ECON: Working women almost certainly caused the credit crunch

page: 22
58
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by rizla
Yeah, I basically agree. It would be good idea to make one parent (male or female) a full-time carer to children at any one time.

40-50 years ago, women did not work once they had children. Can we seriously say we are better off now that both parents *have to* work? Or do we just have to work harder to be secure?


yep, and then when the two decide that they just can't get along, and well, decide to go their separate ways, the one that's been the full time caregiver will be given custody of the kids, with no means to support them, and the full time paycheck earner will be zapped with a huge child support bill...........
sound familiar???

as far as the 40-50 years ago, women did not work bit....
ummm....yes, they did.....many of them HAD TO!! for one reason or another, husband didn't earn enough, husband chose not to share enough of his earnings, husband decided to split on them, husband DIED!!
matter of fact, many of these women grew up in households where the women were working, and well, those women grew up in households where the women were busy doing all kinds of things inside their homes, and in their gardens and fields to earn a little extra income.

frankly, I think maybe it is time to make both the women, and the men equally responsible for both the caregiving and the bread winning! after all, women are usually chosen to care for the children, it's she that has to come up with the food to feed them, it's her who has to tuck them into beds at night, it's her who has to care for them when they are sick!! when the father, for whatever reason, fails to deliver the money for all this stuff, well, it's her who has to contend with the hungry, cold, sick kids!! and, well, the first thing she is gonna do is find a way to come up with the money that is needed to get those kids what they need!!! and write whatever laws you want, come up with whatever social taboos you desire!! SHE WILL BE EARNING MONEY!!!

the only thing you way will be ensuring is that she will be working harder, for longer hours to earn less of it!




posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 05:49 AM
link   
I think the evidence of the world speaks for itself.
Who holds the wealth?
Who has the power?
Who are the elite?
Who has stolen, cheated and squandered the money?
Who not only allows but creates situations where children starve to death?
Who rapes?
Who are the vast majority of paedophiles?
Who practises the vast majority of domestic violence?
Who devised and practices grotesque and sick torture methods?
Who creates all wars?
Who commits genocide?
Who would toss a baby in the air to land on a bayonet or behead someone?
Who would believe people should be killed as they are not of benefit to society?

Who therefore has even a hope of having the empathy and emotional maturity required to lead and administer a country or its finances….and who should be entrusted with the power to do so?
Seems that for all time those that have forcibly placed themselves in power in every sphere have failed so utterly dismally that now they threaten the safety of the entire world.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 10:35 AM
link   
as a single mother I would like to speak to the word "choice". I have never had a choice in rather I should work or not. My children required food and shelter. I believe if the men stayed in their marriages, and supported their families, there would be a "choice". Please do not blame the woman who did their best to raise their kids, be responsible, instead of running off to support their fading egos.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Dragonelle
 


Much of the time, if not most, women in your situation become pregnant out of wedlock .. if you get pregnant without both parties being fully aware of the potential consequences and accepting that, then you can hardly blame one side for leaving? If your not married or engaged, the man is prrooobably not going to be to excited about you having a child, be it his or not. And it's hardly "without choice" ... you had the choice not to sleep with a dirt bag, but you slept with the dirt bag anyways.
But I am sure your suffering should not be downplayed.. and us men who DO stick by their wives/girlfriends/children can go on living with the reputation of every moronic man out there. Just so happens, women tend to sleep with the morons. What can ya do eh?



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:25 AM
link   
It pains me to say this, but yes, working women are causing the problems.

They need to be home looking after the kids.

Actually, I am serious here - the kids suffer and the economy suffers - and I am a women's lib member - but I see that this is true.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   
reply to post by learningtofly
 


Of course.. the Father could do this too, however, the stigma of society would dictate that father ignorant, lazy, stupid (there has to be a reason he can't get a job, right?) and by all means, far less a man if the female is making the money. Which, it's ironic that since posting this thread I don't know a single man whom I am close to that makes more than their female counterparts.. we have all lost our jobs, or had to take time/pay cuts.. while the government is expanding all kinds of medical, clerical admin jobs that females are taking.


I think it will be an interesting decade..



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


Actually, Rock, I think it will be a turning point.

Yes, fathers can be wonderful. And yes, fathers can do all that.

