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.

 

Fox News: "Liberals who reject that men should dominate women are anti-science."

page: 1
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+11 more 
posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Fox News outdoes itself.




Fox Business host Lou Dobbs asserted women earning more than their husbands was an indication of the dissolution of American society. Fox News political analyst Juan Williams agreed, describing it as a sign of the disintegration of marriage that would have negative consequences for generations to come.



Fox News contributor Erick Erickson went one step further, saying nature itself commanded that women be subservient to men.

“I’m so used to liberals telling conservatives that they’re anti-science,” Erickson explained. “But liberals who defend this and say it is not a bad thing are very anti-science. When you look at biology, when you look at the natural world, the roles of a male and a female in society and in other animals, the male typically is the dominant role. The female, it’s not antithesis, or it’s not competing, it’s a complementary role.”


Link

I know that some people out there still think that women should only stay in the kitchen, cook and clean around the house. I just didn't know Fox News was hiring them as contributors.


Apparently this guy thinks he knows science, but I think he forgot about Bald Eagles where the female is the one that builds and keeps the nest and lays her eggs, goes out and brings food back to her offspring. Or even female Lions thay go out and hunt in packs and bring back food so their kittens can eat.

Societies that choose conservative politics will by definition not move forward.




posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Yo politics is not a science for the record.

Neither is political dogma like the 'bare foot and pregnant'.

As bad as what Lou said it is nothing in comparison for 'liberals' making it a 'moral imperative' to make government the 'bread winner' in the 'family'.

Contrary to the Lou Dobbs and Fox News condemer's I think women can take care of themselves.
edit on 30-5-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


No gonna support the retardedness of Fox and its politicians, but in nature there is a dominant sex and a supportive sex. This does not mean one should put the other down, it just means both sex are not equal with cheery on top..



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 



Societies that choose conservative politics will by definition not move forward.


Well, I guess the U.S. is doomed then. Going by the last 4 Presidential Elections? We seem to have a pretty evenly divided nation by ideology. If Conservative thinking is doom to liberals ..and I know Conservatives have little respect back the other direction? Just where does that leave a nation near 50/50 split down the middle? In deep, I suppose.

By the way.... Fox news has about 25% news reporting and about 75% news commentary and editorial comment shows. They make that distinction themselves. I wish they wouldn't mix and I'd have killed for HARD news in the evenings from CNN or Fox many times, prior to ditching Cable TV news entirely last year.

However... Judging half a nation's population by the comments of a few that self describe as among the more extreme right? Hardly seems like a fair or honest presentation. Just my thoughts... (Kinda like using the bigger idiots of the left to say...ALL people on the left are just big idiots. It just isn't honest, IMO)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Well, I think women had a very important job taking care of the family in the past. I feel that women who do work should get paid the same as men though, if they can adequately do the same job. Sometimes women can do a better job than men at certain things and in that case they should get paid more.

I am a strong believer in a person getting paid by what they accomplish, having a job and not accomplishing what the job requires means less pay. A person starting a job should get a starter wage and work their way up from there. I know this doesn't always work though because of favoritism. I personally can't stand when someone works and doesn't produce anything and still wants a raise because they have been there for a while. Sometimes a Union pushes this type of behavior as desireable and it is taught to new employees, sort of a precedence issue. Why can't management and workers work together....I guess that is impossible in a country full of greed.

This FOX article is a joke, equal pay for equal work.
edit on 30-5-2013 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   
The funny thing is, what this really shows is ignorance, as far as REAL science goes.

That something happens 'typically' in nature, does not make it any less natural if that role is reversed. There are many species in nature where the female is dominant. There are many, like lions, where the female does the hunting. And there are anomalies within every species where roles are reversed.

What an ignorant fool this man is.
edit on 30-5-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-5-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Technically, women are wired to be more submissive by nature, and men are wired to be more dominant. You can thank sexual selection for this, as submissive women fared better than aggressive/dominant women and thus the submissive trait became dominant in women.

The opposite is true with men, though this distinction has been blurred due to unnatural perversions of sexual selection due to the institution of marriage. Of course, I don't mean contemporary western marriage in which two people choose to marry each other, but marriage as it has been for the better part of the last few thousand years: a business transaction.

This is not to be confused with equal rights; people are people regardless of gender, orientation, skin color, etc. Women deserve the same pay, benefits, and treatment as their male counterparts.

I think what most conservatives fear is loss of social power over women; it is emasculating for a man in our culture to be provided for. Culturally, we value male providers, not female providers.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Brilliant.
Erick Erickson cleary has not met my wife.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:23 PM
link   
this is so wrong, and don't try to blame this on conservatives. faux news doesn't speak for anyone but themselves.

there is not a "more important" sex, and i fail to see why women making more than men is "wrong".

take the noble chili pepper plant for example, it's origins come from a relatively small part of the world, yet after humans discovered their fruit was tasty we spread the plants around everywhere and cultivate them to grow.

the question is who serves whom. to the chili pepper, we are merely servants aiding in its campaign for world domination, but humans perceive the chili pepper plants as servants to us. this raises the question: "what kind of servant requires lots of care and servitude from those who consider it to be beneath them?"

everything is relative.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


I happened to be channel surfing last night, and saw that exact exchange, and your taking it entirely out of context.

