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 dolphinfan
reply to post by StigShen
You're kidding, right? Relationships, particularily with young people are rife with manipulation. Men will tell women anything to have sex with them. That they love them, that they want to be with them forever, anything. Now a woman is supposed to what, be able to read their mind, even if she is in love with them and absolutely know that the man is really not interested in anything long term? To suggest that a woman who becomes pregnant can with certainty predict the behavior of the man who fathered her child is nonsense. What about a woman who has a child with a terrific guy who turns into a drunk, drug addict or abuser? Is she a low-life as you suggest? Does she "deserve what she gets"?
Originally posted by dolphinfan
Women, not often, get pregnant on purpose. Now should the man be able to predict that? Should a man who is victimized in that fashion be required to stay and raise the child? Not too sure on that score, but I think not as it is better for a kid not to have a father than to have a father that does not want him and will resent him (or potentially will resent him).
What about a man who marries a woman who turns into a drunk, drug addict or abuser? Should he have been able to predict how she would have evolved as a human being and should he not do every thing in his power to remove her from having contact with her child? Of course he should cut her loose and if that means the child grows up without a mother in his life, well that is unfortunate, but it is a better solution.
Human relationships are complicated and are not black and white matters. You are attempting to apply absolute criteria to what makes a well functioning family with respect to raising a child and in my opinion that is foolish.
Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by StigShen
Good counter argument. I hope that is his last tour too, and not because he came home in a box draped in a flag.
Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by StigShen
You just keeping digging a bigger hole with some of your posts.
Feminism was created to destabilize society? Christianity has contributed more to that over the years than feminism ever will!edit on 19-3-2011 by The Sword because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by StigShen
Suppose the Rothschilds had never funded it? Would it still happen?
I think so. Women didn't need Rothschild money back then to know that they were getting a raw deal.
Originally posted by Whiffer Nippets
I really don't even know where to start with all this.
First of all - there is no Feminist plot to gain more tax money - that makes no sense. If one person earns enough to "support a family" - say 100K, and if two people together make 100K - the same amount of tax is collected.
And any kind of "Greedy Big Biz" agenda is going to *promote breeding*, not working women. This produces not only exponentially more tax payers - but also more consumers.
Families tend to spend more money than singles also. And they have ever increasing and perpetual needs. A single person can live on next to nothing, if they want to.
And why in the hell would the wealthy and/ or those in control want to destabilize society? For war profits, maybe, in other countries, but outside of that - you have to figure that they want people calm, consuming, and breeding more consumers.
Another angle we have to consider is - just because things might be the way someone perceives they ought to be - this is NO guarantee of a "happy life".
If Feminism was erased right now - you're not automatically going to become an Executive like the Dad on Leave It To Beaver and live in a nice house with a good looking wife and easy to manage children.
Just like for me - if people suddenly stopped making Dumb Blonde jokes - that does not mean I'm going to win a Nobel Prize next Tuesday.
Another idea that strikes me as crazy: Various people who think that - for whatever reason - if society was no longer "modern" - everything from nuclear war, loss of government, an electromagnetic pulse event - anyway - many of these men who bring up these "doom" scenarios seem to think that if 'whatever' happens - we will automatically revert to a "cave man" society and women will be forced to have "a protector".
This is ridiculous. And the pathetic part is that you can clearly tell that such people who bring up these ideas *want* such a thing to happen, they are salivating at the thought of it and not thinking at all.
No, we won't revert to 'caveman days'. Do you think Japan is going to revert to such a culture after all their numerous disasters? Of course not. Because so many of us still remember *now*. And recent things.
Some guy said in some other thread once, something like - oh there will be an EMP event and we'll see what the women will do then when they have to go dig ditches with a pick axe, like the men will have to.
Something along those lines. It was so ridiculously stupid, I don't even want to try to find it to quote it. And - I have seen many, many thoughts like this.
These people are essentially forgetting the ENTIRETY of human history! We'd not revert back to Neanderthals, those people died out anyway. We might go back a few notches - but um - DUH - people are going to think to use other manual tools to 'dig a ditch' besides a pickaxe.
Even during the Middle Ages - and even Dark Ages - there was commerce, they had fairly sophisticated trade and banking networks, women *and* children often worked, had shops, etc - these people went through the Dark Ages, various plagues, wars, widespread exploitation of the under classes - did they fall back to a caveman society? NO.
And neither will we. We have too much intelligence now. And we have, for thousands of years. We were not "cave people" yesterday.
Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by StigShen
Lol, not only am I waiting until my life is in order, I am waiting until the god damn world is in order. No way I am bringing a kid into this world, it is spiraling into hell every day. I have some friends with benefits sure, but they all know from the getgo the deal. I always use rubbers, hasn't failed me in 18 years yet. I wish there was more I could do, like some kind of contract similar to a prenup, know what I mean?
Okay stud, so you want to hit this bareback. You are hereby notified that I am not using any form of birth control of my own. If I become pregnant,
I have no intention of getting an abortion. By agreeing to the terms of this contract and in order to hit this bareback, you agree to any or all of
these terms:
A) Provide financial support for the child either in full, or partial. (Circle choice and initial.)
B) Provide financial support to me as the mother, so that I may properly care for this child on a regular basis.
C) Provide direct care for the child on an as needed, or regular basis. (Circle choice and initial.)
D) Provide a positive influence as a male role model, and to act as a father figure in a social capacity.
E) Provide directly, all basic necessities for the child and mother so long as I am willing to reside in the household with the child.
List any and all items agreed to, sign, and date.
Originally posted by backpage
While I'll agree that narcissism is epidemic in our culture. Why are you targeting the feminist movement? I mean, come on, it's everywhere. It's not as if the movement began with a bunch of self-serving, self-aggrandizing, me me me'rs. It began from a genuine need for change and equality. Narcissism has plagued every facet of society. Just look at kids today, they're all self entitled little wieners.
Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by StigShen
Read it again.
Women were expected to be nurturers and to take care of children. The husband could beat/rape/drag them and get away with it. They had no real freedoms.
Yes, that is a raw deal. And you know what? It continues to this day when there are female workers that make less than their male counterparts, despite the fact that they are skilled laborers!
Originally posted by 2manyquestions
reply to post by StigShen
There is no point in continuing to argue with you. You are dead-set on blaming women for the ills of society, and refuse to place the blame on men who are equally responsible. No amount of evidence or argument is ever going to persuade you to think differently, because it is obvious that you resent women.