Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Ravages of Feminism

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
It's because of feminism that some women HAVE to work outside the home. Women are clogging the job market, let's face it. If all women stayed home, that would leave more jobs for the men to snap up and support their families. That's provided they're actually married instead of having ex-girlfriends and assorted children scattered to the winds.


Oh...my...God

Wow! That was comedy GOLD


Ever think that some women WANT to work? What about women who choose not to marry or have children? Should they not work and stay home so all the men can have jobs? Wait...are you blaming women for the high unemployment rate as well?



I wouldn't mind at all if we went back to head-of-household voting. But so long as we have individual voting, I'll go right ahead. See back then, they went by HOUSEHOLD rather than individual.


And how would that make this country a better place?

Does your husband know you are on the internet spouting out opinions? Shouldn't you be cleaning, cooking or making babies somewhere?

[edit on 11/29/2004 by Lecky]




posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Males and females are not identical. Males and females each have their own strengths and weaknesses--that's why you hear about how lousy we women parallel-park and the fact that we can't pee out a campfire.
Males are more inclined to act like complete fools on the road in their ricers than females. As the saying goes, boys will be boys.-Amethyst
__________________________________________________________

This is like telling children that they can only do certain things with their lives. It puts labels on them and stunts their originality. I for one am never going to tell my daughters that they have to get married and have
children to be complete people. If they want to that's fine with me but it's also alright if they don't want to.



[edit on 29-11-2004 by elaine]

[edit on 29-11-2004 by elaine]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by elaine
This is like telling children that they can only do certain things with their lives. It puts labels on them and stunts their originality. I for one am never going to tell my daughters that they have to get married and have
children to be complete people. If they want to that's fine with me but it's also alright if they don't want to.


I couldn't agree with you more, elaine.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 01:23 AM
link   
And Amethyst I just can't resist adding that when I took my daughter for
her driveing test a few months ago, I proudly watched as she parellel parked perfectly...
And I"M the one who taught her.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 02:59 AM
link   
Parhessia - You say that having marred your daughters father would have made your home less stable, but isn't that more of an example of your taste in men than anything else? Had you nt mated with a man who would be a destabilising influence woldn't your daughter now be enjoying a household where she received the love of two parents?

Allow me to preface my own views with this statement, I was raised by my mother, my parents divorced when I was 4 or so. I have no problem with women working being educated etc.
However every time this subject is brought up I hear about how so many women are abused, either emotionally or physically, how men are # etc.

Well not to be a complete prick about it if the man you have a child with is not going to make a good father, if its not a man you feel is worthy of spending the rest of your life with then why in the hell are you fuc*ing him?

It seems to me that women have become in many ways much like men were in the 50's. They have gotten to a point where they no longer believe that sex has any consequences. That it is no more than aerobics. The reason for the change is undobtably birth control and abortion. The fact is however that sex is not aerobics, it is not and should never be treated casually. Regardless of what precautions you take, whether the pill, condoms, diaphragm etc every time you have sex you are opening yourself to the risk of unintended consequences. Whether its an STD, pregnncy or whatever the risks are always present.

My point is that sex, from a biological standpoint is for procreation. The reason it feels so good is for reasons of survival of the species. However Humans are not like lesser anmals, we have the abillity to think, decide, and control our impulses. Whether you are a man or a woman if you have sex with multiple partners you are a whore. Not only that but you are placing yourself at great risk of serious life altering consequences. If you have sex casually with people you have not yet taken the time to know the same applies.

To all women out there I would like to give a little advice, get a vibrator and keep your legs clsed untill you know the guy well enough to know whther or not he s worthy of sex. Guys use your hand untill you know whether or not she is. Believe me when your 50-60-70 you will regret fuc*ing everything in sight if you live that long.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
It seems to me that women have become in many ways much like men were in the 50's. They have gotten to a point where they no longer believe that sex has any consequences. That it is no more than aerobics. The reason for the change is undobtably birth control and abortion.


