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.

 

The Feminist Movement—Ruining The Image Of Men

page: 37
57
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by kalisdad


thats a bogus arguement. and I say that as a white male that has been refused state health insurance solely based on the fact that I am a man, when women can get state health insurance at any time, just because they can reproduce.


Actual reality is a bogus argument? Good one.

I'd love to get state insurance. My daughter would love to get state insurance.

You must live in a different state then I do.




posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Full_Vision
reply to post by Annee
 

I know very well of the time periods of this struggle for our freedoms, in thanks to my mother and grandmother.. but those are basic human freedoms and doesnt mean the women should be allowed to take over everything..its not saying we as a sex arent strong or intelligent, damn right we are, but its in a different way, not to equal men.



If you didn't live it yourself - - - then no - you don't really know. You have never felt the suppression or being denied the simplest thing like playing sports because of gender.

ALLOWED? . . . to take over? Take over what?



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by kalisdad


thats a bogus arguement. and I say that as a white male that has been refused state health insurance solely based on the fact that I am a man, when women can get state health insurance at any time, just because they can reproduce.


Actual reality is a bogus argument? Good one.

I'd love to get state insurance. My daughter would love to get state insurance.

You must live in a different state then I do.



your entire argument is that you lived thru the inequality...

try living in the present, where women and minorities are legally superior to the white male


hell, illegal immigrants have more rights to healthcare than I do

[edit on 17-6-2010 by kalisdad]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by kalisdad

your entire argument is that you lived thru the inequality...

try living in the present, where women and minorities are legally superior to the white male

hell, illegal immigrants have more rights to healthcare than I do



Corpse here typing. I look pretty good in my Avatar for a dead person.

Let's see:

1. my husband is only 43 white male - - working in Arizona - - in college working on his degree.

2. 16 year old grandson in Arizona - white male - qualified for scholarship.

3. Canadian son-in-law (legal) white male - electrician - working.

4. raising 2 year-old grandson

5. daughter white female - working freelance film production - no insurance

6. daughter white female - ADHD - been working since she was 13. She's a very hard worker.

Sorry to disappoint you - - - but I've still got my pusle-on-life - - - I'm not hangin' out on the porch in my rocking chair.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by kalisdad

your entire argument is that you lived thru the inequality...

try living in the present, where women and minorities are legally superior to the white male

hell, illegal immigrants have more rights to healthcare than I do



Corpse here typing. I look pretty good in my Avatar for a dead person.

Let's see:

1. my husband is only 43 white male - - working in Arizona - - in college working on his degree.

2. 16 year old grandson in Arizona - white male - qualified for scholarship.

3. Canadian son-in-law (legal) white male - electrician - working.

4. raising 2 year-old grandson

5. daughter white female - working freelance film production - no insurance

6. daughter white female - ADHD - been working since she was 13. She's a very hard worker.

Sorry to disappoint you - - - but I've still got my pusle-on-life - - - I'm not hangin' out on the porch in my rocking chair.


what does any of that have to do with my statement?

again, you said you were denied everything in the past because of your gender? are you still experiencing these kinds of bias?

are you still denied that credit card because you are female?

are you denying that illegal immigrants are getting free healthcare in mosts states

www.theamericanresistance.com...

www.heritage.org...

I say again, live in the now and see that you are not only legally equal, in alot of ways you are superior.

why are organizations allowed to offer programs specifically for women and women alone, but if a male organization did the same thing it would be considered sexist??

www.fundsnetservices.com...


[edit on 17-6-2010 by kalisdad]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


You just like to fight for the sake of fighting.

My point is NOT that I stand for all women. My point is that the whole point of equal opportunity is that "women" as a collective dont exist. Only individual women do. We make big groups of things, collectives, for our ease, it is a mental convenience. Fighting for equal opportunity never meant that "all women" should act one way or "all men" another. Thats never been the truth, "all" of any "group" of people have not been identical in makeup, and "women's rights" were an attempt to restore a natural balance where that same mistaken, lazy and self interested tendency toward grouping them had previously taken it away.

Its about individuals. And quite frankly, when feminists feel justified in lumping "men" or "white men" into clumps and decline to look at that individual and that individuals merits failings or circumstances it is equally lazy and shamefully self interested.

