From: bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Feminism and Libertarians
Date: 21 Dec 92 14:05:06 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina

In article <1992Dec21.041122.22091@athena.mit.edu> hhuang@athena.mit.edu (Han-Young Huang) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.205810.5848@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
>
>>	I think this is topic worth discussing.  Why are so many
>>libertarians opposed to feminism?  
>
>A libertarian generally denotes someone who agrees with at least a
>goodly number of a set of principles.
>
>Now what does feminism stand for?  Does it stand for:
>
>federally subsidized cheap abortions
>federal affirmative action based on gender 
>pornography banning
>prostitution banning
>guilty-until-proven-innocent sexual harassment laws
>banning of ``sexist'' speech
>and, on an attitudinal level, the making use of any type of injustice,
>	imagined or real, to promote similar authoritarian measures
>?
>
>My question is:
>
>What does feminism have to teach libertarians?  Some vague notions of
>``equality''?  What is ``equality''; does it mean the use of
>government to enforce some level of equalness?  Sounds very
>authoritarian-socialist to me.
>
>On the other hand, if feminists are simply trying to let everybody
>have an equal playing field where everybody's rights are protected,
>then why do they call themselves FEMINists?  Why not support equal
>rights for everybody; why not just be an INDIVIDUAList or
>EVERYBODYist?  Why be so fickle and only support the female cause?
>What type of integrity is that, where one waxes eloquent about
>fairness -- but only specificalaly for females?  After all, we'd like
>everybody to have a fair shake, but some groups deserve to have a
>fairer shake than others, right?
>
>If that's what feminism is, then call me a proud very-anti-feminist
>libertarian.
>
>Han-Young Huang
>hhuang@athena.mit.edu

	The issues you listed are some of the issues that many feminists
support, though many are on the oppisite side of these issues as well.  I
think the bid point your missing in feminism, is that it seeks to
accomplish more than just liberty.  Certainly it advocates equalt rights
for everyone.
	However it does something else.  It examines why the majority
gender of this country was not participating fully in the:
1)  Social life
2)  Academic life
3)  Economic life
4)  Artistic life 
	.
	.
	.

of this country.  In other words it is not simply a legislative meovement.
 As for what it can do for libertarians the answer is simple, votes and
recognician.  The feminists are unhappy with the democrats because they
have split views on many woman's issues.  Parties like the consumer party
of people's socialist party are econically rediculous.  
	The LP might very well be able to actract this group.  As a
philospophy libertarianism might be both aided by and aid feminism. 
Finally the discussion started by noting that there are very lib. females.
 The very antogonistic relationship between the LP and feminism was cited
by one woman on this board as one of her big reasons for not joining the
party.  
	I'm trying to figure out if the antogonism is mandatory (like the
libs would have with say a socialist group), or just ignorance and
misunderstanding.  

--JMB