You apparently missed the dripping sarcasm in my previous post...it definitely wasn't about feminism at all, so I don't know why you are harping on feminism again in your response to me.
If feminism is just about furthering the interest of the afluent white female, count me out. Change all fortune 500 male CEOs by female ones, and all congressmen by congresswomen, and see if I care.
I used to rout for a different kind of feminism, more generous and less narrow minded, the one that cared for poor women and those from ethnic and religious minorities. The feminism that cared about how well boys were being raised and not just girls, because these boys were sons of women and would tomorrow be the companions of other women's daughters.
Who, other than you, says that feminism is "just about furthering the interest of the affluent white female?" That's totally inaccurate, as I previously pointed out to you, but your mindset is so rigidly fixed it seems incapable of absorbing new or contradicting information.
Regarding caring about poorer women, and minority women, this is N.O.W.'s current position:
NOW is a multi-issue, multi-strategy organization that takes a holistic approach to women’s rights. Our priorities are winning economic equality and securing it with an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that will guarantee equal rights for women; championing abortion rights, reproductive freedom and other women’s health issues; opposing racism; fighting bigotry against the LGBT community; and ending violence against women.
NOW advocates for wide range of economic justice issues affecting women, from the glass ceiling to the sticky floor of poverty. These include welfare reform, livable wages, job discrimination, pay equity, housing, social security and pension reform, and much more.
NOW condemns the racism that inflicts a double burden of race and sex discrimination on women of color. Seeing human rights as indivisible, we are committed to identifying and fighting against those barriers to equality and justice that are imposed by racism. A leader in the struggle for civil rights since its inception in 1966, NOW is committed to diversifying our movement, and we continue to fight for equal opportunities for women of color in all areas including employment, education and reproductive rights. NOW’s Combatting Racism Committee is working to encourage growth at all levels within NOW of multiracial task forces to combat racism.
Where is the lack of concern, by N.O.W., for poorer or minority women that you claim exists?
Even though you want feminism to be as concerned with the welfare of little boys as it is with little girls, there is a corresponding men's movement, called Masculism/Masculinism, as incessantly represented in this thread by nononono, and those groups, the male counterparts of feminism, show no concern with the welfare of little girls, their concerns focus on boys and men.
And, unlike N.O.W., which does address issues affecting women of color, and which supports LGBT rights and same sex marriage, this men's movement tends to mainly focus on the concerns of white heterosexual men
Melissa Blais and Francis Dupuis-Déri. "Masculinism and the Antifeminist Countermovement." Social Movement Studies: Journal of Social, Cultural and Political Protest 11:1 (2012): 21–39.
So, the complaints you have could be lodged at masculinists as well. So why are you directing them against only the women's groups? Special interest groups are special interest groups.
A feminism which is apparently sooo dead by now that its mere evocation is deemed absurd by well-informed people such as yourself...
No matter how many times I tell you I do not
view feminism as absurd, you persist in repeating that distortion, apparently willfully and intentionally.
I view feminism as somewhat obsolete and unnecessary now in the U.S., mainly because I think they have largely achieved the goals of second-wave feminism, civil rights issues have been addressed, gender roles have expanded, the issues and concerns have been identified, and women have become more empowered, and assertive, to speak up and speak out, on their own behalf, without a dedicated advocacy movement.
And, right now, I don't think there are galvanizing social gender issues that require feminism to wake people up about them. In other words, I think those earlier feminists did a good job--they got the necessary process of social change started, we now have both male and female activists addressing and speaking out about concerns of women, and now the larger society must continue working to improve things more, and to make sure that previous gains--like abortion rights--are not lost.
I'm not interested in yet another 'special interest' lobby.
Then shouldn't you be as equally critical of the Masculism/Masculinism groups, and their male advocacy movement, as you are of feminist groups?