Feminism: Destroying the Male and Female Relationship

page: 48
85
<< 45  46  47    49 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 


In closing:

At this point it is so well beyond proven that feminism is a hate movement:
feministhate.tripod.com...
:that to deny the fact that feminism is a hate movement is an open act of bigotry.




posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 



If Mom wants to carry the baby to term and then give it up for adoption, the state does indeed look for Dad in order to give him the option to _take the child himself_. However, Dad _cannot_ simply refuse his consent to adoption and insist that _Mom_ keep the child. Dad has two choices: (1) take the baby, or (2) agree to adoption. In practical terms, when Dad takes the baby, there is rarely, rarely, rarely a CS order granted against Mom. However, if Mom wants to carry the baby to term and does NOT want to give it up for adoption, Dad has no choice and will likely be subject to a CS order. Do you see the inequity here?



LINK

Spot on.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 01:33 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Star128
post removed by staff


Actually, feminism is the radical notion that boy's and men are not human beings:

www.avoiceformen.com...

edit on 28-3-2012 by korathin because: (no reason given)
edit on Wed Mar 28 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 02:22 AM
link   
I'm a feminist. I also don't hate man. True story.



Having the vote, being able to own property and to be not considered property yourself when married is not equivilent to hating men.. though a minority of men seem to think women defending these rights is somehow and assault on theirs. Viewing people in such a blinkered way will only sabotage chances of creating happy and healthly relationships.
edit on 28-3-2012 by riley because: my grammar is very bad



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 


actually, you might do better to think of this as a rich/poor rather than female/male....

poorer women always worked and earned money for the household.....it was only the more well to do women that were able to stay home and concentrate on taking care of home and hearth.
and well, it's those more well do do people who get to be in public office and make the decisions that make the society's policies. and well, they always seem to thnk that what is working for them, should be working for everyone.....

thus, it's been portrayed that men went to work everyday, and the women stayed home and took care of kids, did the housework, and had dinner on the table as the man walked through the door....
it was only like that for those families where dad could make enough money to pay the bills and still buy the food to be put on that table!!!

as far as the rest of your rant...
hey, got news for ya, I don't even know who is leading the feminist movement at the time, nor do I care.
I am not militant in the least. I just reject the push to get back into a role that I know for a fact has not worked for me, for my parents, for my grandparents, nor for my great-grandparents....all of whom had the mother figure working to bring cash into the home, because of proverty, or early death of a spouse, or divorce!!!

for those of you who can actually afford to have mom at home...lucky you!!!
just don't expect the rest of us starve to death because you think we all should live the same way you do!!!
and if we are working, we do deserve the same pay as those males who are doing the same exact job!
which, contrary to what you seem to think, I also know for a fact doesn't happen!



posted on Mar, 31 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorKarma
 


So you found an ancient record of another miserable, bitter prick... Ya-hoo....



posted on Mar, 31 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 


I'll SAY IT AGAIN;
FEMINISM IS THE RADICAL NOTION THAT WOMEN ARE HUMAN BEINGS.

If you are all so threatened by intelligent, strong women, perhaps you should start your own 'man-cave' nation.
It's NOT like it hasn't happened before.

Just ONE example is 'The Church'.

btw; Not yet, but keep writing and it may shape up that way.
edit on 31-3-2012 by Star128 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Dawnstar, you make excellent points.

Just thinking of my own family here, but all of my great-great grandmothers, great-grandmothers, and grandmothers worked. Most came from farming families and that requires a lot of work, but then some worked in the cotton mill, as kitchen staff for the wealthy, and had part-time jobs in department stores, or working in factories to supplement their family income. None of them were feminists and they were strong women.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Star128
reply to post by korathin
 


I'll SAY IT AGAIN;
FEMINISM IS THE RADICAL NOTION THAT WOMEN ARE HUMAN BEINGS.

If you are all so threatened by intelligent, strong women, perhaps you should start your own 'man-cave' nation.
It's NOT like it hasn't happened before.

Just ONE example is 'The Church'.

btw; Not yet, but keep writing and it may shape up that way.
edit on 31-3-2012 by Star128 because: (no reason given)


LOL.

I will believe your line when you explain to me about the SCUM manifesto, and why the vast majority of feminists praise it. Or perhaps after you illuminate the reasons why the AAUW lied about the girl crisis?