The context was that many men are no longer the bread winners, as been historically seen, and that the fact soo many women are working so many hours a week, their children are no getting the natural nurturing only a mother can provide.

Also, these mens psychological health is fuffering, because most men feel they should be the primary bread winners, while women should be the primary nurturers of their children.

Which in turn, has led to many of the societal problems we are seeing today in our country.

This was a very good point I thought, as it is a fact women are better equiped for the most part, to be the emotional nurturers of young children, it is natural, look at any mammal on earth, this is not debatable, it is a fact, women are better nurturers for the most part.

Not to say men can not fulfill this role, some do a very good job, but as a whole, it is not the rule, and only PC nazis would try to claim so.

Thankfully my childrens mother agreed, and took the primary role of nurturing our children, as I know for a fact, I can not do the job nearly as well as she.

I am more of a rough and gruff "doer" type, that does not usually consider feelings and or emotions when I do and say things.

Please op just stop trying to play this BS PC game, it is a fact, not debatable at all, to more than 99 percent of the people on this planet, women are naturally better equiped for child raising children.

That is why women do it most of the time in all cultures and races across all of history, it is their natural role in the family unit, just like carrying a child during pregnancy is also a womens natural role in the family unit.

Yes women can and do compete and accomplish in the working world, nobody with any intellectual honesty can argue that, the discussion was should they, at the expense of society at large, as more and more generations grow up without a full time mother in their lives, as they have chosen to be"successful" in the business world, instead of successful as a parent of a child, and then after their raised go into their field of choice.

I don't have the answers to these questions, I just see the need for an honest dialogue on the subject.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   
I'm guessing they'd have the same argument about homosexuality, arguing that it's not natural because it doesn't happen in the rest of the animal kingdom when

a) there are plenty of examples of homosexuality and female dominance in the natural world
b) behaviors observed in the natural world should not, and do not, dictate how we humans should, and do, behave as a species



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


It those pesky contraceptives that allows women's equality in the workplace. Woman can actually opt not to have baby after baby now days! (gasp) They can now pursue the same goals as their male counterparts.

That's what they really mean when they say nature dictates the role of women. It's the evil scientist that over throws nature! That is what is responsible disintegrating the family, in their mind, and why liberals correctly assign these types as "anti-science".

If they can outlaw contraception and adultery they think that they can restore traditional marriage.



edit on 30-5-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)


+4 more 
posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Hmm, guess this guy missed a few science classes. Like the ones involving the Praying Mantis, Black Widow, Seahorse, etc. What a grossly inaccurate and insulting attitude.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


In Nature the males are typically more colorful and boisterous. In many species females often scavenge for food while the Male is at the nest or den protecting the offspring.

Will he be ok with men wearing makeup and colorful outfits then? And wait...stay at home Dad's?
edit on 30-5-2013 by abeverage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Hmm, guess this guy missed a few science classes. Like the ones involving the Praying Mantis, Black Widow, Seahorse, etc. What a grossly inaccurate and insulting attitude.


Yes because women eat the mans head, or kill him for sustanence, or leave him to carry and then raise the children, I mean that is just so spot on a comparrison to mammalian life, I can't believe I didn't see that before.....

Thanks a lot.......for actually taking away from your side, and adding absolutely nothing of any import to the discussion.

Don't mean to be so obtuse, but if that is the best you got, please just stop before you hurt your side of the debate on this issue.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by muse7
 


In Nature the males are typically more colorful and boisterous. In many species females often scavenge for food while the Male is at the nest or den protecting the offspring.

Will he be ok with men wearing makeup and colorful outfits then? And wait...stay at home Dad's?
edit on 30-5-2013 by abeverage because: (no reason given)



I have problems with men acting like, and dressing like women, but my oppion on the subject does not not should it influence the acts another feels make them happy, as long as they aren't causing any harm to another, well unless said mans, men friends want to......at which point.....just TMI for me please I don't want to hear it.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
Thanks a lot.......for actually taking away from your side, and adding absolutely nothing of any import to the discussion.


Take your own advice mate, you might be on to something there. Do you have something to add to the topic either than a shot at me?


As to the lions that actually adds to this moron's premise. The females do ALL of the work while the males fight each other for dominance and mating rights.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   
animals in nature also eat their own feces and never take showers on purpose...

Whats this guys point?

Biological drives have nothing to do with jobs or opportunity...this guy needs to get out a bit more..maybe visit a leather shop or something if he is having issues expressing his desires.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Meh,

My wife makes more than me, has for the past 6 years. For the first 5 years of the marriage I made more, at the time helping and supporting her through College.

When its all said and done the house is run jointly as "Our" funds, we save and do things as equals, not as competitive partners who are trying to one up each other.

Who would of thought viewing your partner as an equal was bad... Guess me and the Misses are whats wrong with America.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 


So, then, I assume you'll accept these examples:
Baboons
Hyenas
Lemurs
Binobos
Elephants

edit on 30-5-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join