That's a load of crap and an extremely false generalization to give to women. Some could say the same for men as well...


Regardless of what precautions you take, whether the pill, condoms, diaphragm etc every time you have sex you are opening yourself to the risk of unintended consequences. Whether its an STD, pregnncy or whatever the risks are always present.


I agree, I think most people don't take the risks seriously...until it's too late. I don't believe it's because of birth control or abortion... Do you really think that women think to themselves "Hmm...Johnny's really cute, I think I want to have sex with him...if I get pregnant who cares! I'll just have an abortion..." From what I have learned about abortion, it is not a fun experience physically or mentally...

I think it has a lot to do with the "I am invincible mentality"...


My point is that sex, from a biological standpoint is for procreation. The reason it feels so good is for reasons of survival of the species. However Humans are not like lesser anmals, we have the abillity to think, decide, and control our impulses. Whether you are a man or a woman if you have sex with multiple partners you are a whore. Not only that but you are placing yourself at great risk of serious life altering consequences. If you have sex casually with people you have not yet taken the time to know the same applies.


Thank you for telling us when we should all have sex...while I believe you do have a slight point, who are you to tell others that they should only be having sex to procreate? Some could say that sex feels good because it was given as a gift for two people to share love *shrug*...




[edit on 11/29/2004 by Lecky]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 05:09 AM
link   
Lecky prior to the devolpment of birth cntrol n the 50-60's women were far less casual about sex than men, the main reason being that wheras a man could impregnate woman and skip town the woman had no choice but to live with the consequences. However once birth control had become reliable women no longer (at least not to the same extent) automatically equated sex with pregnancy. Freed from the negative consequences of sex it only stands to reason that the attitude torwards intercourse became more relaxed.
As for "telling you when to have sex" I did nthing of the sort, I merly offered some basic rational advice. However the fact remins that sex has, always has had, and always will have, the risk of pregnancy and/or STDs. If you have sex you are doing so with the full realisation that those risks are inherant, therefore IMHO you have no right to complain about the consequences whether they be pregnancy or STD's.
As my father used to say "If you can't do the time then don't do the crime".
If you are not willing to bear a child or suffer from AIDS, syphilis etc. then keep your legs closed.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
As for "telling you when to have sex" I did nthing of the sort, I merly offered some basic rational advice. However the fact remins that sex has, always has had, and always will have, the risk of pregnancy and/or STDs. If you have sex you are doing so with the full realisation that those risks are inherant, therefore IMHO you have no right to complain about the consequences whether they be pregnancy or STD's.
As my father used to say "If you can't do the time then don't do the crime".
If you are not willing to bear a child or suffer from AIDS, syphilis etc. then keep your legs closed.


Don't get me wrong, I said I agreed with you to some extent...that society is too relaxed when it comes to sex and that people need to be more careful...practicing abstinence is never a bad thing...

The thing that threw me was that people should only have sex to procreate...does that go for married couples as well?

I just see "the ravages of feminism" then read how birth control has turned all women into sluts...pardon me if I seemed offended.

Anyways we are off topic...unless one equates feminism to women having lots of sex on birth control...

[edit on 11/29/2004 by Lecky]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 05:50 AM
link   
I ddn't say that people should only have sex to procreate, I said that from a biological standpoint that is its only purpose. My wife and I have sex as recreation, the difference being we know each other, love each other, and are willing to accept whatever consequences result from our actions. However I feel it is both morally wrong and the height of stupidity to engage in intercourse as recreation with someone you met today.
If you don't know a person you shouldn't IMHO fu*k them.
Humn beings being what they are, will always engage in pleasurable actions unless there are consequences.
Sex is pleasurable, however because of the rise in the effectivness of birth control many people fail to realise that there are also serious life altering consequences. So they engage in sex with strangers, multiple partners, unprotected etc. and then want an easy way out when hit by the consequences.
You can't have it both ways.
Either you respect yourself enough to control your urges or you accept the consequences of your actions.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 05:54 AM
link   
LOL ok...I misunderstood then


[edit on 11/29/2004 by Lecky]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 06:39 AM
link   
I don't beleive anything could be more degrading to a women than a man saying to her..."Hey, I support you, I own you."
Which seems to be the basic thought process expressed in the original post.
Strikes me as someone who is having a temper tantrum, because he can't "own" his wife.

