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.

 

Feminism: Destroying the Male and Female Relationship

page: 21
85
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


She wants a career and be financially secure within her own right. She understands nothing is to be taken for granted and there are no guarantees a marriage is forever. She hopes for the best and be prepared for the worst.
Good for her, but the question was directed towards AZC's statement regarding how he hopes his daughter eschews feminism.




posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
by definition it is for eqal rights but Carlos Mencia put it the best:

What do you come out on the news saying? 'We want to be treated like equals in the workplace.' No you don't. You want to be treated like a woman in the workplace, and you want to get paid like an equal. That's what you want. Because when men treat you like equals, what do you do? You send us to sensitivity training, bioch. That's what you do.


This is the pure truth as I have seen it. Weman are held at a high level of respect and are catered to based on being a woman and unless you sacrifice that and go even accross the board then you feminist make me sick. Just as much as a woman that dates on a financial basis.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by riley
 


being a mighty big fan of Starwars myself, I really like the avatar.

The Utopian Penguin created it.. thanks again Tup.


Wondering if there's a feminine version of Darth Vader for me

You've probably seen this already but it is relevent to the topic. Hopefully some may even learn from it.





posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 





It seems quite a few women enjoy eating at a laid-back places such as Subway or Nandos.


Starving women.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 02:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by THELONIO
reply to post by MeSoCorny
 


i would like to see a picture, there's no point having a trophy unless it is highly polished


Fair enough.

But remember the polished trophy wants a nice shiny place to sit upon.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 07:39 AM
link   
Ok....

So from reading the last few pages of posts here I have learned that I shouldn't bother asking a woman out if I don't have enough money to go to a ritzy restaurant...It would seem that men have been reduced to penises with wallets. I'm hoping it hasn't always been this way and I am just realizing it. I mean really, what's wrong with subway? So that's all I can afford, if you are right for me I'd still grow old with you.

It would seem that the past few pages has proven the OP's point. Feminism has destroyed the male-female relationship, by first allowing women to suffer the same exploitation that we do in the work place and second teaching women to exploit their male counterparts.

Also, I don't think it should be all that surprising to know that if a male is talking to female he wants to have sex with said female or her friend, or sister, etc. It may be reductionist but it appears that sex is the motivator behind everything in the end, at least as far as males are concerned.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
It would seem that the past few pages has proven the OP's point. Feminism has destroyed the male-female relationship, by first allowing women to suffer the same exploitation that we do in the work place and second teaching women to exploit their male counterparts.

How does it do that...are...you...nonsense... you are a Misogynist! (That's the only answer you will get from highlighting the truth on this particular issue.)


Also, I don't think it should be all that surprising to know that if a male is talking to female he wants to have sex with said female or her friend, or sister, etc. It may be reductionist but it appears that sex is the motivator behind everything in the end, at least as far as males are concerned.

But it's not like men are biologically programmed to desire sex is it? Surely you are aware that this is a purely psychological trait (they think with their dicks remember?) that requires simple self-control. If only men could stop being so "man-like" and just ignore their hormones, then women - I mean everyone - would be happy.

(The tone of this reply is sarcastic for those who thought otherwise.)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by AdAbsurdum
 


If there is chemistry, not money - she will follow you anywhere, regardless of whether or not you are a decent person (love makes fools of us all, indiscriminately!)...until she gets used to your smell.
(Pheromones)
After that you have to work it.
(and vice versa)

I used to know a guy, he fished in Alaska part of the year and let his hair grow long, past his shoulders and sort of flowing. Big green eyes...I digress...
The other half the year he lived in the Virgin Islands.
His drivers license had a short serious haircut and I asked him if he noticed any difference in the two hairstyles. "Class of women" he said.

With longer hair he got a more spontaneous, fun, lovable class of woman who was not as materialistic or affected.
With short hair the women who were drawn to him tended to be more shallow, insipid, and fake.

For what it's worth.


edit on 18-9-2010 by rusethorcain because: inserted a qualifier



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by rusethorcain
 


Ok... But you said a woman would have to be starving to eat at a place like Subway...

So if in order to ensure it never becomes about money shouldn't you only take her to 5$ menu places to ensure she's into you and not your wallet? Wouldn't I just be seen as cheap, as another poster stated, and there by reducing my value as a person to the size of my bank account?



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by AdAbsurdum
 


Dating is like the first two weeks at a new job.

If the person is a sloppy dresser, late and has poor performance - this is the very best you are ever going to get out of this person.
It will not suddenly get better from here.
Subway isn't exactly a tell-all but it does not bode well for the future.