We use "groupings" for our own convenience when dealing with humans. It is a short cut, it is a cheat of the truth, It makes it easier to exclude someone else from something we want, or to pretend we know who are allies are. Saying "all x is y" is lazy when it is used to describe human beings who are incredibly nuanced and variable. It isnt until you get down to the x y chromosome level that you can begin to sound coherent making generalizations, and even then, you have xxy, and other variants.

And your description of working in a powerplant is a good example of that. Not ALL jobs in mining are physical. Are they? Its a big industry. And there are specific job titles within that industry. Same with power plants, same with anything. There isnt just one type of worker in a power plant, or in mining, or in construction, or in an office. Just like there isnt just one bland "woman type" that all women fit into.

Which was my point, your generalizations are crap. Little, round, prolific, but fortunately rather innocuous, turds of the intellect. Scattered everywhere.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by kalisdad
 


You are correct. Allowing one form of discrimination but not another is not equality. It may have, at one point in time, have been a necessary evil. But its still an evil, and IMHO, its time has long passed.

There are two whole generations from birth to young adulthood toiling under these new "discriminatory" assumptions that are being treated unfairly. There is a time when the new evil becomes more of a harm than a good, and I think it is time we started taking a more "humanist" approach and looked at people as individuals and stopped allowing broad generalizations any merit.

That was the original goal, presumably, but unfortunately, anyone who gets some form of an advantage is loathe to give it up. Women and men (and all the races) do not behave differently in that regard.

Edit to add;

All the bickering over who (as a group) has it better is just a distraction from the fact that no one at certain income levels has it very good. If you can keep the slaves fighting among themselves over whose fault it all is, you dont have to worry that they will look at the real culprits who run things and whom are making it harder and harder for all of us to pay our bills and have a decent life.



[edit on 17-6-2010 by Illusionsaregrander]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   
It's just changes in culture and society. It's not merely the feminist movement that's destroying men. That movement seems to have run it's course as far as benefiting either sex, and now it's just a monstrosity run by absurd dictators.

Both sexes are going through a lot of changes. The amount of change in such a relatively small time period is causing abnormal amounts of stress for us all. I always like to bring up the environment when dealing with issues like these. All the synthetic chemicals, and various heavy metals are wrecking havoc on our hormones and bodies as a whole. It's effecting everyone slightly different based on their expose and genetic propensities.

Just look back to b & w television but a couple of generations ago. Compare it to now. Men are more feminine-like, and women are more masculine-like. It's not as if this is cool or anything, but it is what it is.

Personally, I think before it's all said and done, men and women will be nearly indistinguishable, and everyone will be homosexual as a result. This is the way it's always been in some people's eyes.

[edit on 17-6-2010 by unityemissions]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by kalisdad

what does any of that have to do with my statement?

again, you said you were denied everything in the past because of your gender? are you still experiencing these kinds of bias?

are you still denied that credit card because you are female?



Excuse me - - where did I say I was denied EVERYTHING?

It is because the Women/Femnist fought for legal equality - - that I am not denied a credit card today because of gender.

However - when I got my divorced - I had been a stay at home mom. None of the credit rating or credit cards my husband and I had acquired while married would have been transferred to me. My husband - because he did love me - requested that my name be put on the credit cards as independently in my name. (he was a good guy - he just didn't want to share me with anyone - including his own kids).

The laws have changed since then - - - thanks to women continuing to fight for equal rights.

----------------------------------------

Illegal immigrants is a different subject. Just not going to go there. Or that you are denied because you are a white male.







[edit on 17-6-2010 by Annee]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by unityemissions
 


I have to disagree on that. I dont think we will end up homosexual.


I couldnt be less homosexual, even though many of the things I like are "male" things if you use the dogma. I definitively like men, I always have, and I have no confusion on that point. And they like me as well. I have never had one iota of trouble finding men who wanted to date me, even if I was covered in head to toe with cutting oil, discussing philosophy or World of Warcraft. You would be surprised how many very masculine men are attracted to women who do not fall into the traditional female stereotype. And I know women who are very attracted to men who are more metrosexual looking. There is always going to be physical attraction between the sexes, despite our cultural meanderings. That bottom line attraction has had millions upon millions of years to be wired into us. Its not going to disappear because of some minor tweaks in our culture.

