It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Odium
Surely, if they supported it than it would have happened?
Sorry to let you know, but women earn less, do more domestic labour and a placed in a duel burdon. They gained no equality from the Feminist Movement because the Government hi-jacked it. The legislation that grants Equal Rights and Pay, doesn't hold up in court and in fact in the U.K. the Equal Pay Act doesn't mention anything to do with Gender which could be enforced in Court.
Edit:
Also if they are earning the same as one person, it means they are spending the same as one person was back then and thus buying the same amount. Meaning? We don't have an increased level of productivity, due to lack of demand.
[edit on 29/3/2006 by Odium]
In addition to adding to the taxrolls, the feminist movement also began the destruction of the family unit. Children are raised by strangers, and soon the state will swoop in benevolently and begin brainwashing the children even earlier in universal day care centers - this will of course be to alleviate the burden on two-income families.
Originally posted by Odium
the difference being my Grandfather purchased it without the income of his spouse in the 1950's.
AS for who was a biggie? Which Nation and which period? The Feminist Movement itself is hundreds of years old.
Originally posted by Odium
You take for example the housing market, the rise in prices is linked to the rise in income. However, the rate at which you aquire your house [15 to 25 years] hasn't changed. This period is the same for my Grandfather as it was my parents and then me, the difference being my Grandfather purchased it without the income of his spouse in the 1950's.
Originally posted by Odium
...However, you make one vital mistake - the one based around children. You massively over-look previous years, although women were at home they were not just taking care of children. Women tended to work by collecting goods, such as fire-wood, or helping in the farmers the only difference was that the children were taken with them or used to help them. They didn't just sit around and do nothing.
Originally posted by Odium
As for your points, Conspiracy, how has it benefited the N.W.O? Surely, the whole basis of allowing women into the Labour Market has been destroying the Traditional view of the N.W.O. [White-Male-Upper Class]. AS for who was a biggie? Which Nation and which period? The Feminist Movement itself is hundreds of years old...
Originally posted by Odium
1 :The Level of the Work Force isn’t important, especially when you yourself admit that the PP of the family unit is still the same. So although you might have both of them working and earning, it doesn’t mean they can buy anymore. You also forget what areas women generally work in - however, I’ll come back to this later.
2 :Tax level is dependent on the society, due to the differing levels World over, this is hard to link to being a reason for the New World Order - a One World Government would likely use one system of taxation. In fact, if they are the Elite - the Rich, they’re punishing themselves in a lot of Nation’s.
3 :What is the Traditional Family Unit? This again is era and culture dependent. What you define as the TFU [TNF] isn’t what I would see as a Traditional Family Unit.
4 :Children were traditionally raised by one person in the village, while the other women did a set job. [Getting back to the older point]
Women are primarily part of the care-labour force, now just earning for it [although many cases they do not.
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Well,if one looks at the feminism movement of today,it's not that popular amongst modern women. Women that are 30 and younger are not very supportive of the feminist agenda....really.
Originally posted by gps777
As much as i would love to believe the majority of women realize the feminist agenda (as you put it) is a negative agenda i can`t seem to,maybe its me i just dont believe there are that many sensible women in existence,though when i hear one say its negative to women and or to families i`m always impressed with such women or men for that matter
Though when men say it, it always will attract the women calling us women bashers,So i assume a lot of men would`nt touch this subject with a ten foot pole.
[edit on 29-3-2006 by gps777]
Originally posted by gallopinghordes
Wow, I'm a single mother who has worked my daughter's entire life.
I guess you could say I'm a feminist I bought my own home and do my own repairs, by the end of this summer I will only have a car payment and my mortgage, my daughter will be attending a good college (only number 11 in the country) and I've done this without her father's help or the help of any man.
I'm very very tired of being told that I as a single working Mother have helped cause the decline of the American Family.
I did not date while she was growing up out of choice not because I like to bash men but because she was and is my primary responsibility.
And yes folks I do believe in equal pay for equal work regardless of sex, creed, or lifestyle.
My daughter has not been brainwashed by the government or any other organization but has grown into a self-confident independent young lady who will be able to handle anything thrown at her and all this has been accomplished while I worked 40-56 hours a week.
Believe me ladies and gentlemen I know kids from the traditional family unit who have not accomplished the things my daughter has
My point is; kids will follow examples and live up or down to expectations no matter whether Mom works or not. Am I a feminist?
I don't know I just know that I have for the last 18 years taken care of my family and tended to business.
I also coached her soccer team, and attended all her sporting or 4-H events and assisted at her schools it's all about setting priorities. She was and always will be my priority and that is what kids need. It doesn't really matter if there is a stay at home parent as long as the kids know they are the parents' priority.
Originally posted by gallopinghordes
I'm very very tired of being told that I as a single working Mother have helped cause the decline of the American Family.
It doesn't really matter if there is a stay at home parent as long as the kids know they are the parents' priority.
[edit on 30-3-2006 by gallopinghordes]
Originally posted by suzy ryan
As a woman, wife and mother of adult children, I'm sad to say most women don't even want to hear these facts from other, older, wiser women who can remember how things were and what caused the changes.
When I fell pregnant with my third child, EVERYONE advised me to abort her so I could stay at work to help pay the 17 1/4% mortgage, for the 'living' childrens future.
I just pray that when I'm a grandmother, it won't be illegal for the old woman who lovingly raised their parents, to help care for them. The massive child care industry has already been lobbying to have 'certain' people declared 'unfit' to care for children. "Old women", keep being mentioned as an example.