But society has been turned on its head and I wonder if we are going to recover or go under.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by learningtofly
 

I recently found a nice site (then lost it), that consisted mainly of old pictures and postcards of my hometown and spent hours one night looking through them. Well there were alot of photos of the employees of the old companies that were in the town. I'm telling ya, there were women working in these place back in the late 1800's to early 1900's!! Far too many for them to be just old maids and young unmarried! I'd bet if you did a little research, you'd find about the same thing!
My family history tells me the same thing.....I've worked, my mom worked, my grandmother worked, and her mom worked!! Albiet, the further back you go, the more likely that the women were making their income from producing products in their home....but the industrial revolution kind of killed that one off a bit!

I think the differences are more like, hey, back then, extended families were more common, when my grandmother worked, outside the home, during the depression, her mother was living in the same home, and available to watch over my father. and well....gee...what a shame!! laws were passed that eliminated child labor and required equal pay for women.....so, well, first we eliminated the cheap labor force that we now call slavery, then we eliminated the other cheap labor force, the women and children.....and well.....we've been experimenting with illegal immigration as a replacement!

but, I assure you, there are alot of group pictures of employees of different companies on line if you chose to look for them, showing lots of female workers dating that far back!

en.wikipedia.org...

here's a great example! oh, and by the way,
ya know how horrified we all are when we hear of these islamic girls schools burning down, and their doors are locked to keep the girls from getting into trouble....
guess what??
many of the doors at this factory were locked also! I've heard different reasons given, to keep them from wondering off during their shift, to keep theft down, ect...but still over 100 people were left to either burn to death, or jumped from windows....simply because the factory didn't trust their employees and the laws were lacking when it came to protecting them!

but, it's a perfect example of women (and girls) working, way back in 1911!!!

more examples.

historytogo.utah.gov...




Women during the Industrial Revolution

Women faced different demands during the industrial age to those that they face today. Women of the working classes would usually be expected to go out to work, often in the mills or mines. As with the children and men the hours were long and conditions were hard. Some examples of work specifically done by Women can be found amongst the links at the foot of this page.

Those who were fortunate may have become maids for wealthier families, others may have worked as governesses for rich children. The less fortunate may have been forced to work in shocking conditions during the day and then have to return home to conduct the households domestic needs (Washing, Cookng and looking after children etc.)

Women also faced the added burden of societies demand for children. The industrial age led to a rapid increase in birth rates which clearly has an impact upon the physical strength of the mothers. It was not uncommon for families to have more than 10 children as a result of this demand: and the woman would often have to work right up to and straight after the day of the childs birth for finanical reasons, leaving the care of the new born child to older relatives.

www.schoolshistory.org.uk...



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 02:47 AM
link   
I wrote an essay about this actually. There are specific roles that need to be played, but which gender plays which role can be switched more easily now than ever.
I heard a plebeian in one of my classes suggest that women always vote for the tallest candidate. Which made me wonder if candidates who appear to be better suited genetically for mating get more votes from the opposite gender. Seems plausable enough.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackalope_hunter
I wrote an essay about this actually. There are specific roles that need to be played, but which gender plays which role can be switched more easily now than ever.
I heard a plebeian in one of my classes suggest that women always vote for the tallest candidate. Which made me wonder if candidates who appear to be better suited genetically for mating get more votes from the opposite gender. Seems plausable enough.


I don't know if I agree with this one Jackalope. As a matter of fact I don't agree with it. Most of the women I know prefer to work in certain corridors..to have options in how and where and when they work. They as a rule do not want to work in a job which entails alot of traveling. Or shift work....working nights. Away from their families. It is ok if the men do it..but generally it is not for the women...and they will usually get more leeway in this than will the men...by default.

Most women I have ever known prefer to work in jobs which more suit their personalities...certain kinds of work. Certain
conditions..environments. You do not see most women trying out for jobs which can get them quickly and violently killed or maimed for life ..since this would lower substantially their value in the marketplace..and amongst other women..the competition. Also among men.

Now what was that you were saying about...


but which gender plays which role can be switched more easily now than ever.


This looks good on paper...jackalope..but I don't see women building shopping malls or grocery stores..or hooking up the electrical..or commercial/industrial refrigeration systems....which keep all these goods at their fingertips.

The women on these sites who are doing most of the complaining about how unfair the system is are to me the women who have the least "options" from the system in operation.