As per "man cave nation", you are beyond deluded. Traditionalism is not, nor has ever been, a male supremacist ideology(which would be fundamentalism). Traditionalism is rooted in the matriarchal "Mothers of the Republic", women's rights movement. But feminist's like to ignore real history,so as to substitute it with their own group think.

Most MRA's are actually egalitarianist's for the most part. As the only way to break the cycle of male persecution and oppressment, is to force women to adopt a human standard.

That said, Feminism has been and will always be a female supremacist hate movement. I am sure there are many strong willed gal's who are feminist's, just as their are many feminists who are nothing more then weak willed sheep.

And no matter how many times you try to claim feminism is something other than what it is, I still won't believe it. As feminism as made it perfectly clear that Feminism= The radical notion that males are sub-human.

www.avoiceformen.com...

That said though, traditionalist gal's aren't any better. They too view men as sub-human beasts of burden, but this thread isn't about conservative misandry so I digress.

And about that Church, if the Church is such a woman hating institution, why are the vast majority of congregations made up of women? Really, if it wasn't for women the Churches would be dead already.

www.the-spearhead.com...
www.avoiceformen.com...

Ignoring reality that you don't like will only end one way: You and all your fellow feminist's driving into a brick wall called reality that you foolishly tried to will out of existence.
edit on 1-4-2012 by korathin because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-4-2012 by korathin because: fixed their for there error



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by korathin
 


actually, you might do better to think of this as a rich/poor rather than female/male....

poorer women always worked and earned money for the household.....it was only the more well to do women that were able to stay home and concentrate on taking care of home and hearth.
and well, it's those more well do do people who get to be in public office and make the decisions that make the society's policies. and well, they always seem to thnk that what is working for them, should be working for everyone.....

thus, it's been portrayed that men went to work everyday, and the women stayed home and took care of kids, did the housework, and had dinner on the table as the man walked through the door....
it was only like that for those families where dad could make enough money to pay the bills and still buy the food to be put on that table!!!

as far as the rest of your rant...
hey, got news for ya, I don't even know who is leading the feminist movement at the time, nor do I care.
I am not militant in the least. I just reject the push to get back into a role that I know for a fact has not worked for me, for my parents, for my grandparents, nor for my great-grandparents....all of whom had the mother figure working to bring cash into the home, because of proverty, or early death of a spouse, or divorce!!!

for those of you who can actually afford to have mom at home...lucky you!!!
just don't expect the rest of us starve to death because you think we all should live the same way you do!!!
and if we are working, we do deserve the same pay as those males who are doing the same exact job!
which, contrary to what you seem to think, I also know for a fact doesn't happen!






What a load of hogwash.

Your statement is as bad as Hillary Clinton's"women are the primary victims of war because they lose their brothers, fathers and husbands".

And then you try to perpetuate feminism's sexist, wage gap myth:

www.cbsnews.com...

Pure revolting.

On top of all that, you try to treat the past as if it is today. Yesterday was nothing like today. Men died annually by the tens of thousands(If not hundreds of thousands) due to work place accidents. The work women did back then was hard, the work men did was so utterly back breaking, that a lot of women cheerfully where thankful they only had to work as hard as they did. The ignorance feminist's have for history is disgusting, and that is why the feminist movement is doomed.

That is the main risk though of fighting a war for so long you forget the who, what, when, where and why of it all. No matter.

P.S
Divorce was illegal/very difficult to get for the most part(except in cases of infidelity or Erectile Dysfunction{yep, women could file for divorce over that one, one thing they leave out of the history books}) till the 60's-70's. And since the 60-70's women have filed for divorce well over 70% of the time, so no sympathy there.

Ultra P.S

States in which women did a lot of hard work, close to the level of hard work men engaged in(such as the Western States), women received the right to vote quicker then in states where men did more backbreaking work.

Case in point:Republican Rep.Jeannette Rankin

Elected to Congress Nov 7th, 1916 Montana.
edit on 1-4-2012 by korathin because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by rusethorcain
reply to post by AzoriaCorp
 


Highly offensive, simplistic and part of someones opinionated and not so scientific nor even sentient blog.


Unscientific, eh? Seen any numbers on current Western birth rates, recently?