I especially like this little quote.

"The woman's role is to empower a man. He uses this power for her benefit. Together they are a team. Heterosexuality works this way. "

NO, unbalanced marriages work this way......

And then is followed directly with this one...


"We cannot conceive that the people who lead society wish us harm. But I'm afraid this is the case."

This is true of all who society choses to put in leadership positions......including husbands....so I can assume that you at least acknowledge that hey, the husband may wish to harm once in awhile also, not to mention just bumbling into it on his own...which we are all good at?

I can count down four generations where the mothers in my family worked!! A husband died here, the man just walked here, and well, there's even a case where they both had to work to meet the bills!! Don't blame this on the feminist movement! In the three cases just mentioned above, it was before 1960!!!

In one of the "Meet The Press" like shows that were on this Sunday, they had a group of "political religious leaders"....sorry, just don't know how else to put it. They were really quite funny though, worse than kids....interupting each other and all. This quote came from the Southern Baptist's official doctrine, and these leaders were asked what it meant.

"A husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church. He has the God-given responsibility to provide for, to protect, and to lead his family. A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ. She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation. "

When asked one of them quipped, that means that if the husband decides that his wife shouldn't be working, then she shouldn't be working....

Well, It could also mean....
If the husband doesn't wish his wife to go to church, she shouldn't.
If the husband decides he doesn't want his wife to go shopping, she shouldn't.
If the husband doesn't wish his wife to ever venture out of the house again as long as he lives.......!

Ya, right....

This is how it works out here in the real world.......
When my kids were young, my husband didn't want me working...I mean, why should he have to take care of the kids after a hard day of work?
Since the cost of childcare was more than I could make, and he was not willing to help, well, I didn't work. Me and the kids went without alot of things that in reality we needed, while he basically had everything he wanted...
Then, well, he couldn't afford what he wanted.....so, oh ya, go get a job, I guess I'll watch them......(he didn't, he ran them over to a friends house and she took care of them!) Then well, they changed the hours of my job, I had to quite. Then all of a sudden, out of the blue, I have this guy griping at me....all his friend's wives are making more than them, what's wrong with me?

Hey, all his friends must have been supporting their wives in their efforts!!!

At least when I work, I get a fairer wage than my ancestors. I have safer, healthier workplaces....(women have burned in locked down factories, just like the Muslim girls do now in some countries.
And, hey, the check comes in MY NAME!!!

By the way there is something much more dangerous to the sex life of a marriage than the women chosing to "own her body".....it's a man who choses not to support and help raise his kids!



