Citizenship For Women) and an article for Journal de la Société de 1789.[34][35][36]

Main articles: A Vindication of the Rights of Woman and Mary Wollstonecraft

First edition print of A Vindication of the Rights of WomanPerhaps the most cited feminist writer of the time was Mary Wollstonecraft, often characterized as the first feminist philosopher. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) is one of the first works that can unambiguously be called feminist, although by modern standards her comparison of women to the nobility, the elite of society (coddled, fragile, and in danger of intellectual and moral sloth) may at first seem dated as a feminist argument. Wollstonecraft identified the education and upbringing of women as creating their limited expectations based on a self-image dictated by the male gaze. Despite her perceived inconsistencies (Miriam Brody referred to the "Two Wollstonecrafts")[37] reflective of problems that had no easy answers, this book remains a foundation stone of feminist thought.[3]

Wollstonecraft believed that both genders contributed to inequality. She took women's considerable power over men for granted, and determined that both would require education to ensure the necessary changes in social attitudes. Given her humble origins and scant education, her personal achievements speak to her own determination. Wollstonecraft attracted the mockery of Samuel Johnson, who described her and her ilk as "Amazons of the pen". Based on his relationship with Hester Thrale,[38] he complained of women's encroachment onto a male territory of writing, and not their intelligence or education. For many commentators, Wollstonecraft represents the first codification of equality feminism, or a refusal of the feminine role in society.[39][40]

19th century 
Author and scholar Helen Kendrick Johnson opposed women's suffrage. 19th-century feminists reacted to cultural inequities including the pernicious widespread acceptance of the Victorian image of women's "proper" role and "sphere".[41] This "feminine ideal" was typified in Victorian conduct books such as Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management and Sarah Stickney Ellis's books.[42] The Angel in the House (1854) and El ångel del hogar, bestsellers by Coventry Patmore and Maria del Pilar Sinués de Marco, came to symbolize the Victorian feminine ideal.[43] Queen Victoria herself disparaged the concept of feminism, which she described in private letters as the "mad, wicked folly of 'Woman's Rights".[44][45]

The charismatic and controversial[clarification needed] Pankhursts formed the Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU) in 1903. As Emmline Pankhurst put it, they viewed votes for women no longer as "a right, but as a desperate necessity". At the state level, Australia and the United States had already granted suffrage to some women. American feminists such as Susan B Anthony (1902) visited Britain. While WSPU was the best-known suffrage group, it was only one of many, such as the Women's Freedom League and the National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies (NUWSS) led by Millicent Garrett Fawcett. WSPU was largely a family affair, although externally financed. Christabel Pankhurst became the dominant figure and gathered friends such as Annie Kenney, Flora Drummond, Teresa Billington, Ethel Smythe, Grace Roe, and Norah Dacre Fox (later known as Norah Elam) around her. Veterans such as Elizabeth Garrett also joined.

In 1906, the Daily Mail first labeled these women "suffragettes" as a form of ridicule, but the term was quickly embraced in Britain to describe the more militant form of suffragism visible in public marches, distinctive green, purple, and white emblems, and the Artists' Suffrage League's dramatic graphics. Even underwear in WPSU colors appeared in stores. They feminists learned to exploit photography and the media, and left a vivid visual record including images such as the 1914 photograph of Emmeline. As the movement gained momentum, deep divisions separated the former leaders from the radicals. The splits were usually ideological or tactical. Even Christabel's sister, Sylvia, was expelled

The protests slowly became more violent, and included heckling, banging on doors, smashing shop windows, and arson. Emily Davison, a WSPU member, unexpectedly ran onto the track during the 1913 Epsom Derby and died under the King's horse. These tactics produced mixed results of sympathy and alienation. As many protesters were imprisoned and went on hunger-strike, the British government was left with an embarrassing situation. From these political actions, the suffragists successfully created publicity around their institutional discrimination and sexism.

Source is wikipedia
User avatar
dogman
 
Posts: 4477
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 8:22 am

Re: The Feminist Movement (Women's Lib)

Postby dogman » Sun Oct 26, 2014 7:25 am
Feminism and Education

By its very nature, feminism studies what feminists perceive to be a male-dominated society where historically girls and women have been ‘kept in their place’ while men have dominated areas such as politics, education, the military etc. How has feminism impacted education and schooling? 

