[E4qC1qQ5]

A while ago there was a discussion on here that sort of pertained to Feminism, and someone told me it would be a good idea to make a thread about it, and I thought it was a good idea. I want to make it long enough and get a good discussion going, please read everything...it took a long time.

I was brought up in a small town in the American New England area. As a kid, boys would hurl dead spiders in my hair and say I had "cooties". They would be the loudest during class and misbehave often. Me and my girls would pick on boys and make fun of them to get attention. We would watch them play in the dirt or get in fights with each other. I was a girl, and they were boys, it was normal to have conflicts like that right? It was normal for us to act different, even at that age and us not having the self-awareness or maturity to make choices and think about our surroundings as we do now, we were able to differentiate between male/female roles. Even if it was partly due to cultural norms for girls to help their mom cook dinner or clean the house and boys to go out with their dad to work. Seems right to pretty much all of us, huh?

Females aren't as naturally adept at building or working in the field as Males. Most guys probably don't have the patience to stay home for long periods of time taking care of kids (taking them to and from school, helping them with their homework, watching them, etc), cleaning the house and cooking dinner. In this modern age, more and more families have both spouses working full-time shifts. I think that's great, both men and women should work and help support a family. The beauty of it is that they could make their hours flexible. If they had kids that needed to be taken care of, the woman could work more in the morning before the kids came home from school, and less hours than the man to make up for the housework she would have to do. That would be a perfect world, in my opinion. NO NEED for this ultra-feminist bullshit.

I realize that feminism is in part responsible for women being able to work so freely today, and that's great. Many other rights that were handed to us, like the right to vote (even though I don't really care about politics) were awesome. How can I be against that? Women should be able to go to the same bars as men, hang out with whoever we want in public and have a good time. That's all great. Here's where it gets edgy...

Feminists and Feminism today has many double-standards. I once heard the term "feminazi", and I think that would be a better word to describe most of today's feminists. We have the same rights as human beings as men do, plus a few "special rights", what more do we need? The problem is, feminists don't just want equality. They want superiority, and to do away with "gender roles". That would really harm society even more.

Feminists believe that even though nature/god made men and women different, it shouldn't effect our roles in society in anyway...that we shouldn't be "limited" by our biology. Yeah right. For example, look at the world's top sports leagues. Would women be able to compete in the NHL or other male sports leagues? Hell no. Do you think the average woman would make as good a CEO as the average man? Don't think so. Men and Women are inherently different.

Look at politics, even though there are quite a few good female politicians, the ones that are well-known and open for criticism make us look so bad. Sarah Palin is seen mostly as a sex object, as the mascot of the Republican party. Hillary Clinton is seen as a "mad dyke", an unattractive, grumpy lady. People will always judge females more by their personalities and looks than the views they hold or serious political causes they may try to further. Obama isn't usually ridiculed for his personality or body shape, it's his politics and views that people attack. It's like a woman saying she wants to join her local boxing club or something. I think people just simply have natural biological reactions to people of the two sexes doing different things. I would say Men actually respect and admire feminine women who accept themselves, as opposed to how they view women who try to be men as laughing stalks.

Modern feminism in Western countries is unnecessary guys. Feminists often bring up the fact that women have been oppressed throughout history, that's true. But, what should we do now? Take revenge? Why should today's men be punished for what happened years ago, aren't we just being so utterly hypocritical and taking the sad "haha, we're on top now, it's our turn to oppress you!" stance? If anything, feminists should stop wasting their time and turn their focus to places that really don't have strong woman's rights. There's their chance to prove they they are simply after women's welfare, not to gain an unfair advantage over men.

Sure, guys are bigger and stronger, more "creative" than women in some ways. But, we live longer. We usually don't need to fight in wars. Of course there are some seriously wicked crazy things that nature bestowed upon us females. Having periods (I made a post about this before, sorry I was just venting frustration due to an incident), having to give birth and being weaker which would make it easier for someone to take advantage of them. But we also have a bunch of advantages that show over time. We live longer, have less physical diseases over our lifetime and are less prone to mental illnesses.