I do agree with one of the posters early on in this thread.. In line with the textbook "Victim Dictum " so popular today ..even among politicians...when the economy goes big time into the trash can...the women of this nation will be bailed out by one government program after another...while the men will get little or nothing since they are obviously and by default.."oppressors." Textbook of politics to do this.

The real motivation is that the women can be more easily cultivated for predictable, malleable, guaranteed votes at election time than can men. The women must be subsidized and the men who still have jobs must be put in a position to work by default to support this.
Government itself in this is very female and feminine..in that they are so often want to give away someone else's production or monies...give away someone else's RISKS. And they use this to keep and maintain power and control in a manner not seen and not known by most peoples.

Sound familiar to some of you?? Think it through it works.

Most of the government jobs which are being created...whom do you think will get the bulk of them?? Males or females. They are buying votes.

By the way..I don't know if it has been mentioned..in this thread...I hear alot of what I have taken to call the "Burka Dictum"

That women in this country are but one step away from all wearing Burkas..now...they are almost "Victims."

Sometimes when I want to be properly entertained..I watch this HGTV program ..or is it some other channel where they flip a house or hunt up a new house or a second home..et al. I notice that all the women in these programs wear "Burkas" and are totally silent when the decisions and input are made into what goodies go into the home under consideration. These women are all downtrodden and brow beaten...they have no input or decision making potential in the purchase or outfitting of these homes.
They are for all purposes unknown and unheard.

Women in this country..America ..are the prime decision makers of almost every big ticket item sold. It is they who decide what appliances go into what house.....what schools ..how the children are dressed..what kind of vehicle is purchased...etc etc...these are all items usually bought on credit.

And this is true whether she has a man or not. You do not usually see a woman in these programs allowing the man to decide these issues for the house while she makes the purchase on her credit. The entire process is primarily up to her..and every house or auto sales persons know this.

This makes a total laughing stock out of the Burka Dictum as well as the "Victim Dictum" so popular among so many including the body politic.
You just have to be able to think past sports conditioning to see it for the joke that it is.

And the Joke is on you males out here... Because this is true whether the woman works or does not.

Thanks,
Orangetom


[edit on 15-4-2010 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Hi orangetom,

Must say that i am quite surprised by your views on women and how they apparently went from having not even the power to vote, or really pick husbands in the west ( god forbid we mention the East) to having all this power you suggest they do? It's been said that the best advice for a good marriage is to marry a reasonable women and then to do everything she tells you to; is that what the men of America/west all suddenly did fifty years ago?

As to specific statements most jobs still go to men ( and they are still higher paid per year of experience&education) as logically men pretty much live to support their and do as well as they can by their families and can and will forever more continue to do so. While economic and social conditions determine if women have full time or part time professional employment, or remain at home to work harder than they ever would at ' the office' to raise the kids and maintain a livable environment. Men on average can't provide the same level of primary care and on average will not be satisfied with such a role as we are simply not psychologically or biologically evolved for it. I am not suggesting that men can not but in terms of averages and 'efficiency' i would like to see why you think this can be different.

As to governments supporting women how can this argument be sustained when our economic conditions are so changed that middle class families now rarely have the option of being middle class without both spouses working full time? How does that represent a government that cares more about women, or gives much away to gain their votes, when such conditions can be changed only by monetary policy?

On another issue women logically do not risk their lives , especially not pointlessly, as they have and are aware that they have intrinsic value in being able to give society children. Men on the other hand are for at least until they get married just busy trying to prove they have value enough to attract a women that will have them. Men have very little intrinsic value and society's in general understands this well enough to have them do any and everything that is remotely dangerous.

There's a few other things but hopefully you will care to elaborate on these issues?

Regards,

Stellar



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Stellar,


Must say that i am quite surprised by your views on women and how they apparently went from having not even the power to vote, or really pick husbands in the west ( god forbid we mention the East) to having all this power you suggest they do? It's been said that the best advice for a good marriage is to marry a reasonable women and then to do everything she tells you to; is that what the men of America/west all suddenly did fifty years ago?


This type of time warp "Victim Dictum " ideology is not of what I am speaking at all. It works on Drama Queens but not on me. No thanks.
Don't despair Stellar, I have just as dim a view of what passes for alot of males today as for what passes for alot of females. Hence I told the males out here ..men if you prefer..that the joke is on them in my last post.

