This article talks about the first female elected president of Iceland, talking about the worrisome nature of extreme feminism. Although she doesn't name names, this is the kind of thing that has got here worried
Another thing I believe could be the reason for thinking that the feminist movement is too extremist are recent comments made by Ms. Gudrun Jonsdottir, a spokeswoman of one of the most prominent and best funded feminist organization in Iceland, Stigamot. Only a few months back, she publicly spoke favorably towards diminishing the human rights of men only. This she did by claiming that the ideology of assuming a man innocent until proven guilty is outdated in light of feminist research and therefore indicated that this cornerstone of the Icelandic justice system should be abolished. This right of people, that are accused of crimes, is clearly stated in the Icelandic constitution, The European human rights treaty and the United Nations human rights treaty and thus is not just a mere ideology.
Gudrun’s words are not an isolated incident. Other feminists have spoken favorably about reversing the burden of proof in crimes that are committed against women and the NoF cheerfully shared her words on their official Facebook page later to become the most popular record on that page ever, measured in shares and likes. One could have expected that the state funded Center for Gender Equality would utter a sound in protest to such blatantly male discriminating views but nothing has still been heard. Reaffirming the belief of many, that the Center for Gender Equality is actually a Center for Women rights only and not the least bit concerned with men’s rights.
Gudrun’s organization, Stigamot, are almost entirely funded with taxpayers money and to this date, her words seem not to have worried the Icelandic government even though Iceland is part of international treaties that explicitly state that being assumed innocent until proven guilty, should be the cornerstone of a nations justice system if it is to be considered in favor of human rights.
I would have dismissed this incident as an example of the raging left, were it not for the fact that the CGE has said nothing. Isn't this a fairly clear example of feminism going too far.
Yes i totally agree that gender roles suck but we cannot permit behaviour simply because of gender expectations. We can understand it though. I do see your point about the longevity of sentences for men and that is a problem of gender equality. I think more women should be encouraged into traditionally masculine jobs and roles and more men into traditionally female ones as it might alleviate the bias and ideals we have for each gender. Perhaps if there were more female police and judges the justice system would be more fair to men. for example only female police can search women so that could be why more men get arrested for drugs?
However i do think men commit more violent crimes. Gender expectations are part of the problem but I think there are other factors at work. I think there are biological elements at work too. In early hunter gatherer societies and primate societies it is clear that males behave biologically different to females in certain situations. The biological role each one plays has an effect on their behaviour. Females reproduce, take care of their young and rely mostly on fruit etc whilst the males compete with each other for the females and hunt for meat. At some point we stopped evolving biologically because we were able to evolve technologically there was no need for our bodies to adapt once we started using tools. Therefore our bodies still carry some memory of these primal instincts. Men had to be more aggressive and impulsive at one point in time because of the role they played in society of course we have socially evolved since . When you know the origins of culture it becomes more clear that culture must be in harmony with our biological natures. thats why I get so annoyed with the patriarchal world we live in is it is proven not to co-exist well with our biological nature.
"Historically males and females have been under different selection pressures, which are reflected by biochemical and behavioural differences between the sexes," said Dr Joohyung Lee, from the Prince Henry's Institute in Melbourne. (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-03-30/man-woman/31...)
In Anthropology it is believed by many that matrilineal societies (such as the Trobrianders) are the original types of society and they seem to be more in tune than the patriarchal we now think of as natural. For example, A father is considered a 'stranger' to his child in terms of inheritence and obligation and authority (these are all from the uncle) but encouraged and expected by society to form a close friendship with his child and he does. He is the chief caregiver.
'the research indicates that men are more aggressive than women because the part of the brain that modulates aggression is smaller in men than it is in women. Both genders have about the same ability to produce emotions, but when it comes to keeping those emotions in check, men have been shortchanged.'(http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97882&page=1#.T7vqHRz...)
The thing is in some tribes and cultures men are not believed to have anything to do with conception and yet women do not treat them the same way as men do in societies where it is believed that semen and nothing else creates a baby. 'Because in a patriarchy 'men rule over women', a matriarchy has frequently been conceptualized as 'women ruling over men', whereas in reality women-centered scieties are - apparently without exception - egalitarian.' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriarchy.) From comparison of patriarchal and matriarchal/matrilineal societies it seems to me that a female dominated society is less destructive than a male dominated one. I believe in gender equality I do but science tells me a slightly matrilineal social structure would work best.
I would question strict definitions of behavior based on neurological regionalism alone. The jury is still out on that one. Yes, males and females have no discernable difference in amygdalae structural, and in many other things. But if they're referring to some forebrain bundles that primarily develop post-myleinisation and seem to also be associated with impulse control more generally, I'd say that if there are any gender differences it's because of the effects of socialisation on neuro-plasticity.
In short, once again, biology only takes us so far before environment manipulates biology. In this case, reinforcing aggression in young boys may actually change the physiological structure of their brains so that it appears that males have biologically induced aggressive tendencies in adulthood, whereas, the biology was not caused by biology, but by sociology XD