We have had more egalitarian (not matriarchal in Europe for the most part) societies before, where women were more physical and participated in battle and in ruling. (Though even then, the majority of women were not suited, it just wasnt written in stone that your couldnt) Read some of the Roman histories on how surprised they were when dealing with the barbarians in what is now the UK, and how "wild" their women were compared to the housebound women they were used to. It isnt like what we have had until recently was the be all and end all of human society. We were laboring under a culture imposed upon some via a religion imported from the middle east.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by Edrick
 


You just like to fight for the sake of fighting.

My point is NOT that I stand for all women. My point is that the whole point of equal opportunity is that "women" as a collective dont exist. Only individual women do. We make big groups of things, collectives, for our ease, it is a mental convenience. Fighting for equal opportunity never meant that "all women" should act one way or "all men" another. Thats never been the truth, "all" of any "group" of people have not been identical in makeup, and "women's rights" were an attempt to restore a natural balance where that same mistaken, lazy and self interested tendency toward grouping them had previously taken it away.



Thank You!

I keep trying to make the point "Legal Gender Equality". Not male - not female.

If you feel bullied - persecuted - inferior - - or whatever - - - - put one foot in front of the other and do something about it.

My mom had polio in the 51 epidemic - with 3 kids under 5. My dad walked out a year later.

She just put one foot in front of the other and kept going - kept fighting - kept being strong for us. Never wallowing in self pity.

I am very proud to be a strong independent woman today. I had a great teacher.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 

Due to my upbringing, i know the time period and struggle for equality better than most do born in the early 1980s.. but no one can know of anything truly unless they live it and experience it..as you cant explain to a person who doesnt have a child what having a child is like.. you can tell them all you like, but until/unless they experience parenthood, they wont fully understand, so yes, i only know to the extent i am capable of.
I have met some amazingly strong, wonderful women who share similiar views to my own, they just dont try to take over and dominate everything..including male partners like many females seem to aim to do these days. note that i said many and not ALL..



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Full_Vision
reply to post by Annee
 

Due to my upbringing, i know the time period and struggle for equality better than most do born in the early 1980s.. but no one can know of anything truly unless they live it and experience it..as you cant explain to a person who doesnt have a child what having a child is like.. you can tell them all you like, but until/unless they experience parenthood, they wont fully understand, so yes, i only know to the extent i am capable of.
I have met some amazingly strong, wonderful women who share similiar views to my own, they just dont try to take over and dominate everything..including male partners like many females seem to aim to do these days. note that i said many and not ALL..




OK - thank you. Yes - I have a daughter born in 1968. She never had to deal with in-equality because of gender. She could wear pants to school and play sports from the first day she started school. That may sound simple to some - but its really a big deal in equal rights.

Why is the person who dominates in a relationship at fault? That is not a gender issue.

If you allow yourself to be dominated - - you are responsible - - no one else is.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Full_Vision
 


It is hard to relate to the anger some women alive today still feel about how they were treated. Its also hard to relate to some of the archaic attitudes some men alive still express from time to time. For those of us born after the civil rights movement, there is less to be angry about, (as females) and we have grown up laughing at the men who still tried to impose the old order on us. They seemed quaint, angry old dinosaurs, trying to impose the cultural norms that to us, from our self centered perspective, felt ancient and lost in the mists of time, way back before we were born.

The women who still seem so angry also seem to those of us born after the cultural revolution to be fighting ghosts, long dead enemies, and to many of us, it seems as if they are fighting something that no longer exists, and we may be right.

But............................we should remember that it was their anger, and their willingness to fight that has allowed us this perception that these things are "long past" or "over." We do have the right to say "we need to change the way things are handled, the world you grew up in is all but gone, and you are fighting memories as well as real present slights" but we do not have the right to pretend that their anger and vehemence is entirely unfounded. It was their reality that they were suppressed, held back, forced into roles they did not want. The fact that it is not our reality is in large part, thanks to them.