What you have out here today..its a large section of males raised primarily in the company of women, television, movies, and peer groups ..with little adult male supervision or guidance ...except for what they see on television/movies and in peer groups.
I know this because of the almost feminine way they carry themselves..with alot of bling and story telling...profiling and styling. When the going gets tough..alot of them can be found hanging back...near the soda machines, microwave and coffee pot. Not out where it is happening ..at great RISK and difficulty. They too don't want to break a nail or get dirty...take RISKS with their Beauty potential.
They think and act like women..but they dress in nice fancy clothes, have nice cars...et al. Of course..they were raised primarily by women.
No problem by me with this ..I just don't want them around me any more than necessary. They are for all purposes...High Maintenance.

You need to think this through Stellar..


As to specific statements most jobs still go to men ( and they are still higher paid per year of experience&education) as logically men pretty much live to support their and do as well as they can by their families and can and will forever more continue to do so.


Males who are men ..by rote..do not spend huge amounts on big ticket items without consulting their women...with their "Higher paying jobs." Translate that to say, by social constructs, more options for both the women and children...no matter if the women work. Got it now??

As I stated in my previous post...the women in the west do not come to the realtors wearing burkas..they do not stand silent in the background while the decisions are being made. Every realtor knows they must sell the woman...first not the man. Every car sales person knows they must sell the woman..not so much the man...in a car sale.
This gives women tremendous political as well as economic clout in western nations. All the while folks like you are using the time warp technique to make a point which has long ago gone obsolete yet it is still used to keep the average male dumbassed ignorant and trembling in his boots with guilt. What a dumb ass. As long as you feed the average male in the west...sports and cheerleaders and NASCAR or such..he is good for another 100,000 miles. The system is designed to keep him this way.
And it is his fault for being tunnel visioned.

Women in Western Nations are not downtrodden browbeaten victims. Never have been. The women of whom you speak..fifty years or more ago...worked harder than many males to today. But what is also ignored for political expediency is that it was no cakewalk for the average western Male as well. This is a lie which must be fed to the public to dumb them down while creating a whole victim class on the public purse...for votes. To dumb down America and the American male in particular.

The men of yesteryear...did not have it all that easy as well...all you have to do is walk into any graveyard and look at the dates on the stones and use some simple math to know the story.
When they do this political claptrap Stellar ..they only tell half the story...the other half does not exist or is a fantasy. The men had it just as rough back then too Stellar...not just the women. Yet only half the story is told.


While economic and social conditions determine if women have full time or part time professional employment, or remain at home to work harder than they ever would at ' the office' to raise the kids and maintain a livable environment.


What Stellar>>!!!???? Think about what you are posting here. Economic and social conditions...???? for women??? What???
What about economic and social conditions for the men??? On the government purse of course??? Are there any?? or is there unequal protection of the law going on here??

How many men do you know who have the "option"...of necessity or social construct.. to work part time verses full time?? Or remain at home to take care of the children and home while the woman works and takes RISKS with her life and beauty values ..social values to bring home the bacon...at her expense??
Does this fit in with female social belief systems and expectations..on the public purse?? Are there any male social beliefs and expectations being financed from the public purse???"

Do you think for one minute..that women of Equality are trying out for textbook male occupations..at great risk..then come home to be taken care of ...and then do traditionally male work at home..while the male takes care of the children and home..and screams about his victimization???

Are the women of equality in this world doing the traditionally male work at home as well...at great risk to their persons?? Or are they screaming inequality ...because the male is not doing enough outside of his risk taking male work and helping her with hers as well?? Are you getting my point here yet...Stellar. Who is the dumb ass here??
Only a male can be this naturally stupid..because the females are not.

Female socialization beliefs mean that for many women in the workplace ..they can tailor their jobs to their personalities...more than the males. They can take advantage of more favorable environmental conditions ...better hours...take more time off...have better facilities..etc etc etc.
In other words they have all round more options than to most males.

The women you see out here on most of these threads..who do the complaining about the system are usually the ones with the least "Options."
The least options either through men or through the system...on the public purse of course.
The only one dumb enough not to catch it is the males out here. As I said..give them some sports and cheerleaders and they are good for another 100,000 miles.

