@Rainman05:
I tend to agree that very ideological, extreme feminism is "terrorism" of some kind, but I don't think that's representative of "mainstream feminism". Just like the civil rights movement that demanded equal rights for blacks is not sufficiently represented by looking at the "Black Panther" or "Nation of Islam" groups.
And I don't think feminism has become obsolete. In Germany, and I guess in many other Western countries too, some workplaces are still dominated by male "rope teams". Men are running the show. And even if balance is not the problem, as you say, a lack of equal opportunities for women is indeed still a problem, because these male rope teams won't let women in, even when said women are just as well, or even better qualified than the males they hire. That's not necessarily because of malice or bad intentions from the side of these men, but it's a very real manifestation of involuntary, often unconscious prejudices against women.
Many women who climbed the carreer ladder can tell you stories about males in their way attempting to stop them, or sexism they had to face in predominantly male environments.
Granted.
I am not saying that there aren't challenges. I am just saying that feminism cannot solve them. That's all I've stated before. that feminism in it's current state and the trend of activism it is taking in the mainstream, is not equipped to deal with these issues. Nor can they. It's not an issue that feminism can solve. All the problems women face in the western world need to be solved through other means. And it certainly has nothing to do with this mythical creature called the patriarchy.
There are male dominated jobs. I can atest personally that engineering is dominated by men. But that's because women are overrepresented in other fields. There is a limited number of men and women in the world. So if you have 100 people, 50 men and 50 women. And you put 10 career paths in front of them and then say: 1 by 1, a man and a woman will pick a job career, no limits. If we are to take the stats available, most of the 50 women will go into education, nursing, accountants, managers, marketing etc. And men would go for engineers, programmers, construction workers, the army and such and we'd go more or less half-half on doctors, paramedics and such. So maybe you're right. Maybe there is an inherent bias when, say, you hire a construction worker, you hire a man. Or when you go to hire a police officer you hire a man because traditionally, that's how it's been done and there are some (more or less justified) cautions about hiring a woman. Maybe that's true. but that's not something that the feminist movement can tackle. In fact, I'm willing to bet that if they tackle it, they'll end up doing more harm than good.
Wage Gap: Women's Median Wages Compared to Men's in the Same Jobs, 2011 | Womens eNews
Can you link any population density statistics that support your claim that European countries do not face overpopulation as compared to Africa and the ME? As for Asian countries - China and India are the obvious standout countries for overpopulation but their population density is not at the top of the statistics table.
Well. I can provide you with these 2 things:
City Mayors: Largest cities in the world by population density (1 to 125)
If you look at the list, the first European city to enter the top is St. Petersburg in Russia at number 28. All cities until then are not European. Predominantly asian (china, pakistan, india) and some in africa (congo)
The next European city is Athens at #40 and only after that other European cities become more prevalent in the list. But still, the chart is dominated by asian, african and south american cities.
I am not saying European countries aren't overpopulated. the UK is full up. That's why unregulated mass immigration may very well be throwing the whole thing overboard. This is why we need to take drastic and immidiate action to make this stop.
The second link:
population of all countries of the world largest to smallest
This is according to countries. Not counting city states like Monaco, Vatican City, Mauritius (a tourist island basically, almost a city state), Singapore and such, countries with the highest pop. density are Malta (well, I did say no city states and malta isn't a city state), Bangladesh, bahrain, S. Korea, Nauru, Lebannon, the netherlands, Rwanda, Tuvalu etc. So in this shortlist, we see a lot of african countries and just 1 european one.
This of course, doesn't mean that Europe isn't overpopulated and that it could take in more.
It just means that african countries and some asian countries are heavily overpopulated and why they should take actions for population reduction. I often said that the high birthrate of african and ME countries is one of the main reasons why they are so impoverished. And as long as they don't drastically reduce the birthrate, they will never increase the chances of escaping poverty.
So yeah. In essence, European countries are highly populated. But we have the economic infrastructure to maintain high quality of life at the current population density if the population is contributory to the economic infrastructure. If European countries continue to suffer mass waves of immigration from third world countries, this will most certainly damage the balance and destroy this infrastructure and cause overpopulation. However, the countries with the highest population densities are outside Europe and for most of them, we can draw parallels between the high pop density and birthrates with poverty. Now there are exceptions. S. Korea is a very wealthy country but it has low birthrate and a very homogenous culture. Same for japan.
