tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8248707.post8001479631657066162..comments2023-08-14T16:35:49.756+01:00Comments on Cruella-blog: How Women's Rights Could Actually Save The PlanetCruellahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03446805038957924958noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8248707.post-28532601931727591602010-12-21T07:32:49.707+00:002010-12-21T07:32:49.707+00:00I have commented on your article on Pickled Politi...I have commented on your article on Pickled Politics.<br /><br />http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/11111<br /><br />I had more to say, but they're not really that interested there. I have to confess to being a white male (pinkish, that is), but at least I'm not middle class.Trofimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02471793476279541681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8248707.post-89389192062469304152010-12-18T23:10:56.206+00:002010-12-18T23:10:56.206+00:00Peter Preston claims he is concerned about climate...Peter Preston claims he is concerned about climate change but in fact he advocates eugenics as the supposed answer. Nothing new there Preston because did you not know that our male supremacist society has always practiced control over women's reproductive and sexual rights. It is called male domination over women and girls.<br /><br />Eugenics is a cover word for powerful white men defining which women, girls and of course not forgetting marginalised men will be subjected to sterilisation because these groups supposedly reproduce inferior children.<br /><br />Oh and by the way Preston last time I checked males play almost a 50% role in reproduction - but that fact has apparently bypassed your understanding of the issues.<br /><br />I was not aware women themselves reproduce a child/children, especially since our patriarchal society claims that women have men's babies - meaning of course women are empty vessels waiting to be filled with a man's child. But of course male supremacy was never concerned with factual biological reproduction but instead continues to 'reproduce' (sic) lies that only men are the ones who actually create a foetus, whereas the woman's body is merely the recepticle for the man's foetus. Hence the common misogynistic claim that 'a woman has a man's child!' Wrong - a woman gives birth to her child whereas the man fathers a child. But Preston you aren't concerned with that fact are you?<br /><br />What would work Preston is for male supremacy to be dismantled and for women's sexual autonomy and ownership of their bodies and sexuality to finally be recognised by men, particularly white powerful men. Women have for centuries been subjected to male domination and male control over their bodies and sexuality because as if you didn't know - women's sexuality and bodies exist for male use/abuse. This is why women's reproductivity continues to be controlled by men in men's interests. <br /><br />So Preston when are you going to tell men they do not have 24/7 sexual rights to women. After all you claim to be concerned about climate change do you not?<br /><br />Oh but I forget you just want child benefit to cease, which of course will benefit the white powerful men but not women. How convenient then that yet again we have another man demanding men's interests and men's pseudo rights must supercede women's rights and women's ownership of their bodies and their sexuality. <br /><br />As I said above - men not women are still the ones who control women's sexuality and women's reproductivity.JENNIFER DREWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02112807166372869685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8248707.post-83869680887299797272010-12-18T10:01:05.383+00:002010-12-18T10:01:05.383+00:00This is brilliant Kate. Right on the nail. The p...This is brilliant Kate. Right on the nail. The perfect response.<br /><br />Only one tiny quibble with last paragraph. We not only "can" address population issues through the empowerment of women, we must. It is a pre-condition.<br /><br />The empowerment of women and girls has been repeatedly linked with the achievement of a whole slew of social and economic goals. Just as economic equality correlates with a range of broad benefits for all, so does gender equality.<br /><br />The UN has loads of data on this, for example its annual Human Development Report, and State of the Worlds Women.<br /><br />Whatever one might think of the UN, it does have good statistics, and has explicitly stated that the one thing that would consistently lead to reduced poverty (tightly linked with reductions in fertility) is the education of girls, and yet few governments really drive this priority. Very often for religious reasons, totally agree, but also widespread cultural prejudice, conservatism and straight-out male supremacism, often rooted in religion but sustained independently of it.Sarah Louisehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07171313931700896999noreply@blogger.com