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 


whatever........
ya, the work was harder back then....I agree, and the risk was greater, which...
BOTH MEN AND WOMEN WERE MORE LIKELY TO DIE IN WORK RELATED ACCIDENTS,,,and many died...both men and women!!!

and...um.....
I don't need the feminist movement, research results or anything else to tell me that there is still a wage disadvantage to women in the work force!!
Experience tells me this!

but, back to my post......
women have routinely been portrayed in the past as the stay at home type, so much so, that well, if you read these polls you get the idea that many here believe that yesterday was the golden age where mom was always home, with the kids, taking care of home and hearth....
I am only saying....
it was the more wealthy that had the advantage of having mom staying at home. many, many women worked, at first within their homes, making candles, or sewing quilts or whatever, which they sold.....but then as manufacturing took off, well, they were forced to move into the factories. where they still made their candles, sewed quilts, wove taxtiles, ect....
and....I can point you to some pretty good accidents where many women died....



posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by korathin
 


whatever........
ya, the work was harder back then....I agree, and the risk was greater, which...
BOTH MEN AND WOMEN WERE MORE LIKELY TO DIE IN WORK RELATED ACCIDENTS,,,and many died...both men and women!!!

and...um.....
I don't need the feminist movement, research results or anything else to tell me that there is still a wage disadvantage to women in the work force!!
Experience tells me this!

but, back to my post......
women have routinely been portrayed in the past as the stay at home type, so much so, that well, if you read these polls you get the idea that many here believe that yesterday was the golden age where mom was always home, with the kids, taking care of home and hearth....
I am only saying....
it was the more wealthy that had the advantage of having mom staying at home. many, many women worked, at first within their homes, making candles, or sewing quilts or whatever, which they sold.....but then as manufacturing took off, well, they were forced to move into the factories. where they still made their candles, sewed quilts, wove taxtiles, ect....
and....I can point you to some pretty good accidents where many women died....




Your talking about the mid-1800's, right when American families went from the farm to the city. At first everyone worked, but women got tired of factory work very, very quick like. And started "Mothers of the Republic" women's rights movement. They fought for the "right" to be stay at home moms. They are the ones who created the feminine divine construct(women as being morally superior beings), and are directly responsible for the discrimination women faced in employment.

Your basically trying to make a brief period of time seem like it lasted for a few centuries.

Men and women are no-where near equal in terms of work place injuries or deaths. To claim so is an insult to the hundreds of thousands(if not millions) of men who died since the 1800's in America's coal mines, steel mills and production centers, to bring us this some what peaceful Nation we now enjoy.

And the fact that you are stuck on a debunked "wage gap" is beyond pathetic. P.S feminist's still report that lie(about the wage gap), the link I gave you had nothing to do with feminists, but yet you engage in out right lies.

This is to be expected as certain feminist and traditionalist groups are aiming for a soft landing for women, given the last three decades of unchecked misandry in our society.

Truth is, the more those like you lie about the past and present, the worse gender discourse will be, and the more inflamed the real gender war will become.

edit on 2-4-2012 by korathin because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 


nice of you to call my family history lies....
my experiences lies......
here, I'll give it back to you.....
HOGWASH!!!



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by DavidLV
 


From what I have read in regards to your posts, you have serious issues with the female gender (claiming that they "Know nothing" or something of that sort, and that they "lie, cheat, play games"
among other things) as a whole. You have also implied that women are intellectually inferior to men (as evidenced by your "You know nothing" comment to a female poster) as well as inferior in basically every other area of life. I hope you don't become president of the United States, let alone run, because you would more than likely make a law that had the following effects on women:

* It would be illegal for a woman aged 18 - 25 to be single (in essence, she would be required by law to marry, rich or poor).

* Women would not be allowed to vote.

* Women would be, by law, absolutely forbidden from having any job outside the home, nor would they be allowed to leave the house at all unless their husband was following them around.

* Domestic abuse of all forms (including marital rape), when committed by the husband, would not be recognized in any way under the law, but if the wife so much as threatened to slap her husband, she would be charged with a felony, no questions asked.

* It would be against the law for a woman to not wear a skirt or dress at all times.

* When under arrest or charged with a crime, a woman would not have any of the legal protections guaranteed to her male counterparts under the 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments to the US Constitution except for maybe, just maybe, the right to a trial by jury. Any confession to said crime by the woman that may have been obtained by use of force or under duress would be admissible into court, and the woman would not at any point be allowed to take the stand in her own defense. After all, women are by nature incompetent according to you, right?

* While it would be an option, women would not be required to be taught how to read or write.

* It would be illegal for a girl or woman to attend any form of school, be it public, private, or Parochial. She would have to be educated at home, if the parents wanted to educate her at all.

