ECON: Working women almost certainly caused the credit crunch

No.

Lessening economic ability to provide you ARE talking about taking away rights.

Pure and simple.

And the answer is NO.

You leave your job.

[edit on 2009/3/3 by Aeons]

reply to post by orangetom1999


Your commentary is full of emotion. The entire concept you promote is based on emotion.

You aren't my equal.

Fortune for you that there are laws protecting you from the fact that you are not my equal in any way, merely based on the fact that you are also human.


[edit on 2009/3/3 by Aeons]

reply to post by orangetom1999


rawa.org... the ladies on that site are not happy with burkhas. burkhas are ridiculous. take responsibility for your own fingers and hormones. don't blame the ladies

[edit on 3-3-2009 by undo]

The Feminine is the shape that is the dominant force upon your planet at this time. Men do not know about being the Feminine in a physical way and women are still trying to work it out in their own understanding. Gender is a formless-form fashioned by individuals into a convenient form through the forces of consciousness and unconsciousness. The shape of the Feminine has evolved through its various forms by this process whereas the shape of the Masculine has not changed as much over that same period of time.
("Scales of the Dragon", A.Dragon, 1999)

Change is part of the upward evolving structure of (all) society. To withhold half of that potential from it's higher potential, is to limit the entire potential, and create certain internal downward shifts, which lead to aberration of balanced Intent in that societal framework. It takes two wings to fly, both the left and the right, the female and the male.

Societies' current imbalance, financial and moral, is the result of many forces that have not been balanced. Least of all the Feminine, who has stood as half of all that is owed and owned, with the same courage as the Masculine.

[edit on 3-3-2009 by SS,Naga]

What I am about to say is politically incorrect to say the least, even prejudice perhaps, but I am going to say it anyway.

Every couple should be entitled to one job, it doesn't matter if it's the man or woman as the alpha earner. Who ever has the skills to obtain the highest paid job goes to work. The other can only go to work once 0% unemployment and underemployment is achieved in society, that way every family has at least one higher wage earner and a job.

Radical I know, but it would sure boast up the middle class, and maybe bring down the upper middle class. And it would destroy the inflation we saw develop with the two wage earning family.

Emotions are not intellligence to me.

There is nothing wrong with emotions. Women evolved to be more emotional for a reason, it is NOT a weakness but an alternative way for us to deal with conflict. It is not a sign of a weak intelligence.

It is to be expected that I as a woman would feel threatened by the article, I did the first time I read it.

I will fight to my last breath to have the right to be respected for the HARD work I do to keep the hearth. The right to be protected when the breadwinner abandons me. The right redress when the breadwinner abuses me. The right to give the hearth tending duties to my partner whilst I pursue my dreams.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
What I am about to say is politically incorrect to say the least, even prejudice perhaps, but I am going to say it anyway.

Every couple should be entitled to one job, it doesn't matter if it's the man or woman as the alpha earner. Who ever has the skills to obtain the highest paid job goes to work. The other can only go to work once 0% unemployment and underemployment is achieved in society, that way every family has at least one higher wage earner and a job.

Radical I know, but it would sure boast up the middle class, and maybe bring down the upper middle class. And it would destroy the inflation we saw develop with the two wage earning family.

Solved. No Problem.

We'll just get a divorce and live together instead.

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by Logarock

 

yes, but what drove the women out of the homes was that industrialization came along and snatched their jobs from them!! they were creating income at home through the weaving, the sewing, candle making, ect.....
till industrialization came along....

so, well, you want to give up those nice lucritive industries and give them back to the women now?

You need to get away from the candle making days. lol

The current trends and situation had a transition point starting in the 60's. Really didn't have much to do with industrialization. Thats an simplistic misplacement of the point in time. Although there were several social factors it still boiled down to money.

One incomes was enough for the vast part population whoever was earning it the man or the woman. What changed everything was more is better. More more more!

A new car in the 60s cost say about 3grand. The cost represented much less of a portion of a couples income. Now car payments represent a very high percentage of the same couples income with both working! Same with house payments. Anyway cost of living is much more disproportionate for todays working families forcing both to work 40 hours a week.

Originally posted by Merigold

Emotions are not intellligence to me.

There is nothing wrong with emotions. Women evolved to be more emotional for a reason, it is NOT a weakness but an alternative way for us to deal with conflict. It is not a sign of a weak intelligence.

It is to be expected that I as a woman would feel threatened by the article, I did the first time I read it.

I will fight to my last breath to have the right to be respected for the HARD work I do to keep the hearth. The right to be protected when the breadwinner abandons me. The right redress when the breadwinner abuses me. The right to give the hearth tending duties to my partner whilst I pursue my dreams.

The people who say emotions and intelligence can't go together are usually very emotional, and so unintelligent that they don't even recognize it.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33


Who entitles anyone to this? Who is over your head? No ones over mine! I'm just curious who you handed your reigns to? No one empowers me! I am a sovereign being and all a country is, is the arrangement of assets, and our childrens inheritance. Those we hire are mere employees. All I've seen so far is treason!

holy cow....


ladies ladies ladies.....

let me be the one to say, that we men, do of course love all of you! WE WANT YOU TO BE HAPPY, CUS IT MAKES US HAPPY!!

when you are mad/upset WE ARE VERY MAD/UPSET. trust us.

now. this topic (however stupid/imature/irrellevant as it may be) only has one point that is going for it. That point is simply stating that since there are more incomes, then prices went up.