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 07:34 AM
link   
Well This post is quite a read First let me say im a man and also that I am marred to a wonderfull woman and have children .
Now on to the nitte gritty im 40 so I grow up through most of the changes that were going on with womans rights .Mind you I do relize this started 100 years agaio and dident personly see it all only the um finly faze of it but that was the showed the biggest in scoity .
anyway on words . At 14 I relized this could be a very good thing or if used wrong a very bad thing . womans lib humm these words are NOT a bad thing its only how we and yes I do say we men AND woman take these words and use them to farther are goals.
Now me my self went through a living hell because of BOTH my BAD parents and dident even have parent most of my life.And I saw manny other kids going through the SAME problems to one extreme or another .
Dads not there at all or mom split or a combo or eather or both.
and I tryed learning what was causing this HUGE problem even today its still a HUGE problem manny of these kids dont make it .
and found that first manny males no longer feal they have to help the woman if she gets preggers .After all dident you just sped a HUNDRED years telling use you dont need us? that you can do anything we can?
that we better let you OR else. And then your surprised when men dont follow through .
The funny thing here is I am marred and had a realy Bad accedent last year and have traded places with my wife compleatly alest for another month still. so for the last year my wife has been working FULL time and I have taken care of kids clean coook wash and so on. Does this bother me you may ask . No not one bit. My wife loves me and I love her and i belive in a way she is mine .BUT i also belive in a way im hers . and do I have a problem with things she is BETTER at then me ? again no as a matter of fact im louse at paper work and shes a master so she does almost all paper work except the math wich I understand better.
And Farther more Ill tell you Right if NOT for HER being able to do the paper work we would NOT have the beutfull home we are now buying.
wile my credit may be good enough and my math skills are exclient the paper work Baffuled me I looked at it as well but dident have a CLUE were to start and in a million years would have never been able to jump through all the hoops the bank was throwing at me. She on the other hand made it look easy. Im still amasied to this day and tell her so .
So to you woman wich ever you are Im glade to have your help in things your better at then me .If you can do the job as good or even better then me you are the better person for that job and you should be payed as well as any man with equal skills.
on the other hand there are things YOUR not as good at allow me .(no come ask me to do it for your if my skills are better then yours .As ill ask your help on the things your better at .It doesent bother me your better then me .It bothers me that when im better you foolishly try to do it anyway when I can do a better job just because YOU dont need a man.
this is redickless statment . Ill never in a million years say I dont need a womans help.
try haveing a kid without her. try haveing a kid without a male.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 07:58 AM
link   
Actually, I think we've spent the past hundred years or so saying that no one, regardless of race, color, creed, or gender, should have any opportunity withheld from them because of that race, color, creed, or gender.

And, it shouldn't matter weather or not the women feels that she needs you....the children still needs a viable relationship with their dad, as well as probably the monetary support. This you do for the children, not their mother.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 08:08 AM
link   
.
.
.
Henry Makow was an unhappy man who made a small fortune from his game about 'ethical choices.' He found 'happiness' with a mail-order Phillipino bride who will likely remain grateful until death for her change in fortune.

Now he is using his life experiences as the basis for a 'new age' philosophy, and marketing same towards acquiring another small fortune. Shades of Scientology.

Go Henry. In lieu of natural endowments, money will suffice.


.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
Feminism has helped bring about the sexual revolution back in the 1960s. It's also brought us the Roe travesty in 1973.

Oh. I see you've revived what I said in another thread [which you didn't reply to anyway] to pretend you actually know what you are talking about. I said actually do some research.. not parrot other people.

What do you see now that you didn't see 50 years ago, for example? Both parents working outside the home and putting their children into daycare--which is NOT qualified to raise children. Single mothers with a whole bunch of kids, often by different fathers (I have a couple of cousins who are in that situation), living on welfare.

Yep.. again we've got a prolifer condemning single mothers. Oh the irony.

The divorce rate has skyrocketed--and it's mostly women who do the leaving.

See what happens when you change 'love, honour and OBEY'.. ah the good old days where women could be beat into submission..


We have more juvenile delinquents. Since Roe vs. Wade, the frequency of child abuse has shot straight up.

No doubt by all these families are on on welfare?

Another claim of the feminazis is that children are blank slates and that gender roles are stereotypes. Wrong on both counts! Boys tend to act like boys and girls like girls--without any prompting.

quote]Another claim of the feminazis is that children are blank slates and that gender roles are stereotypes. Wrong on both counts! Boys tend to act like boys and girls like girls--without any prompting.

Actually that is incorrect. While some children may lean towards traditional gender preferences.. many others don't. Some boys may like dolls.. girl might like trucks [myself included]. I have 'girly' neices.. and ones that would thow a fit if they got a doll instead of that cool video game or fishing rod they wanted. They are unique.

n fact, I encourage this in my son by getting him Bob the Builder stuff and things I think boys would like.

That is exactly what gender contitioning is. If they lean towards tradition thats fine.. but to force them into the roles they are uncomfortable with is abusive.

