Why are some men so upset with the idea that treating women differently can promote and teach Sexism.

[ljm2002]

195. No one has argued that men and women are "interchangable"...

...and while the bread-and-butter issues are important, so are the attitudinal issues. Things that seem irrelevant to one person, may seem very important to another.

I know that when I watch old shows like, say, All In The Family, it really underscores how far we've come with those attitudinal issues. My children never experienced the bad old days when many men really did have the Archie Bunker style of dealing with their wives, and with women in general. Women were considered "emotional", and incapable of reasoned responses.

It is condescending, to say the least, to tell feminists what the "goal of feminism" should be. The goals of feminism are what feminists deem them to be, just as the goals of the civil rights movement were what the civil rights activists and leaders and participants deemed them to be, just as the goals of the LGBT movement are what the people in the movement deem them to be. By the way, many people told them for years that their goal should not be gay marriage, that they should accept civil unions as a substitute, that insisting on calling it "marriage" was irrelevant, a side issue that offended the religious people and distracted from the "real" issues.

I am not slamming you for your statement. Many of us react to things and think WTF? Why on earth are "they" pushing that irrelevant claptrap when there are important things to address? I'm sure I've been guilty of the same thinking at times. It's just that one person's irrelevant claptrap may be another person's essential, underlying issue.