* If she is subjected to any medical procedure against her will, a woman cannot take legal action against the hospital or physicians involved. She also would not have the right to informed consent, as she is incompetent and is considered an object rather than a person.

As was the case during the reign of Ivan the Terrible in Russia, it would not be against the law for a man to kill his wife. However, if a wife killed or maimed her husband (including for self-defense reasons), she would be given the death penalty, also no questions asked.

* It would be illegal for a woman to read, purchase, or check out books of any type.

* It would be illegal for a wife to divorce her husband, but a husband can divorce his wife for any reason.

* If a woman is raped and she is not married at the time, she is required by law to marry the man who raped her.

* A marriage would not be legally valid until the couple had at least one child.

* Abortion would be completely illegal, even to protect the life of the mother, as the mother is property and not a person.

And probably other things, but that's all I can think of now. Do you really want to live in that kind of society? I know I sure as hell don't.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Star128
reply to post by korathin
 


I'll SAY IT AGAIN;
FEMINISM IS THE RADICAL NOTION THAT WOMEN ARE HUMAN BEINGS.

If you are all so threatened by intelligent, strong women, perhaps you should start your own 'man-cave' nation.
It's NOT like it hasn't happened before.

Just ONE example is 'The Church'.

btw; Not yet, but keep writing and it may shape up that way.
edit on 31-3-2012 by Star128 because: (no reason given)




The assertion that women are strong is an illusion. they are as frail as they ever were. An idea doesn't make you strong, it just makes you cocky. A woman would get smoked by a man in any fight despite what Hollywood would show you on some illusory screen. If it wasn't for the government......you would still be my property! If it wasn't for some weak-will coward of a man who traded all men for a night with Britney Spears ...men would still rule this world without the government holding our hands behind our backs while letting women kick us in the nads at every turn. You are strong because of that fire breathing dragon called the American Government. Wait until they get their teeth sunk into all of our freedoms...they will turn, and not thank you for subduing and pansifying all of the men....turning some into feminists themselves (you weak cowards!)...rather that same dragon will rip you to shreds with the rest of us...and you women are helping them to do it. Now go sit in a corner and feel guilty or something...make yourself useful.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pearl1970
reply to post by DavidLV
 


From what I have read in regards to your posts, you have serious issues with the female gender (claiming that they "Know nothing" or something of that sort, and that they "lie, cheat, play games"
among other things) as a whole. You have also implied that women are intellectually inferior to men (as evidenced by your "You know nothing" comment to a female poster) as well as inferior in basically every other area of life. I hope you don't become president of the United States, let alone run, because you would more than likely make a law that had the following effects on women:

* It would be illegal for a woman aged 18 - 25 to be single (in essence, she would be required by law to marry, rich or poor).

* Women would not be allowed to vote.

* Women would be, by law, absolutely forbidden from having any job outside the home, nor would they be allowed to leave the house at all unless their husband was following them around.

* Domestic abuse of all forms (including marital rape), when committed by the husband, would not be recognized in any way under the law, but if the wife so much as threatened to slap her husband, she would be charged with a felony, no questions asked.

* It would be against the law for a woman to not wear a skirt or dress at all times.

* When under arrest or charged with a crime, a woman would not have any of the legal protections guaranteed to her male counterparts under the 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments to the US Constitution except for maybe, just maybe, the right to a trial by jury. Any confession to said crime by the woman that may have been obtained by use of force or under duress would be admissible into court, and the woman would not at any point be allowed to take the stand in her own defense. After all, women are by nature incompetent according to you, right?

* While it would be an option, women would not be required to be taught how to read or write.

* It would be illegal for a girl or woman to attend any form of school, be it public, private, or Parochial. She would have to be educated at home, if the parents wanted to educate her at all.

* If she is subjected to any medical procedure against her will, a woman cannot take legal action against the hospital or physicians involved. She also would not have the right to informed consent, as she is incompetent and is considered an object rather than a person.

As was the case during the reign of Ivan the Terrible in Russia, it would not be against the law for a man to kill his wife. However, if a wife killed or maimed her husband (including for self-defense reasons), she would be given the death penalty, also no questions asked.

* It would be illegal for a woman to read, purchase, or check out books of any type.

* It would be illegal for a wife to divorce her husband, but a husband can divorce his wife for any reason.

* If a woman is raped and she is not married at the time, she is required by law to marry the man who raped her.

