How much has feminism and equality harmed love and romance?

And has the Internet has become an unsatisfactory refuge, where people forget how to relate to one another?


0|0
10|5

Most Helpful Guy

  • I would say that not knowing to treat a woman like a woman, or a man like a man has really damaged romance. I think the internet actually helps people find help for their problems and get more honest answers. Many go through a stage where they are bitter and full of hate, but eventually I think most people come out of it okay, because of the help they can find online.

    0|0
    0|0

What Girls Said 10

  • Have you looked at human civilization at any point in time? Please share your rose colored glasses on how love and romance has always existed. The start of human society/monogamy was not romantic or loving in the least. Families would trade off their sons and daughters to gain higher social status/wealth. Only in the past few decades have people married for love. Love and paring out of "emotion" is a fairly NEW concept to the human race. Pairing has always been out of economic and social necessity.

    You question just goes to show how many people on the internet DON'T READ or know anything.

    1|0
    0|0
    • So you are attacking the premise of my question, which you have taken as romance is older than human civilisation.

      Well, as far as I know, romance goes back a few hundred years before Shakespeare (in literature) and even animals perform colourful dances for their mates, when they could just mate! 'Mating' is primitive romance, for want of a better term, so the unnecessary dances etc are millions of years old. So 'romance', although I did not think of it when writing my question, is much more ancient than money (you suggest the opposite).

      I have read a lot, but this issue seems to me quite taboo in society at the moment. I would say, instead of my question exposing how little people in general read these days, that it actually has revealed how some people cannot be bothered to think about questions.

    • Show All
    • You're welcome I give credit where it is due. Me stating scientific facts isn't mystifying anything. You're trying to romanticizes human pairing when history and documentation account otherwise. Which is why I assume that you don't read as much as you claim, or simply read romantic literature that doesn't reflect the reality of human history and pairing.

      I'm not comparing romance to monogamy, I'm comparing emotions/romantic behavior that is OBSERVABLE in animal mating and pairing. Monogamous animals display emotions and behave in ways that can be described as "romantic" compared to animals that mate seasonally and separate there after.

      The examples you gave are not of romance. Non monogamous animals put on displays to show their strengths and genetic superiority. Animals pair with the purpose of mating to reproduce, not for romance.

    • 'You're trying to romanticizes human pairing' (Grammar! Am I? - Oh...)

      '... account otherwise. Which is why...' (Grammar? lol... come on, you're the supreme arbiter of who reads books and who doesn't! Help! You can do better than this!)

      Ugh,... I don't have time for you, sorry.

  • I don't think it's harmed it. It's changed it, for sure. Many (including myself) would say that it's made those things better. Feminism and equality both mean more respect towards each other, and that can only be a good thing.
    As far as the internet goes, I think that depending on the person, it can either be a help or a hindrance. Personally, I used to be a really shy individual, so to be able to start building a relationship with someone in a non-threatening way, such as over the internet, was amazingly helpful for me. And I don't even necessarily mean online dating sites or anything. Even with Facebook. Like I was able to add my co-workers on there, and we were able to get to know each other in a gentle way, and now they're my best friends in the world. Sometimes that wall can be helpful.

    1|0
    0|1
  • This is an interesting question.

    I don't personally see any difference in my environment with real relationships dealing with real love. Love is love and it accepts one another no matter what feminism or equality says. That understanding between the two is already a given if you're with the right person. However, not everyone IS with the right person, so I do think the internet wedges itself between couples a lot nowadays. Status and relationship updates or lack thereof seem to be the main heartache amongst kids nowadays (and immature adults). But then again, that's just kids for ya.

    0|0
    0|0
  • The internet has ruined people's social skills.

    2|1
    0|0
  • I don't think feminism and equality is the cause. It has to do with us becoming more individualistic, selfish and materialistic. As we get more choices, we discriminate and get details obsessed.

    0|0
    0|0
  • It hasn't. And No.

    1|1
    0|1
  • I'm not for me. Equality and feminism is the reason I can happily go places with my girlfriend

    2|0
    0|1
  • If anything I think it's made it better.

    1|0
    0|1
  • It has not ruined romance. How can two people being equal ruin it?

    1|0
    0|1
  • I feel like it has had a horrible impact on romance, I hate feminism.

    0|1
    2|0

What Guys Said 4

  • I love modern day relationship dynamics.. I dislike traditional routes so I don't think it's hurt love or romance.

    3|0
    0|1
    • Yeah, I think I want to be like you... but online data is not the same as being in person, surely?

    • haha I wouldn't know I've never used online dating sites.

  • It hasn't harmed it. Men and women should always respect eachother equally in a relationship. The feminsit movement has only improved this for the most part. Respet is a needed aspect fo a working relationship no matter what.

    1|0
    0|0
  • It's pretty much destroyed them both.

    0|1
    4|0
  • In your question you lump feminism and equality together as if they are the same. They are not. Feminism has always been about advancing women's interests without regard for men's, and there is nothing "equal" about that. The fact, however, is that feminism has been much more anti-male than pro-female.

    Anyway, what we are really talking about here is equal opportunity, since true equality is an impossibility. Equal outcomes is something that is neither possible nor desirable. To answer your question, I think equal opportunity has been nothing but good, but let's be clear about the fact that feminism has had very little to do with achieving equal opportunity. Feminists love to take credit for every positive societal change that has occurred over the last century (and, of course, none of the bad) but in most cases those positive changes would have happened without feminism, AND without all the harm it did while those positive changes were taking place as a matter of modernization and all that came with it.

    Feminism, as it is taught in our schools and history books, is mostly a myth. Sadly, what is REAL is the hate feminism has spawned and the harm it has done to society and both genders.

    0|0
    1|0
    • Your opinion is interesting, but as much as I would question feminism, it is simply not true that 'positive changes would have happened without feminism,'... any change requires a force and it was not in the interest of most men, at the time, to give women 'equal opportunity', as you say. (I realise in American culture there is a massive distinction between equal opp. and equality).
      Anyway, I should have said in the question perhaps- by 'equality' I mean equality in relationships between the genders. Speaking of assumptions, there is the view (above) that 'equality is just a good thing' between men and women, but obviously it is not, otherwise we'd all be clones of one another, lol.
      However, I can see what you mean about modernisation - because it became an advantage to have a female workforce, (especially during the wars for example), for economic reasons. But I don't think men thought 'hmmm, let's get the women doing our jobs so that we can get richer' because was not issue then.

    • If you believe those changes wouldn't have happened without feminism then you've blindly bought into feminist revisionist history, which is not representative of reality. What feminism was back then (and still is today) is a hate driven anti-male ideology that had nothing to do with the fact that technology and modernization made it possible for women to participate in the world in ways that were never possible in the past. THAT is what drove the changes, not feminism. With those changes came an inevitable shift in attitudes toward the roles women could assume, among both men and woman. That happened independent of feminism.

    • What feminism actually DID do was convince society that the fact that women could not earn a living in the past was oppression, when in reality it was just an artifact of the realities of the world in that era. Women were better suited to tending the household and gardening while men cleared and planted the fields, hunted for meat and protected the family. It wasn't oppression... it was a necessity of family life.

      For the most part women were treated like gold and valued by men. If you believe something else then you have been duped, like the majority of people today, by feminist revisionist history.

Loading...