It's because of feminism that some women HAVE to work outside the home. Women are clogging the job market, let's face it. If all women stayed home, that would leave more jobs for the men to snap up and support their families.


Actually.. it's called INFLATION dear. The cost of living often requires two wages these days.. not one.

[edit on 29-11-2004 by riley]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
Parhessia - You say that having marred your daughters father would have made your home less stable, but isn't that more of an example of your taste in men than anything else? Had you nt mated with a man who would be a destabilising influence woldn't your daughter now be enjoying a household where she received the love of two parents?


It's not that simple, mwm. Hindsight in 20/20... and when the man you're with for a long time is kind and gentle to you... and then physically abuses you when you are pregnant... That's not necessarily something you can just pick out in someone and say "Oh, not him, he's going to hit me!" You can never know if that will happen to you when you get into a relationship, so really has nothing to do with "my taste in men." People are stable and then become unstable, all the time. to chalk it all up to my taste gets you nowhere.

My point is, my daughter enjoys the home she has now, recieving the love of me, her mother, as well as the love of her grandparents, and the love of my brothers, and the love of my friends. She is not missing out on anything, and is just as happy and content as a child in a home with two parents.


Well not to be a complete prick about it if the man you have a child with is not going to make a good father, if its not a man you feel is worthy of spending the rest of your life with then why in the hell are you fuc*ing him?


You don't seem to account for change of sentiment, which does happen. You may feel that the man you're having sex with will make a good father, and worthy of spending your life with, but things can, and do change for a variety of reasons.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Women Abusing Men

[edit on 11/29/2004 by Amethyst]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Parhessia - I understand where you are comming from and true you cant always tell, some people do change. The fact is however the "baby's daddy" sydrome is not the result of people changing, nor is the mid-20's to mid-30's carrer woman having an abortion because she got blitzed at an office party and screwed one of the waiters. Situations such as yours are the exception not the rule. The fact is there has been a serious moral decline in the american attitude torwards sex, and while I don't know if its a result of womens lib, condoms, or tv the very fact that we have 13 year old girls getting pregnant and throwng thier babies into dumpsters should be enough to wake anybody up.

Sex feels good and is something everybody enjoys, but that doesn't mean it should be treated like a handshake. I dunno just always figured if didn't know a woman enough to trust her with my wallet there was no way in hell I was gonna trust her with my dic*



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
I dunno just always figured if didn't know a woman enough to trust her with my wallet there was no way in hell I was gonna trust her with my dic*


haha! That's certainly a good way to go about it, although you're right it's certainly hard to control sometimes even when I knew it weren't good for me, pysically and especially emotionally.

[edit on 29-11-2004 by Joe Manco]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
Feminism is a cancer on our society. You compare today with, say, 50 years ago, and you tell me which is better. And stop with the "oppressive patriarchy" nonsense. I'd happily take the 1950s. I find more fulfillment with a family than with a career, hands down. And it's really bad when a woman chooses to stay at home and she has to actually defend that choice!



I'd happily agree...

While there is absolutely nothing wrong with a matriarchal society, it seems these days the ones who push for a matriarch or close enough to, are angry, hardcore, power tripping bull dykes..

While there is nothing wrong with being an "idependant woman" I see more of the above rather then the "happy go lucky type women who are out there to fulfill an honest desire for success and happiness....

I so admire the women long ago who banded together for good cause... To protect themselves from barbaric men who raped and beat them and took off on the female and the child with no repercussions...

I do think we've won in this regard; taming the wild beast in the man to take care of his offspring and his wife and to go out and work to provide a stable family and household. While society maybe obviously patriarch based, what goes on behind the scenes is much matriarch based in a not so obvious way.



ps: I'd also like to add that the women's movement back in the 60s and in previous years helped to mold us into the modern age where we now stand.
They are good for somethings....

pss: mwm, I like your above post... It's quite true...



[edit on 29-11-2004 by TrueLies]





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join