What this post fails to point out is that is all the hard work and energy ladies have put in to be considered equal by the law.

This should not have been directed as a way of saying GET OUT OF MY JOB POSITION AND GO BAKE A CAKE. which i think it may have been seen as this.

I just want all the beautiful women to think about how this was obviously written by some guy who has nothing better to do than hurt peoples feelings.

no matter how true having more people in the workforce created a disturbance that we are now paying for is, YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT NOTHING WILL CHANGE THE WAY THINGS ARE NOW. Besides, I think that women in the workplace make things better.

Guys will be guys and women will be women

peace everyone

My final point:

It's obvious that this guy (the one who wrote the article) is angry that women are working outside the home. He wants them to stay at home and take care of him.

I say, if men want women to stay at home and take care of them, and not work, then they should be someone that we would want to stay at home for.

And then maybe, if we don't have anything better to at the time, we'll consider it.

[edit on 3-3-2009 by nikiano]

Originally posted by LoneGunMan

Originally posted by whitewave
reply to post by LoneGunMan

 

No, I've never carried a 300# person up a ladder through a fire and couldn't if I wanted to. However, if they lived with me, I could keep them from becoming 300# by regulating their diet and then they might pull their own a** up the ladder.

That 300+ person was a 6'7" Firefighter loaded with gear and muscle and it was going down the ladder not up.
Please lets not miss the point I was making. I already stated my limitations.

Thanks for the correction but I couldn't carry that guy down the ladder either. I caught the point you were making. We all have our limitations. Let's not add to them by removing the rights and responsibilities of half the population.

As DarkElf once stated: I don't want equality; I want respect.
OrangeTom makes the point that women must EARN respect by taking equal risks (if I understand you correctly, OT).

The point of the OP article is based on a faulty premise that women in the work force are the cause of inflation. I've pointed out twice now that inflation is caused by an increase in the supply of money (not estrogen levels in the workplace).

As long as we're all focused on fighting each other we'll never focus our attention on the true culprits or a solution to the problem.

Great post and some great replies from both sides. I think a lot of posters are taking this thing the wrong way. Although the subject isn't quite black and white I agree wholeheartedly, the argument that the feminist movement has destroyed the family unit...not women, which is what some of our girls are getting their backs up about. Quite rightly so. I mean on face value that's an attack on your civil liberties and way of life that countless women gave their lives for and eventually getting.

So women start getting "proper jobs" ie PAID jobs (now now girls, as if I would ) thus creating the two income family. This has been covered in earlier posts so my viewpoint is that economically speaking it did have an affect on monetary values ie inflation, costs of living, those types of things. Women still weren't being recognised as equals and this was shown by way of lack of opportunities within the workplace like promotion, or even equal salaries which still goes on today! Women still had to battle over many decades, gradually getting further on career wise and more momentum. More and more women chased careers. The cracks in the break ups of family units have been showing for a few generations and with the ease of divorces, abortions, contraception our attitudes have become half arsed for lack of a better term. Media influences like soap operas depicting "every day life" delivered en-masse, in my belief and many others have helped to destroy the family unit too. I'm kinda swaying off here i think...

Now we have loads of women chasing careers at what price? I did say loads not all :-) Career, social life, opportunities, independance, building of relationships and friendships.... to have someone else look after your child? we work almost a 3rd of our lives so in effect that means a 3rd of your childs life will be with a childminder who can't discipline your child, can't do things for your child the way mum does, like make a skint knee better with a kiss, or give them that security only mum or dad can, they'll get to see your child do things for the first time that you won't be able to cherish, read a story in that voice they've known since being in the womb... Can u ever remember crying for your mum? That feeling? I believe noone can bring a child up as well as its mother. Come on and look at nature, it's almost entirely female influence in every younglings early stages of development. Women are maternal - men aren't. We can only be paternal (well, that's debatable lol).

We as a species have come so far and I know many of you believe this too when I say that the strings are being pulled for us and unless something is done to save the traditional family then you won't need to look after your kids because they'll be owned by the state or working beside you...it's as simple as that. I don't think women should be stopped to work per say nor stripped of equality. What I propose is a benefit or welfare or scheme of some sort for mothers where they can job share with a friend or family member so that families are brought up with families or close ones thus creating bonds with people that can last lifetimes bringing more of a sense of community back to the world. Or tax reliefs and manners of help to work from home...it's the modern era. Or mothers groups working together in a business, with creche, job share in one place...nursery/job/social group for mothers n toddlers.... no-one wants to take away your equality or rights but men are always told to "be a man!" but also to be kind and sensitive...maybe it's time for some females to be a woman? Just a thought and nothing meant by it... after all we are talking about equality and taking responsibilities? For centuries man worked nd women stayed at home and it was fine. Yet in the last 60 years the break up of the family has happened and look at the youth today
Men would also need to make vast changes in their lives too so why don't we all work together like one big family?

If my good lady wants to pursue her career and allow me to stay at home and raise any children we may have I would snap her arm off in an instant.

Financially it would make sense as she has more years before retirement than I do; that and she also has a job with better earning prospects.

I'm all for it,

just,

er,

don't tell her.