They were angry so we didnt have to be. Although I dont want to ever see a world where women dominate, I also am incredibly grateful I live in a world where men as a rule are not the only ones allowed to hold power.

But I do feel sorry for the younger generations of men, who grew up listening to how horrible THEY were, simply for being men, because of the sins of their fathers and grandfathers. I had a brother. I know how he felt hearing how his whiteness and his maleness made him a natural born oppressor, and evil. I know that the truth of him was so far from that, he was a really good, kindhearted, loving human being, and he deserved none of that. He never oppressed anything.

So, while I am grateful for the women who fought for us, it is my opinion that we need to make sure we arent creating new generations of victims simply because of our own hurt. Creating new victims out of our own sense of victimization is a tragically common occurrence. Look at ethnic or race wars. Look at Israels actions in Palestine.

There is a very real danger for any freedom fighter that they will slowly morph into the very thing they hate and struggle against.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Full_Vision
 


I just had a thought


I can't imagine you saying: "My husband won't allow it" or "I have to get my husband's permission".

But those were normal accepted responses in my generation. We didn't even question it. (well - until later)



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 



You just like to fight for the sake of fighting.


You don't really expect me to refute that, do you?




My point is NOT that I stand for all women. My point is that the whole point of equal opportunity is that "women" as a collective dont exist.


Exactly... women and men are words that describe a collection of biological organisms that all posses the same basic traits. (In this case, a biological gender distinction)


So, how can MEN oppress WOMEN, when the two are merely convenient arbitrary distinctions?


Thats never been the truth, "all" of any "group" of people have not been identical in makeup, and "women's rights" were an attempt to restore a natural balance where that same mistaken, lazy and self interested tendency toward grouping them had previously taken it away.


How is Granting Women the right to Vote in Governmental Elections... "Natural"?

I'm afraid I must have fallen asleep when that was explained.

Would you mind indulging me?


Its about individuals. And quite frankly, when feminists feel justified in lumping "men" or "white men" into clumps and decline to look at that individual and that individuals merits failings or circumstances it is equally lazy and shamefully self interested.


Yes, I agree.


And your description of working in a powerplant is a good example of that. Not ALL jobs in mining are physical. Are they?


I'm pretty sure that I actually referred to the ones who separate the coal from the earth, but yeah... I get your point.


Which was my point, your generalizations are crap.


So are yours.


"Women have been oppressed by men"

You tell me how that is not a generalization.

-Edrick



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 



Thank You!

I keep trying to make the point "Legal Gender Equality". Not male - not female.


But the LAW treats women BETTER than men.


And you still scream oppression?

-Edrick



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


You pretend in your post to me that you want to dispense with the generalizations, especially the one that says "women have been oppressed by men" and yet here you are again, whining about how women get better treatment than men, using the very same generalizations you pretend to be opposed to.

And yes, I do mind explaining to you. Either there is nothing but fluff between those long pointy ears of yours, or you are just a little bunny troll.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 



You pretend in your post to me that you want to dispense with the generalizations, especially the one that says "women have been oppressed by men" and yet here you are again, whining about how women get better treatment than men, using the very same generalizations you pretend to be opposed to.


You have not answered my question.

You merely avoided it.

So, AGAIN:


"Women have been oppressed by men"

You tell me how that is not a generalization.


-Edrick



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 



You pretend in your post to me that you want to dispense with the generalizations


You really went there, didn't you?

Here, let me fix your Brain.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

*YOU SAID*

Dont generalize.


And yet your ENTIRE ARGUMENT is a Generalization.


Thus, Your entire Argument for the past 12 plus pages, has been REFUTED by your own hand.


While *I* on the other hand... remember quite PLAINLY stating THAT I use generalizations, and WHY I use them.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Therefore, your sentiment holds NO WATER.


Thus, you are claiming that I wanted to stop doing something, that I clearly stated that I intended to do.

So, once you are finished "Rewriting History" I'll meet you in REALITY.


You are the one that wanted to do away with generalizations... And yet... you continue to generalize, and you attempt to belittle *ME*?

How Very Dare You.




Check - Mate.

-Edrick



new topics

top topics



 
57
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join