Never Sleeps,

I don't know if you right, but I know that you know how to hit a nerve.

I think your topic will not stay a one post topic. Many post are comming, I can see them.

P.S : I * think * you right.

[Edited on 10-3-2003 by ultra_phoenix]

When i read the title i thought im gonna love this.

But whats with these articles, they never seem to get to the point and need to rumble on for several pages.

But the dist of it is true. The whole movement was designed so that everyone would dance to their music.
Women are so far up their arses that they're dragging everybody else with them.

hmmmm not quite sure just how to take that article, but first thoughts on it:

feminism existed before the 1960's - think Pankhurst, right to vote, suffragettes....

feminism covers equality issues such as equal pay for a man and woman doing an identical job. Hard to say how that one has had such a bad effect on society.

Some women don't want to be wives and mothers - sorry....

Bit of a bad article really - author seems to be attempting to link the CIA with their dislike of feminists. And I can't quite grasp the link I'm afraid. A rather tenuous attempt to blanket-bash feminists by the look of it - unfortunately there are a lot of women who agree with the principals of equality but refuse to give themselves the label of feminist due to the actions of Steinem, Camila Paglia and her ilk

'fannies with teeth' as my dear dad refers to them

I was going to submit this myself but a Google search brought me here.

I'm against feminism. I'm a stay-at-home wife and mother. I don't need a career to be fulfilled. Having had a job outside the home, I'd rather stay home! Your worth as a member of society should not depend on how much money you make.

Being a housewife is not about being barefoot and pregnant constantly--heh, my husband only wanted one child--for financial reasons. Though if I become pregnant again we'll simply have two children (he's had a vasectomy so the chances of that are next to none).

I sure don't feel like I'm a slave. Hubby works, I take care of the baby and the house, it's called TEAMWORK. He doesn't consider me his slave. He wants to do something, my input is always welcome. Where do these women get off whining about an "oppressive patriarchy"? Give me a BREAK!

Now as far as women's rights--First of all, the early feminists believed abortion to be wrong. Their thinking was, considering that women were treated as property, it wasn't right that a woman should treat her own children as property to be disposed of as seen fit.

Women WERE allowed to vote before the 19th century. Voting rights were dependent upon property ownership/head of household. So a single woman or a widow could vote if they owned property. Men could vote if they owned property. But in the early 19th century the "Enlightenment" came along and women were to be considered ornaments. Now that I agree is not right, and that's what Susan B. Anthony et al fought against.

Men and women are different and there's nothing wrong with that. A man's role is not superior to a woman's role and vice versa. Men and women are supposed to COMPLEMENT each other; that's why they're different. They need each other--two halves of a whole.

Contrary to what people think of the Bible, NOWHERE in the Bible does it say a woman has to be dumb and uneducated. Take a look at Proverbs 31, starting in verse 10.

So the website 'save the males' thinks that feminism was sponsered by the CIA. Wow, what else is there too say. the articles lack of sourcing and justification just shows this to be the sort of nonsense put out by fools who dont realised that the world has changed for the better now that women are more equal.

William good catch

On the feminism/CIA connection I think the jest that the CIA rode the back of feminism could easily be true. I still remember an old cartoon of a drugged out hippie holding out his palm with a sign 'I refused money from the CIA' while he took in cash summed things up in the 60/70 time frame.

The CIA may or may not have been the culprit, but some thing with lots of power kept society in a turmoil. The article makes for a good read to me. Some bits of info in there.

Men long ago realized they were semi-expendable to society. One man for how many women and society can still function rather well and grow. Men have never developed the ability to give birth or nurse, therefore for a society to grow women are needed. The Cossacks and other societies figured this out early on and developed means whereby property passed through the woman.