In the past girls have academically underachieved. At present girls are achieving better than boys if GCSE results are used as the criteria for success. Before the National Curriculum, it was not unusual for girls to pick subjects that prepared them for their futures as mothers and housewives. Cookery or Home Economics were seen as the subjects that many girls should follow whereas for some science was irrelevant. 

Feminists believe society is male dominated –in other words it is a patriarchy. Feminists also believe that society is based on conflict between the sexes. They believe that women have historically been disadvantaged in society and that men historically have had more power than women. Feminists believe this is wrong and needs changing. There are many different feminist theories but they all share things in common – they look at the differences in society between men and women and try to see how these problems could be solved. Feminists believe that education is an agent of secondary socialisation that helps to enforce patriarchy. They look at society on a MACRO scale. They want to generalise their ideas about males and females to the whole of society. 

Liberal feminism: Liberal feminists are the feminists who believe that the best way to fight patriarchal systems is by establishing legislation to fight discrimination. e.g. the right for some women to vote in 1918 and finally all women to vote in 1928 were liberal feminist approaches. The proposed and failed Equal Rights Amendment of the early 1980s was also a liberal feminist approach. This school of thought believes women would achieve better equality if they were just more visible in the current social structure. Liberal feminists believe changes in equal opportunities and educational policies, e.g. the National Curriculum, will end patriarchy. 

Socialist/Marxist Feminism: These feminists believe that it is the gendered division of labour that contributes to women's inequality. The fact that men have historically been paid more and get higher position in companies plays a big part. A Socialist/Marxist feminist would point out the fact that the majority of people who stay at home to raise children and take care of the home are women. A Marxist feminist believes that women are oppressed based on gender and class inequalities. 

Multicultural/Women-of-Colour Feminism: These feminists believe that the traditional schools of feminist thought have been created by middle-class white women. They did not recognize that women-of-colour may also be oppressed based on racial inequalities. This school of thought argues for separate feminist thoughts like "womanism" (for African-American women, and also separate movements for Latina feminists, Native American feminists, etc.)

Radical Feminism: Radical feminists believe that the biggest oppression at work in our society is based on gender. Some believe a married woman can't be a feminist or that straight women can't be feminist. All-in-all it comes down to the argument that any dependence on men will equal the oppression of women. Although not all radical feminists are lesbians, this is the school of thought that has been influenced by a lot of lesbian separatist groups. Radical feminists believe patriarchy will only end when women are freed from the physical and emotional violence inflicted by men in the classroom and the playground. 

Many feminists believe that women are being suppressed by a male-dominated society both in education and also in later life. They argue that the curriculum is more based around traditionally male-dominated subjects. Thus it sets up men more than women for further education or more prosperous work opportunities. Coupled with this is the stereotypical view of a woman's part in society - of becoming housewives, marrying early and having children. Feminists argue that this contributes to the suppression put on women by the male-run society. 

Sociologists Heaton and Lawson (1996) argue that the 'hidden' curriculum is a major source of gender socialisation within schools. They believe that schools seemed to show or have: text books with modern family culture and where children are taught from an early age that males are dominant within the family; various subjects are aimed at a certain gender group, for example Food Technology would be aimed at females, leading on to the typical role of females doing housework and cooking; sports in schools are very much male and female dominated within the education system, with boys playing rugby and cricket while girls play netball and rounders. It could be seen that the majority of teachers are female, but that the senior management positions are mainly male-dominated, although this is not the case in some schools. 

The basic assumption shared by feminists is that the gender of divisions in society operate to the disadvantage of women. The process of gender socialisation usually encourages traditional gender roles which reinforce and justify male dominance. Feminists have shown that the so called natural differences between men and women are not true. Women are perfectly capable of building a successful career as men are. Feminists have helped transform many of our assumptions on gender. Women no longer feel their only goal in life is marriage and children. In 1976 Sharpe interviewed girls regarding their aspirations in life. They put when love and marriage as their top priorities in life with a career at the bottom. Twenty years later, she found that a job and career were top of the list for girls with marriage and children at the bottom. 

Courtesy of Lee Bryant, Director of Sixth Form, Anglo-European School, Ingatestone, Essex
User avatar
dogman
 
Posts: 4477
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 8:22 am
  

http://chrisspivey.org/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1792