I will tell you something about alot of these "Professional " women out here in the work place. Ask their teachers how well their children are doing in school. Not all of them ..but a notable number. They are not fooling their teachers...for the teachers who care..are not missing a heartbeat...of what can be seen about the mothers by their children.
It is just not popular to state so publicly in order not to upset the economic/political/'votes to which must be maintained and catered.
These women daily drop their children off in public schools driving in with their nice cars...carefully tailored dress...cell phones stuck to their ears..and then drop off their children without lunch or even materials they need to bring for that class...even leaving the schools with the phone still stuck to their carefully done hair/ear.
These women are high maintenance and in the fast food lane...by social constructs. And their children are paying the price to maintain this lifestyle...as well as are the men.
Once again..very few males even notice this as long as these women look nice and the males have sports and cheerleaders. Dumbasses!!

And remember Stellar ..these women are now voters. What kind of lifestyle do you think these women are going to vote for..and who is going to have to take RISKS to support/pay for it?? Catching on yet??


Men on average can't provide the same level of primary care and on average will not be satisfied with such a role as we are simply not psychologically or biologically evolved for it. I am not suggesting that men can not but in terms of averages and 'efficiency' i would like to see why you think this can be different.


What are you possibly thinking here Stellar?? Do you for one moment think women are going to give up the traditional roles..plus the defaulted roles they get in a social structure so that the men can have "Options?" and take the more sedate comfortable roles in better environmental conditions than women think they are entitled..while they (the women)RISK out in the workplace??
Socially Stellar..the trend is always more "Options" for the women ..not for the men. What are you thinking here?
Women make far more controllable and predicable voters than do men...Stellar. Women will always vote for more out of the public purse.
When the men finally become feminized..they too will vote for more out of the public purse...only they will now become competition for the women. Thinking yet...Stellar?? Whom do you think the body politic will consider more expendable and disposable..the males or the females? What is the historical track record on this??

I will continue on in the next thread as I am running out of characters.
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by StellarX
 


Stellar,

To continue from my previous post..


On another issue women logically do not risk their lives , especially not pointlessly, as they have and are aware that they have intrinsic value in being able to give society children. Men on the other hand are for at least until they get married just busy trying to prove they have value enough to attract a women that will have them. Men have very little intrinsic value and society's in general understands this well enough to have them do any and everything that is remotely dangerous.

There's a few other things but hopefully you will care to elaborate on these issues?


As a rule this is generally true. However..as you see more and more women entering the workplace..they are beginning to take on more and more male traditions. I see alot more women than I ever remember smoking now days. Not good Stellar.
None of my business though Stellar..they want to smoke and die of emphysema and other such related illnesses..no problem by me.
Alot more of them becoming junkies, drunks, too..than ever before...total train wrecks out of their lives and children's lives as well.

They do not logically risk their lives or beauty values because it is their calling card...particularly against the competition..and women are highly competitive out in the marketplace..particularly against other women. This is the main reason they do not traditionally take risks...except to catch male "good providers" against the competition. And this competition can be ruthless and without rules.
When they have nothing else to fall back on...many women use combinations of sexuality and beauty as the prime investment. And one does not risk their prime investment without the possibility of great returns in exchange. Males are not traditionally that smart..not even smart enough to catch on to this template in women.

Men/males traditionally "Try out " in competition for the most desirable females....sometimes at great RISK. Not smart of them. It often shortens their lifespan...without reasonable compensation.

Women on the other hand ..expect and usually demand such compensation for their beauty risks...intrinsic risks...after all they are risking so much out here in the marketplace.

What????

they have intrinsic value in being able to give society children


You do realize that this is getting pretty thin now days in lieu of the Abortion issue so demanded by women today??? Right?? It tends to make statements like the one of yours I quote above....nonsensical.

And particularly when I hear alot of teachers mention how it is with alot of women dropping their children off in public schools..even in some private schools too...High Maintenance...even at the expense of the children...just like abortion.

You might want to think this through a bit more.

Oh...they did want to put this in the USA's health care bill..to get it financed on the public purse. I don't believe it went through. Don't worry..they will get it through at a later date..on the public purse...in exchange for the women's vote. They will just amend it..revise it.


Men have very little intrinsic value and society's in general understands this well enough to have them do any and everything that is remotely dangerous.


But this is not equality happening...it is expendability and disposability of one gender over another. Who is the victim here Stellar?? Think it through ..it fits..you are doing well here in pointing out that women are not victims ..yesteryear or today as well.

