Your argument is bit circular, as you state that men need to get out of the way, but than state that women are doing fine. I'm not sure which side of the fence your on? If you could clear that up, I would appreciate it.
I said, Women don't need to prove anything, they just needed (past tense)
men to get out of their way, so they could actualize their potential in society, and realize their civil rights--and since that's happened, they've been doing fine.
Is that clearer?
When I was in college, women were actively discriminated against and prevented from entering many areas of employment, or quotas exited, or you just didn't see any female role models in certain areas. Female college students were basically expected to marry and become housewives and mothers or were nudged into traditionally female professions--teaching, nursing, speech therapy, etc. The fact that the women's movement overlapped with the civil rights movement in the 60's helped to start to change all that--that's when the men began to get out of the way, because anti-discrimination laws forced them to stop some, but not all, of the blatant discrimination that had been going on. But, once that door opened, much greater opportunities, and equality, for women became possible, and I do feel women have made slow and steady progress ever since. They have a ways to go, but they continue to make progress.
You state that women are “doing fine”. With this in mind, perhaps you also see modern feminism as pointless?
In the U.S., I'm not sure that modern feminism is necessary, as a separate advocacy group, given that the concept of gender equality, and efforts to attain it, are now ingrained into the broader thinking of the general culture, and are generally shared by men as well. That doesn't mean I think it is pointless.
And, on a global level, I do think it is necessary in other parts of the world, where discrimination of various types still exists, and females are deprived of things as basic as an education, which will hold them back, and limit them, their entire lives.
Do you think that Womens Studies is a discipline worthy of higher education?
I had to look at the current course listings in the Women's Studies area, at a number of colleges and universities, to be able to answer that question. Unless you're currently a college student, you're really unacquainted with these departments. Given the rants I've heard about such courses, in various A2K threads, I fully expected to find them focused on feminist issues and views. That was definitely not the case.
The departments I looked at were all focused on women, in one way or another, but they offered very little in the way of specific teaching about feminist views or feminism, out of a selection of maybe 25 or 30 courses at some of the schools. Most of them were cross-disciplinary, with faculty drawn from a number of other departments, so that courses in women writers, or the depiction of women in Asian art, or the psychology of women, and similar offerings, far out numbered things like the history of feminism, or anything even specifically connected to feminism. They were simply courses that contained information about women, or women's contributions or influence in various areas, that might not be covered in the regular, traditional courses, that usually implicitly focus on men. I saw absolutely nothing connected to any sort of statistics, and nothing that suggested these departments were intended to indoctrinate students in feminism. On the whole, they seemed designed to highlight the contributions and accomplishments, and influence of women, which might otherwise be overlooked and neglected in general courses.
So, did I think the Women's Studies course offerings I looked at were worthwhile or a discipline worthy of higher education? On the whole, I did. I thought they sounded quite interesting, and, if they had had such courses when I was in college, I would have enjoyed taking some of them. I learned next to nothing about women when I was in college.
Actually, proof of an idea is kinda the motivation behind Womens Studies, isn't it? It certainly hasn't made any progress towards this proof, or even built a solid foundation to further its central idea. It's had it's chance, but its still a whirlwind of useless stats that both sides can argue without resolution
Proof of what idea? What "central idea"? I really don't know what you are referring to? You sound like you're referring to some sort of single course on a specific topic, but I really have no idea what you're talking about. How could a diverse, multi-disciplinary area, like Women's Studies, with course offerings and faculty drawn from many areas and departments, be focused on any "central idea"--other than the study of women?
And, as I said, in my previous post, I don't think women, as a whole, have anything they have to prove.
So, why did you say such down right silly things about women in your opening post? Do you really believe the things you said?
Do you really think someone like Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is nothing more than a "sex toy" because of her gender?