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 eletheia
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
You're making an assumption that every man is a devoted selfless father and interested
in his children above himself?.........Well I've got news for you NOT SO!
And do you know how eager he was to 'capitalise on the equity' or disappear or even
support his children emotionally or financially??
No not all men are selfless downtrodden angels - and contrary to what you seem to believe
not all women are misandrous harridans .
Originally posted by resoe26
Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
Originally posted by eletheia
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
You're making an assumption that every man is a devoted selfless father and interested
in his children above himself?.........Well I've got news for you NOT SO!
And do you know how eager he was to 'capitalise on the equity' or disappear or even
support his children emotionally or financially??
No not all men are selfless downtrodden angels - and contrary to what you seem to believe
not all women are misandrous harridans .
In your first response to me you admit you did not read my post.
Now you go on saying I am making assumptions, please go and identify where any of the things you claim I am assuming have even been presented or hinted at by myself? If you are referring to my description of actual feminists in the movement I was associated with then you would be apt to realize I was ascribing those descriptions individuals not an entire gender.
You seem to have serious trouble discriminating between fact and the emotionally driven fictional narrative taking place in your head.
"You seem to have serious trouble discriminating between fact and the emotionally driven fictional narrative taking place in your head."
Seems all females tend to have this quality. Logic out the window when any arguement arises.
Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
reply to post by InverseLookingGlass
Feminism did take off on its own! So I guess it must of been a good idea.
Tired of control Freaks
In 2012 there were 18.2 million families in the UK. Of these, 12.2 million consisted of a married couple with or without children.
David Green, director of the Institute for the Study of Civil Society, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "If you take almost any measure - how well children do in school, whether they turn to crime, whether they commit suicide, etc - it's better to have two parents.
"It's also the biggest disadvantage of lone parenthood that you're much more likely to be poor."
But Jane Ahrends, from One Parent Families, said while single parents might face poverty, the image of them as "young, feckless women who deliberately get pregnant" was wrong.
"The vast majority of lone parents are ordinary working mums and dads in their 30s and 40s, who are just trying to do their best in circumstances they didn't choose," she said.
"And remember, families are constantly changing - lone parenthood is not a permanent state for most people. It's a phase, usually lasting about five and a half years."
Originally posted by eletheia
Don't expect others to read your post's when you don't even have the decency to take the
time to read theirs properly!
Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
David Green, director of the Institute for the Study of Civil Society, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "If you take almost any measure - how well children do in school, whether they turn to crime, whether they commit suicide, etc - it's better to have two parents.
Don't all children have two parents? Or am I missing something on the evolutionary scale?
And before you say it...I do realise what he means...but then you were cherry picking and as the article goes onto say...
"It's also the biggest disadvantage of lone parenthood that you're much more likely to be poor."
But Jane Ahrends, from One Parent Families, said while single parents might face poverty, the image of them as "young, feckless women who deliberately get pregnant" was wrong.
"The vast majority of lone parents are ordinary working mums and dads in their 30s and 40s, who are just trying to do their best in circumstances they didn't choose," she said.
"And remember, families are constantly changing - lone parenthood is not a permanent state for most people. It's a phase, usually lasting about five and a half years."
news.bbc.co.uk...
We can all take information out of context and shave it to suit our agendas...but that doesn't really help us understand the issues involved, now does it?
Originally posted by resoe26I believe that was a fine display of logic.... don't you agree?
Imagine what it would be like for America's premier feminist to acknowledge that well into her 30s she thought Stalin was the Father of the Peoples, and that the United States was an evil empire, and that her interest in women's liberation was just a subtext of her real desire to create a Soviet America. No, those kinds of revelations don't help a person who is concerned about her public image.
Originally posted by paganini
Originally posted by resoe26I believe that was a fine display of logic.... don't you agree?
You seem to be lacking in the ability to display anything resembling logic. The numerous people who have pointed out the countless holes in your argument in your Op alone prove that.
Well that and you conveniently avoiding answering anything they brought up. You going to tell me how a 25 year old whos already married and spent time in the military prior to that knows so much about women? Because your story and many of your comments reek of inexperience if anything.
Gender equality, however, does not mean gender similarity; as empowered women, we do not have to imitate men, but only to gain equality. If women chose to imitate men to attain power, we only affirm an image of male superiority, rather than excelling in our own strengths.
Originally posted by eletheia
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli[/i
In the first instance YOU replied to a post by TiredofControlFreaks
directed to ME with a sarcastic comment 'quote':
"LoL were you born in the 1800's " with a link to women's rights.
Information on that link was all PRIOR to 1900, and both ToCF and I have had
actual life experience of property and women's rights in 1900 I think that lends
some credence in the thread?? Don't you think?
Do YOU have any actual life experience of the topics being discussed?
You go on (off topic) and call the poster "quote": 'a weak woman who is going to
get walked over and you deserve it don't blame the man. To be blunt you made a very
poor choice of a husband, unless it was arranged (?) etc. OFF TOPIC, PERSONAL
AND UNCALLED FOR
Until you can answer my last post directed to you asking
Please point out where I said that I didn't read your post I intend to ignore you