Too Radical

      I found it very difficult to get through the reading by Atkinson for today. Since the title is Radical Feminism I had expected some unusual and very left-wing ideas and plans for the women of the world, but I was not prepared for some of the statements she threw out to her readers. I was rather shocked.

     But before I jump off of what Ben was saying about Atkinson, I would like to point out that she did indeed have some valid points and ideas. Atkinson wanted all women to band together and fight for their sex. Since we've been reading recently about racism and problems faced by women of color in the women's movement, it was refreshing to see a feminist declare that all women must be incorporated into the fight regardless of race, economic status etc. I say she wanted all women to "fight". This is another point I like that Atkinson made. She wants all women to really try hard and show the world what we are capable of. Given the levels of oppression, it would be well worth it to indeed fight for our freedom. I do not agree however that we should be considering men the enemy....and this is where I begin to dislike Atkinson. 

      She calls men diseased, horrible, and that they continuously act in a deranged manner towards women. She makes the jump that the societal oppression of women simply stems from men alone. She rejects to account for cultural and societal forces that allow for oppression. The unspoken rules, the mindsets, the beliefs that all individuals are instilled with by parents and society are what keeps oppression alive. And the fact that she blames men, as they are apparently the only part of society that could allow for continued oppression, leaves women in her mind completely blameless and flawless of all charges. Yet it is all individuals who contribute. 

      As I continued through the article I found that Atkinson jumped around various topics quite frequently which left me a little confused (I reread the article to make some sense of it.). Until however, I reached the final page at which Atkinson claims that Love is a mental condition...a problem....a reaction to the oppressor....excuse me??

      I have to completely agree with Ben here, Atkinson has gone to the extremes. She alienates male readers and polarizes the women's movement. She is probably the reason (as well as other radical feminists) that all feminists get such a bad rep today. Atkinson went to far, and honestly, she's wrong. We as humans feel love not because of oppression but because of a bond between two people or family members or friends or pets! If I love my cat, according to Atkinson that means that I am being oppressed by my cat.....not likely....

     I just honestly can't understand how Atkinson made that leap. It is as if she believes every woman in the world has Stockholm syndrome, and that no real loving relationships exist. But Atkinson must love someone? No? At least care for a friend or relative? Because if she does, she would know that the point she's trying to make just doesn't work.