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 Illusionsaregrander
And regarding the "nowdays women HAVE to work, it isnt a choice," I dont suppose it ever occurred to you that women HAD to go to work financially even back before "womens lib." Women have always HAD to work. Not every single one of them, but the poor have always been for the most part two income households. The options for what women could do was very limited, and they had little protection from being fired for ridiculous things, (like getting married) and that is what the whole equal rights thing was about.
Originally posted by kalisdad
you are proving my point...
did women get equality? no
did things get better for women? a little bit
prior to the movement, it was the poor that held 2+ jobs in the household...
after the movement it was the middle class that needed 2 incomes to survive
Originally posted by kalisdad
reply to post by Annee
you are proving my point...
did women get equality? no
did things get better for women? a little bit
prior to the movement, it was the poor that held 2+ jobs in the household...
after the movement it was the middle class that needed 2 incomes to survive
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by kalisdad
after the movement it was the middle class that needed 2 incomes to survive
Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Originally posted by kalisdad
after the movement it was the middle class that needed 2 incomes to survive
Lol it always makes me laugh and feel slightly sad when i hear people saying they need 2 incomes to survive. The simple fact is you could survive on 1000 a month, 2 people with a mortgage IF you were willing to sacrifice.
For example two people probably don't need a 3 bedroom house with an 800 pound mortgage, you don't need that second car, the new tv, those new expensive clothes or any of the other stuff. People seem to confuse want with need more than ever before.
I am of the opinion that if two people can't afford a child they should make the choice not to have one. If they can afford to havea child then one of the parents should stay home to look after it. When the child goes off to school the person at home can get a aprt time job and i don't care if it's the man or woman who stays home.
Originally posted by kalisdad
if thats your version of alot better, I feel bad for you
2nd line
Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
Originally posted by kalisdad
if thats your version of alot better, I feel bad for you
2nd line
So you think poor women, widows, women married to alcoholics, or disabled men, or men with mental or other illnesses, divorced or abandoned women and their children should have just sucked it up and dealt with it so that some in the middle class could have the Beaver Cleaver thing going?
Heck, we could make that same argument about slavery. All those whiney black folk should have just sucked it up so that a certain segment of the population could prosper from not having to compete with them.
Right. Your argument isnt selfish at all.
Originally posted by kalisdad
when did I ever mention 'Beaver'???
I said that after the movement, women have it a little better.
Annee said that they have it ALOT better, despite her own words that
"Women today can not even fathom they could be fired for getting married or pregnant or even living with some guy. Or rejecting advances - or not wearing nylons - or being over weight. It is not in their reality"
my point was that the they have more options, but they still don't have equality
edit for spelling
[edit on 15-6-2010 by kalisdad]
Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Originally posted by kalisdad
when did I ever mention 'Beaver'???
I said that after the movement, women have it a little better.
Annee said that they have it ALOT better, despite her own words that
"Women today can not even fathom they could be fired for getting married or pregnant or even living with some guy. Or rejecting advances - or not wearing nylons - or being over weight. It is not in their reality"
my point was that the they have more options, but they still don't have equality
edit for spelling
[edit on 15-6-2010 by kalisdad]
Huh?
Women have the right to vote.
Women have the same legal protections as men.
Women are generally paid the same amount (some sectors lag behind).
Women can work.
Women can be government officials.
Women can be in the armed forces.
You consider these to be "a little better"?
Please point out the exact inequalities you seem to think abound.
Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Originally posted by kalisdad
when did I ever mention 'Beaver'???
I said that after the movement, women have it a little better.
Annee said that they have it ALOT better, despite her own words that
"Women today can not even fathom they could be fired for getting married or pregnant or even living with some guy. Or rejecting advances - or not wearing nylons - or being over weight. It is not in their reality"
my point was that the they have more options, but they still don't have equality
edit for spelling
[edit on 15-6-2010 by kalisdad]
Huh?
Women have the right to vote.
Women are generally paid the same amount (some sectors lag behind).
Women can work.
Women can be government officials.
Women can be in the armed forces.
You consider these to be "a little better"?
Please point out the exact inequalities you seem to think abound.
Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Please point out the exact inequalities you seem to think abound.
Originally posted by kalisdad
me joining this thread has never been about the equality or lack thereof.... I say again, it's always been about power/control.... they forcefed us the idea that women would be equal just to get the household income up so they could tax more and rape the people of their hard earned money...
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by kalisdad
me joining this thread has never been about the equality or lack thereof.... I say again, it's always been about power/control.... they forcefed us the idea that women would be equal just to get the household income up so they could tax more and rape the people of their hard earned money...
You are entitled to believe what ever you want. I you want to believe there is some government agenda - - go for it.
But - I find that to be one of the most ridiculous viewpoints I've ever encountered.
Supression is Supression is Supression is Supression
Equal Rights is Equal Rights is Equal Rights is Equal Rights
Simple.
Originally posted by kalisdad
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by kalisdad
me joining this thread has never been about the equality or lack thereof.... I say again, it's always been about power/control.... they forcefed us the idea that women would be equal just to get the household income up so they could tax more and rape the people of their hard earned money...
You are entitled to believe what ever you want. I you want to believe there is some government agenda - - go for it.
But - I find that to be one of the most ridiculous viewpoints I've ever encountered.
Supression is Supression is Supression is Supression
Equal Rights is Equal Rights is Equal Rights is Equal Rights
Simple.
this is a conspiracy website.... don't most people here have their own views of things, regardless of what a few others might think??