* A marriage would not be legally valid until the couple had at least one child.

* Abortion would be completely illegal, even to protect the life of the mother, as the mother is property and not a person.

And probably other things, but that's all I can think of now. Do you really want to live in that kind of society? I know I sure as hell don't.



Women should have their rights revoked! ever since they got them, they have done nothing but abuse power and steal from men. They can't even do the jobs they have responsibly. They are like angry, jealous children. I know that all women agree with me too. Deep down you know that men are superior to you in every way. If not for the government breast feeding you all...men would still rule and keep you socially suicidal women under full control doing what you were meant to do...serve men and making babies....that WE OWN not some court decided BS, political sham that Planned Parenthood is behind...all kids grow up in destitution because of them. Women are so stupid they can't even see this is happening. Don't say anything about my post either....you truly have not earned the right to even speak. Everything has been handed to you on a silver platter by your government at the expense of all men!

Go ahead, call me a male chauvinist pig...A "MALE" I am proud to be, a "CHAUVINIST " Definition - "a person who is aggressively and blindly patriotic, especially one devoted to military glory. or a person who believes they are superior to another".....I believe this with every fiber of my being, right to the inner core of my bone marrow.
"Pig"....pig's are delicious and are inexpensive, so they could be a solution to world hunger. Everything about being a male chauvinist pig is good...I have no idea where the negative connotation came from..This should have always been a compliment.
edit on 2-11-2012 by Ph3nomium because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ph3nomium
Women should have their rights revoked! ever since they got them, they have done nothing but abuse power and steal from men. They can't even do the jobs they have responsibly. They are like angry, jealous children. I know that all women agree with me too. Deep down you know that men are superior to you in every way. If not for the government breast feeding you all...men would still rule and keep you socially suicidal women under full control doing what you were meant to do...serve men and making babies....that WE OWN not some court decided BS, political sham that Planned Parenthood is behind...all kids grow up in destitution because of them. Women are so stupid they can't even see this is happening. Don't say anything about my post either....you truly have not earned the right to even speak. Everything has been handed to you on a silver platter by your government at the expense of all men!

Go ahead, call me a male chauvinist pig...A "MALE" I am proud to be, a "CHAUVINIST " Definition - "a person who is aggressively and blindly patriotic, especially one devoted to military glory. or a person who believes they are superior to another".....I believe this with every fiber of my being, right to the inner core of my bone marrow.
"Pig"....pig's are delicious and are inexpensive, so they could be a solution to world hunger. Everything about being a male chauvinist pig is good...I h



I wonder, if your mother read this post, would she regret not aborting your ass when she had the chance?


Keep on /Trolling



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Ph3nomium
Women should have their rights revoked! ever since they got them, they have done nothing but abuse power and steal from men. They can't even do the jobs they have responsibly. They are like angry, jealous children. I know that all women agree with me too. Deep down you know that men are superior to you in every way. If not for the government breast feeding you all...men would still rule and keep you socially suicidal women under full control doing what you were meant to do...serve men and making babies....that WE OWN not some court decided BS, political sham that Planned Parenthood is behind...all kids grow up in destitution because of them. Women are so stupid they can't even see this is happening. Don't say anything about my post either....you truly have not earned the right to even speak. Everything has been handed to you on a silver platter by your government at the expense of all men!

Go ahead, call me a male chauvinist pig...A "MALE" I am proud to be, a "CHAUVINIST " Definition - "a person who is aggressively and blindly patriotic, especially one devoted to military glory. or a person who believes they are superior to another".....I believe this with every fiber of my being, right to the inner core of my bone marrow.
"Pig"....pig's are delicious and are inexpensive, so they could be a solution to world hunger. Everything about being a male chauvinist pig is good...I h



I wonder, if your mother read this post, would she regret not aborting your ass when she had the chance?


Keep on /Trolling


Not to necro, but I strongly suspect that those individuals are feminists. It is usually a last ditch attempt by feminists. "Debates"(I think of them more as exorcisms) with feminists tend to go like this: a) they try to sprout their bs data, b) their data is refuted, c) they resort to emotional drama and personnel umbrage, d) they mindlessly repeat themselves over and over again, e) they pretend to be on the other side and say messed up garbage to destroy the credibility of their opponents.

Feminists are much like demons, and the most effective method of dealing with a demon is a mirror.





new topics
 
85
<< 45  46  47    49 >>

log in

join