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.
So, how does Drexler explain the fact that boys without fathers want a dad? "It's only natural to long for what you don't have," she claims.
In essence, Drexler argues that moms--singly or in lesbian pairs--are actually superior to heterosexual couples in raising boys.
Raising Boys Without Men is a sign of things to come. The utopian fantasy presented within this book is the ultimate fulfillment of the feminist dream--the evolution of a society that transcends manhood and the need for fathers. The women Peggy Drexler celebrates in this book need and want nothing more than the use of gametes from "seed daddies" who have no further role in the lives of their sons.
Of course, the feminists would never allow this equation to be reversed, even in hypothetical form. A book arguing that young girls do not need mothers and that girls raised by homosexual men are likely to be healthier than those raised by moms because they can select their own female role models and pioneer a new paradigm of femininity would be roundly condemned and probably never published.
Raising Boys Without Men is a clear indicator of the lengths to which the feminist movement is willing to push its radical vision. The ultimate realization of this vision really comes down to the last two words of this book's title--without men.
Originally posted by Mystery_Lady
They can do every thing men can do, they don't need men to have babies, and they surely don't need men to be daddies.
Originally posted by Mystery_Lady
Oh, it is ok for these boys to have "male role models" as long as they don't pick up the male agrevnesses men tend to protray. Heaven forbid if the the boys show any natural characteristics of being agressive, or as other women would say boys will be boys.
The feminist movement really has progressed beyond being equals with men to being superior to men. Many women still have the old idologies of what the femenist movement was meant to be, but unfortunatly it is changing with many young women picking up the new idologies of what the feminist movement should be.
I honestly hope that most are moderate feminists, and don't become radical. They keep equality with men as the main focus, and not superior to men or the elimination of men.
Originally posted by YIAWETA
Drexler recieved her Phd at Stanford. Red Flags Up!!!!.....She might as well have studied at Langley....same thing!
Peggy and her husband have been married for over 30 years and together they have a son and a daughter.
...
Dr. Drexler's research shows that boys raised without fathers are socially savvy, generous, caring communicators, while still remaining extremely “boyish” -- passionate about sports and adept at rough-housing with friends.
These boys’ maverick moms are pioneering a new form of parenting that rejects social judgments about family structure and gender stereotype, and which stresses the importance of communication, community, and love. These brave women have much to teach us about a better way to raise tomorrow's men
Parenting, moreover, is not anchored to gender. Parenting is either good or deficient, not male or female. A good female parent will change diapers and coach soccer. A good female parent will help a boy to develop his full potential as long as she values his manliness and encourages his growth, independence, and sense of adventure.
Originally posted by smallpeeps
Originally posted by Diseria
A little late, but I'll explain why I didn't know the name Rommel.
Simply put -- in all my years of history classes, I (*honestly*) never knew that WWII involved anything beyond Europe and Russia. Rommel was never brought up. So, yes, it was required for graduation... but we never learned the full story, I guess.
Welcome Diseria. Did WyrdeOne's comments prompt you to join this thread? If so, glad to have you. If it helps any, the Germans I know personally, are way smarter than me.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Drexler is challenging the idea that "a boy needs a father" to be socially and emotionally healthy and I agree with her. Neither does he need a mother. A man can raise a child as well as a woman can.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
darkelf, That touches on an important point that needs to be remembered. There are women who would rather maintain the status quo for the benefits and protections that women receive in a patriarchy. These women, although sharing a gender with feminists, move counter to the feminist movement and are therefore sexist against women.
Men aren't the only creatures who can be sexist against women.
Do people agree or disagree with this statement?
Originally posted by WolfofWar
You cant label a woman sexist because she doesnt agree with you.
Originally posted by laiguana
Ann Coulter hates women, esp ones with more money than her
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Well, I didn't label her sexist because she disagrees with me.
"These women, although sharing a gender with feminists, move counter to the feminist movement and are therefore sexist against women."
Originally posted by Byrd
They do use different standards, yes. I should point out that this also allows smaller men of other cultures (Japanese, for instance) on the force.
Does this mean it's wrong? Hardly.
There are many times when a police officer who is a woman can negotiate a situation (and a male officer would cause fear or aggression.) There are many times when a suspect or a victim will relate better to an officer of one gender rather than the other.
Women have better hearing and better reaction times than men do (which compensates for their lack of strength.).....Because of their better reaction times, they're 2.5% less likely to die in traffic accidents than men and are safer drivers.
