It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I wish I could believe that women will be willing to "carry the can"
originally posted by: Malak777
originally posted by: wdkirk
On a global level....meaning those that live in the sticks of Africa, South America or Australia would also endorse said dumbass ideologies? I'm guessing they don't have those problems, but, then again I have not studied any of those cultures that would not be considered modern by today's lofty standards.
Along came a spider...... Saving the weak and sick is only weakening the species.
Really, saving the sick insures our species' survival. Whenever we treated the weaker ones like dirt we ended up with hell holes fit for nobody. The way we treat our elderly, our weak and our sick is a measure of our civility. Getting rid of them all is not possible as we all must become sick in the end. Think about that! At the best we must get old and weak. Many of us will get diseases in our lives because of our polluted lifetsyles and environment.
Will you apply this same ideology when it is your turn? You better hope when you are old there is a nice caring face to wipe your bottom and keep you clean. Just getting real with you.
originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: mamabeth
when absolute power corrupts absolutely, and the system in play gives the men that much power over their wives and children, it doesn't need any kind of "spirit" to raise discontent within the women. just enough men who are abusing that absolute power!!
originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Malak777
Interesting (LOL!) premise... but as I have learned recently, not all feminism is the same. I won't pretend to understand the different factions -- "LibFem" and "RadFem" and "Third Wave" and so on -- but even the different feminists don't agree on everything, so it's impossible to make such blanket statements about "feminism" as a whole.
However, I will say that as a stay-at-home mom in the 80s and 90s, I was pretty put off that there was absolutely no support for moms, and especially stay-at-home moms. We were dismissed (and insulted) as either too dumb or too lazy to work, as exemplified by Hillary's oh-so-infamous "Well, I guess I could have stayed home and baked cookies all day" comment. Like that's all I did!!! Sure, I baked cookies... and cupcakes for class birthdays and sopapillas for Cinco de Mayo and I also volunteered at my kids' school, both in their classrooms and in the reading room. I served on committees and volunteered for events and fundraisers and went on field trips and taught kids to read and write. Things that I taught my own kids before they even started kindergarten!
But society said moms like me were just too dumb or lazy to hold a real job. (And I did it anyway, because I knew it was the right thing to do.)
And I do believe that this attitude has adversely affected our children into adulthood, and therefore our society as a whole. When we devalued mothers and mothering, we also devalued our children and their best interests and well being.
So to a great extent, I do agree with the spirit of the OP. But I won't reduce people -- especially women -- to mere "breeders." Being a parent and giving of yourself and your heart unconditionally is a very fulfilling and gratifying experience. It's a crying shame we don't value and appreciate this gift. Done right, it benefits ALL society. Ignored and neglected, it just drags the whole of society down.
As always, well said. I was a stay-at-home-mom in the 90s too, and the stigma was terrible. It made me look at feminism and think that maybe it had done as much damage as it had good. I still think that.
Like so many radical political movements, the original ends were good. And it achieved what it set out to do--2 generations ago. Now it's fighting windmills and creating more issues than it solves, in my humble opinion.