You would be infinitely farther ahead, financially and romantically to make a couple sandwiches yourself, buy a couple of juice drinks and visit a museum for free. Poor doesn't have to be boring.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by rusethorcain
You would be infinitely farther ahead, financially and romantically to make a couple sandwiches yourself, buy a couple of juice drinks and visit a museum for free. Poor doesn't have to be boring.


Ok... Now I am a bit confused...

So, doing something cheap isn't a bad thing accept when it is?

I just can't win.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by AdAbsurdum
 


Doing those things probably would get you labelled as cheap; she might think you don't want to spend money taking her out. If you go the whole 9 Yards and do candles, whine, chocolate then you are accused of trying to get her into bed. I've done these things myself and it seems there is always some variable one cannot prepare for. One unforeseen hole that manages to tarnish the good intentions you might have had. It's difficult to please modern women. There is a very fine line between showing you care and doing the right thing, and putting the wrong foot forward and doing the wrong thing.


edit on 18/9/2010 by Dark Ghost because: spelling



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by rusethorcain
 


Explain to me why a man should be taking a girl somewhere nice and paying for it? You understand that some women deeply abuse this and get many expensive meals and wine from such things. This is where men find themselves in trouble as well. If you open a door for a woman then some will be happy and some will consider you a sexist, likewise when you pay for dinner, if you dont' pay some consider you cheap, if you do pay some consider you sexist.

This is where feminism is hypocritical. Either we're all equal and the ladies pay their way like the guys or we abandon the idea.

You know a friend of mine is a nice guy and actually a millionaire, you know where he took his wife on the first date? Bowling and pizza and he dressed in a tshirt and jeans. I don't see how any of that is wrong, if someone judges you on how you dress and where you take them to eat then they are an idiot and that is why he did it, well that and the fact he dresses like that most of the time. Being a millionaire he had a lot of attention from women and so downplayed everything to find the right one.

I think he was on to something


But remember that most people after the inital period of dating will revert to their usual selfs, hence tshirt and jeans, so what is so bad about presenting the real you to begin with? It does seem as if most people present a false image on the first date, both male and female.

Shakespeare was right



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Here's a little something to consider:
"
“It is the Department of Human Rights’ position that ladies’ night is illegal,” Commissioner James Kirkpatrick wrote in the memo. “Gender-based pricing violates the Human Rights Act.”

I've noticed States and municipalities cracking down on free or discounted services for women. The above was issued by the State of Minnesota. It's about time, equality is equality so lets get to it....

It reminds me of the time I went into a restaurant a couple of weeks ago and tried to order a margarita. The woman told me that the prices are for women only. I told her I will not be having a drink at all then.

Next is getting women to share custody of children and thus expect them to financial support their own children equally while providing meaningful contact with the father, paying on dates, and not expecting men to support them after they leave in divorce.

Removing female gender separatist and secular representation in government which is in violation of the Constitution and Equal Rights Amendment. This would include all "women first" and "women only" provisions in all political, economic and social policy.

Laws against and penalties for paternity fraud, enforcement against parental alienation, extending rape shield laws to protect the accused, providing equal domestic violence and family trauma services to men.

Rescinding gender biased domestic violence laws and procedures under VAWA. Rape law reform so that each party is responsible for the decision to have non violent sex while under the influence of alcohol and or drugs.

Advancing male contraception technology. Lawsuits and boycotts against companies that portray men, husbands and fathers as dogs, pigs, horses asses, donkeys and jack asses. Revision of sex offender laws so that 8 year old boys are no longer arrested and marked for life for playing doctor.

Protections for boys under statutory rape laws some of whom have been ordered to pay their rapist child support. Protection for sperm donors anonymity and liability as some have been tracked down by lesbians and ordered to pay child support. Code of ethics laws so that male genes are not just handed out to anyone but limited to those with problems conceiving and for married couples only. The concept of trivializing the role men play in reproduction and the lives of children should be legislated against. Selecting male genes from a catalog by what celebrity the male specimen looks like is amoral and reprehensible. It is no different than men selecting female genes and growing children in artificial wombs from the comfort of our home. We have laws against cloning and stem cell research meanwhile it is legal to cut men out of the process of reproduction with a simple doctors note and have male genes sent overnight male to your front door.

Extending Selective Service Military draft registration to women.

Equal reproductive rights where sex and conception is viewed as a mutual act requiring mutual responsibility and therefore the equal exclusive right of each sex to abort responsibility. Each sex should have the right of disregarding the others moral ethics and life choices, not just women.