A Literature Review
on Reaction Time
Gender: At the risk of being politically incorrect, in almost every age group, males have faster reaction times than females, and female disadvantage is not reduced by practice (Noble et al., 1964; Welford, 1980; Adam et al., 1999; Dane and Erzurumlugoglu, 2003). Bellis (1933) reported that mean time to press a key in response to a light was 220 msec for males and 260 msec for females; for sound the difference was 190 msec (males) to 200 msec (females). In comparison, Engel (1972) reported a reaction time to sound of 227 msec (male) to 242 msec (female). Botwinick and Thompson (1966) found that almost all of the male-female difference was accounted for by the lag between the presentation of the stimulus and the beginning of muscle contraction. Muscle contraction times were the same for males and females. In a surprising finding, Szinnai et al. (2005) found that gradual dehydration (loss of 2.6% of body weight over a 7-day period) caused females to have lengthened choice reaction time, but males to have shortened choice reaction times. Adam et al. (1999) reported that males use a more complex strategy than females. Barral and Debu (2004) found that while men were faster than women at aiming at a target, the women were more accurate. Jevas and Yan (2001) reported that age-related deterioration in reaction time was the same in men and women.
We were once all equals in a tribal system and both men and women acted as protectors and invokes of justice; as people who ensured the safety of other members of their tribe. I see every reason to go back to this equality
Originally posted by WolfofWar
You may not label them sexist because they disagree with you, but you label them sexist because they disagree with the feminist movement.
sexism
2 : behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex
M.W.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Men aren't the only creatures who can be sexist against women.
Do people agree or disagree with this statement?
Thanks to Feminism, co-eds today do not endure the daily humiliation of courtship. They don't worry about young men offering flowers or asking them out for dinner or a movie.
The days of dating when young men sought them as friends, and possibly future wives and mothers are gone.
Today, thanks to the humanizing influence of Feminism, young women immediately give their bodies to complete strangers after anaesthetizing themselves with alcohol. They engage in degrading sex acts without dread of repressive "patriarchal" morality.
Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic
This article is a good demonstration of what the feminist movement faces.
I have no idea of the credibility of the site, and I make no claims thereof.
But I've seen this kind of stuff before... how 'feminism' is responsible for the miserable way women - young women in this case - are treated in the culture, even today, after some progress.
The author, a Dr. Makow (Piled Higher and Deeper, not Medical Doctor) starts right in:
Thanks to Feminism, co-eds today do not endure the daily humiliation of courtship. They don't worry about young men offering flowers or asking them out for dinner or a movie.
The days of dating when young men sought them as friends, and possibly future wives and mothers are gone.
Today, thanks to the humanizing influence of Feminism, young women immediately give their bodies to complete strangers after anaesthetizing themselves with alcohol. They engage in degrading sex acts without dread of repressive "patriarchal" morality.
Now, I don't have any fancy letters for my name, but this is on its face nonsense. Basically, the article outlines all the crappy, disrespectful ways women are treated in college. And it is ALL the fault of 'feminism' according to this guy. Not a single word that I saw about the 'conquest' mentality of frat boys, not a word about the deliberate use of alcohol and other drugs for nothing other than 'scoring'. And a blanket generalization that apparently nobody in college these days is a true, honorable gentleman.
This kind of twisting of the truth by the anti-feminist crowd is insidious. Sure, in the days when women were more oppressed than they are now, the kind of behavior described in the article did not happen as much. Or as publicly. And one aspect of full freedom is the freedom to make really stupid decisions, as no doubt happens.
But to blame rampant sexism, poor choices, mis-use of alcohol and all the rest soley on feminism is so ludicrous it would be funny were it not so tragic.
Originally posted by WolfofWar
People like the guy who wrote this article just see what they want to see.
Fact is, Feminism doesnt do this, over-limit consumption of alcohol does this.
Originally posted by darkelf
Most women wanted the benefits without having to pay their dues. That is the hypocritical nature of feminism.
(snip)
Don’t forget the sexual revolutionist who wanted the freedom to sleep around like men without the stigma attached to that action. The invention of the “pill” was their favorite scientific breakthrough! I never could understand how you’re supposed to respect anyone who dresses and acts like a slut.
Most of these women acted out of selfishness. They wanted special treatment, not equality.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Originally posted by laiguana
Ann Coulter hates women, esp ones with more money than her
She is an example of what I was talking about. She doesn't think women should be 'allowed' to vote. And I don't know if she's transgendered or not. It would explain a lot about her attitude against women.