Thank you for making my point here. Only a man can be this naturally a victim and giftedly stupid and not know it. As I said..give this kind of dummy some sports and cheerleaders and he is good for another 100,000 miles.


Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Just personally, as far as women's rights go...

I feel most right when he's making the money, and I'm spending it.


Real freedom is not 'free to be a wage slave like a man.'

Sometimes people need to examine their priorities. We did. It's actually surprising what 2 people that are a good team can accomplish while one works out in the world, and the other works in the home & garden. We cut our income by a good bit more than half, and we live better than we did when just one of us was working.

Sometimes when you live in a good way - whatever that way is that calls you - you get blessed in spite of the numbers. I wish more people would realize that.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Corruption is the reason for crisis, not women. It's the banks that destroyed the system, remenber ?



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by oneclickaway
I think the evidence of the world speaks for itself.
Who holds the wealth?
Who has the power?
Who are the elite?
Who has stolen, cheated and squandered the money?
Who not only allows but creates situations where children starve to death?
Who rapes?
Who are the vast majority of paedophiles?
Who practises the vast majority of domestic violence?
Who devised and practices grotesque and sick torture methods?
Who creates all wars?
Who commits genocide?
Who would toss a baby in the air to land on a bayonet or behead someone?
Who would believe people should be killed as they are not of benefit to society?

Who therefore has even a hope of having the empathy and emotional maturity required to lead and administer a country or its finances….and who should be entrusted with the power to do so?
Seems that for all time those that have forcibly placed themselves in power in every sphere have failed so utterly dismally that now they threaten the safety of the entire world.



Power corrupts I afraid. Women would do the same thing once society will turn them to men.

But its time to make a contribution to the topic :

The real problem with working women is the destruction of family. If women don't have the time to raise the children, don't expect men to do it.
We hear all the time that men have to take a more important role in raising the children, but its against nature. Historically, and I'm sorry to say it, women raise the children while men search for food. Sure women can do the same thing as men , but will never do it as well as men. On the other hand men won't take care of children as much as women (women are babies junkies you know). We are biologically programmed to act in differents ways. Trying to change that is an obscene act of perversion regarding Nature. The fact society pushes for equality should be disturbing. It is only in the name of profit.
Its to be put on the same category as supressings vitamins in food or suppressing freedom. The society is alienating us without thinking about the consequences.

As you probably know chemicals such as plastic bottle are transforming gradually men into women by suppressing their hormones. The is a growing problem of infertility and corporations are at fault here. It's probably not on purpose but less "true" men means more power since women are more predictable...

[edit on 16-5-2010 by ickylevel]



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 07:07 AM
link   
I have a proof that non-sexist societies will fail :

So, in europe and in the USA, we are implementing a non sexist-society. And guess what is happening ? The birth rate in theses societies has fallen. The main threat to theses societies is immigration. Hispanic for the USA and Islamic for Europe. As you know, Islam is taking over europe, because "they" make much more children than "us". The same is happening in the USA with hispanics.

Immigrants have sexists societies where women are entitled to raising children. As a consequence they raise more and slowly replace the non-sexist "host"society.

So women rights is just an utopy that will be swept away by evolution. Our societies are being replaced by sexist societies, which are more "effective" in term of population growth.

I'm sorry for all women, but evolution is telling us that women are made to raise children and that societies that forget this just cease to exist.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ickylevel
 



just wondering here.....
would these women be having so many kids if they could say no to marriage or to the sexual advances their husbands make toward them??
if it's more like they are being married off with no say in the matter, then forced into sexual activity, that then leads to more pregnacies, well.....
do you really think that society needs to demean the wants, needs, and desires of over half the population, so so you can have more people in your society than you have work to keep them busy, or resources to feed and care for??

na, don't think so.....



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by ickylevel
 



just wondering here.....
would these women be having so many kids if they could say no to marriage or to the sexual advances their husbands make toward them??
if it's more like they are being married off with no say in the matter, then forced into sexual activity, that then leads to more pregnacies, well.....
do you really think that society needs to demean the wants, needs, and desires of over half the population, so so you can have more people in your society than you have work to keep them busy, or resources to feed and care for??

na, don't think so.....




Like it or not, its like what is happening. I'm telling you facts. Whether our society is "good" or not, its diying.

[edit on 17-5-2010 by ickylevel]




new topics
top topics
 
58
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join