I hope that as women have property rights over their own bodies and the fruits of its labor both the money they earn and children, that men will someday have property rights over our bodies and the fruits of our labor, our children and our money as women have so that we are no longer coerced by women to provide to them or forced by law to do so in order to enable her choices to leave a marriage by no-fault legislation without any reciprocal obligation toward the man what so ever. The days where female choices are enabled by male liabilities, lack of control and choice over our own bodies and the fruits of our labor should soon be over.

Men's bodies can no longer be the property of the Government to use as cannon fodder by force of war nor to be forced to produce for women that are Independent, Liberated from obligations to men and self supporting.


Anthropologist Helen Fisher states in her book Anatomy of Love: "Unfortunately right now all the blame is on men. Sexual harassment is an issue that has been controlled by women."

Dr. Fisher is referring to passive female solicitation of male sexual response by exposure of their bodies. Though passive in nature female way of dress has to potential to be overtly sexual without direct action. Female way of dress is not just something men see but feel as well. As such female way of dress has the potential to be sexual harrasment of men. It is common conception that women should have no responsibility for the cloths they wear and how it makes men feel or how it affects men personally, emotionally or sexually, though actions of men that are direct or indirect and affect women likewise is classified as harassment. Feminist legitimize female behavior and attempt to define what men find sexually solicitous. They call it "victim blaming". Women shall no longer have the right to define male sexuality.

I hope for a day where women are responsible for how they act toward and treat men, a day when their "choices" come with responsibilities and liabilities and obligations toward and for men as men have toward and for women in our private and public lives, sometimes by law.

I hope that as women now acquire 60% of college degrees and control 60% of the nations wealth, that we should now restore male friendly curriculum models and funding for boys in our public schools. Admission of females to college and in business hirings should no longer be done by "women first" Affirmative Action but on grades and merit so that boys and men will have an equal chance to succeed. I never understood why women have demanded that women be put first in almost every social, political and economic policy I can think of and I hope to convince them to change the laws they made. Men have always given up our seats for women for some reason but I don't know why. We as men must make change socially, politically and economically for our own health and wellbeing and not that of women.

You have all been taught that your lives are less valuable than women and when the time comes it is you that should die so she may live. You have been lied to. The lives, health and wellbeing of women are no more important than your own. We can no longer treat women like children. We must demand they have responsibility and abide by the rules. We must demand that they do so not only for themselves but to have reciprocal obligations toward and for men.

These things will be a good start.
"

Source




edit on 18-9-2010 by gammastate because: italics



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by AdAbsurdum

Originally posted by rusethorcain
You would be infinitely farther ahead, financially and romantically to make a couple sandwiches yourself, buy a couple of juice drinks and visit a museum for free. Poor doesn't have to be boring.


Ok... Now I am a bit confused...

So, doing something cheap isn't a bad thing accept when it is?

I just can't win.


Perhaps you can't win, but I think you already have a bit of a defeatist attitude.
I don't like Subway and I guess this is turning into a referendum on the place. Go ahead and eat there, take a date. Personally I can't handle a man who whines more than I do.
But that's just me.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


As if I never took a man out to dinner. You are not reading my posts. That's fine.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by gammastate
 


There are some impressive passages from that source.

One of the more important extracts for those that call themselves Feminists to ponder:


I hope for a day where women are responsible for how they act toward and treat men, a day when their "choices" come with responsibilities and liabilities and obligations toward and for men as men have toward and for women in our private and public lives, sometimes by law.



edit on 19/9/2010 by Dark Ghost because: reworded



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by gammastate
 


"Next is getting women to share custody of children and thus expect them to financial support their own children equally while providing meaningful contact with the father, paying on dates, and not expecting men to support them after they leave in divorce. "
---------------------------------------------------------------
before the divorce, are you gonna expect her to share the responsibilities of the bills....or are you gonna dump the kids and housework on her 24/7.....then suddenly think that after ten years of staying at home catering to you and kids, she will have the skills needed to draw in enough money to share this responsibility???
I don't think a man who has refused to take charge of the kids, or help in the house while married so she can work, has any right to expect that women to do so after divorce....
not unless he wants to pay extra so that she can hire someone to replace his equal share of the caring for kids and housework.....



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by dawnstar
 


The point is not about what happens before divorce it is about what happens during/after a divorce.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
This is where feminism is hypocritical. Either we're all equal and the ladies pay their way like the guys or we abandon the idea.


I must agree. I agree with your whole post, actually.

I have seen women pick and choose which equalities they want to have and which ones they don't and it's not even close to fair. I mean, hey, life isn't fair, but objectivity can go a long way. Some women want the best of both worlds and they give the rest of us a bad name.

I'm a feminist. I believe in EQUAL rights, equal treatment and equal opportunities for men AND women.


edit on 9/19/2010 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
85
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join