The distinguished Dr. Violet Socks has explained more eloquently than I WHY women can't just comfortably rest on our laurels in light of the progress made in the last 30 years:
Ever since I set out to study history 30 years ago (determined, in my own adolescent phrase, “to find out everything that has ever happened”), I’ve encountered few phenomena more constant than the inferiority of women as a class. Whether it’s Sumerian merchant wives or Roman matrons, Chinese concubines or Greek hetaira, whether we’re talking about medieval Europeans, pre-Columbian Mayans, or modern Pakistanis, women are at the bottom of the pile. The fleeting examples of relative gender equality are few, and come almost exclusively from pre-civilized cultures in benign environments.
The modern feminist revolution is a soap bubble, a blink of an eye, 30 years against 6,000.* Will it last? The patriarchs are working hard to destroy it, and male reclamation of our uteruses is virtually a done deal. Only a fool thinks the gains we’ve made are irreversible and that feminism is obsolete. There is a huge fucking Borg ship out there called 6,000 Years of Women Are Shit. And it’s bearing down on us. Resistance is futile, it says. You will be assimilated . . .
*At least 6,000 years. Probably more.
Read more here.
Meanwhile, Richard's effort to help us feminists present our message more effectively has already paid off! A new term is taking off in the feminist lexicon - chrrrrrrrl power. Here are some examples of chrrrrrl power at Twisty's place and Pandagon.
UPDATE: More from some churl girls at Heo Cwaeth and F-words. Also yet another inaccuracy on Richard's blog: the woman who points out that the central female figure of Christianity was commanded by God to bear a child without her prior consent is obviously not calling "her" God a rapist. As a self-described "heathen" who frequents atheist message boards, she is obviousely criticizing this aspect of Christianity from the outside. To say she is calling "her" own God a rapist makes her sound crazy and I can't help but conclude that this is yet another deliberate distortion of a feminist's words.
SECOND UPDATE: I should clarify the point about the woman who critiqued the story of the immaculate conception. I am the only one who has argued that it is a significant distinction that she herself is not a believer in God. Heo Cwaeth and F-words don't touch on this point.