Another problem with feminism is that they want us to act more like guys. They think that it'll be a perfect world once women start making the same amount of money as men. I don't think that's true. As feminism got stronger, society became weaker and less father-oriented. Why do think we see so many single mothers nowadays? What about the increase in overly-slutty or promiscuous behavior? Girls hooking up with guys without even knowing their name, giving themselves to anyone, trying to do it without remorse, as an average guy would. Girls in flip-flops falling all over people in public like whores. Taking trashy facebook pictures in front of the mirror and in their underwear.

Men do have more power, influence, glory, etc than us. But why do men try so hard to get stuff like that? Why don't you see women lining up to become the next great hero? LET'S USE SOME COMMON SENSE! Men want these things not only for their personal satisfaction or to show off to their friends, they WANT TO IMPRESS WOMEN! That's one of the reasons why you desperately want to have power. Women don't really need these things, in the end. What do we control? You.


I guess that's all for now. Let me know what you think about this.

[Podborodok]

i am a stong opponent to the feminist movement.all that bra burning isnt good,i mean have you seen what women look like when they stop wearing bras? they get those nasty pancake titties which gross me the hell out.not cool with it.proper support is a priority..

[Qualarrizab]

Haha thanks but that's not really what I'm talking about.

[STYWOMBORGOSY]

Feminism was needed in the early 20th century, but not so much now. I think it's analogous to workers unions who were fighting for civil rights at the time, but are doing more harm than good in the present era.

I agree with you for the most part. There are certain tasks that women are much better at on average than men, and there are others that men usually perform far better than women. That doesn't mean men are better than women, or vice-versa, but that they are different.

I support laws prohibiting paying someone more because of their gender, but I also think it's ridiculous to force colleges to spend as much money on women's sports as they do men's. A man who is exceptional at baseball can go on to making twenty million dollars a year playing that sport. Find me a college softball playing female who went on to make a million dollars a year doing that. It's not feasible as a career choice.

[topbonusescod]

A while ago there was a discussion on here that sort of pertained to Feminism, and someone told me it would be a good idea to make a thread about it, and I thought it was a good idea. I want to make it long enough and get a good discussion going, please read everything...it took a long time.

I was brought up in a small town in the American New England area. As a kid, boys would hurl dead spiders in my hair and say I had "cooties". They would be the loudest during class and misbehave often. Me and my girls would pick on boys and make fun of them to get attention. We would watch them play in the dirt or get in fights with each other. I was a girl, and they were boys, it was normal to have conflicts like that right? It was normal for us to act different, even at that age and us not having the self-awareness or maturity to make choices and think about our surroundings as we do now, we were able to differentiate between male/female roles. Even if it was partly due to cultural norms for girls to help their mom cook dinner or clean the house and boys to go out with their dad to work. Seems right to pretty much all of us, huh?

Yes, Feminism is like "Revisionist History". It is a backward-justification process.

Feminism's primary assertion is that: "Gender roles are man-made and social."

Feminism does not approach the subject that gender roles have biological prerogatives.

Females aren't as naturally adept at building or working in the field as Males.

What you refer to is the Architect Career and Specialization as a "work skill". Men excel at Architecture, and dominate over females, because of the "biological imperatives" inherent behind the Specialization. For example, in the past, men had to build Castles in which to protect their children, women, and peasants. This is where 'Architecture' truly began…

Women did NOT build castles in order to protect their children, men, and peasants, because they were not 'Lords'/Men. Men did this. And to presume otherwise is a case of Feminism's "Revisionist History".

Most guys probably don't have the patience to stay home for long periods of time taking care of kids (taking them to and from school, helping them with their homework, watching them, etc), cleaning the house and cooking dinner.

You should become aware that Amerika traditionally has been a Patriarchal society. But that is not ALWAYS the case throughout history. Sometimes societies switch between Patriarchy to Matriarchy, or vice versa. I believe that now, due to the liberalization of our society, that we are becoming more & more Matriarchal. This represents a dramatic shift in "thinking" and "attitudes". For example, women are gaining more "social power" in all aspects of society in culture.

In Amerika, there even has become debates that women can become 'Priests' or 'Bishops', etc. This is ludicrous when entertained from a Patriarchal-Social perspective.

The Patriarchy/Matriarchy outlook necessarily is crucial when understanding 'Feminism' and what causes it.

In this modern age, more and more families have both spouses working full-time shifts. I think that's great, both men and women should work and help support a family.

This relatively new, Wicked.

About 80-years-ago, in the 1930s, this was NOT the case at all in Amerikan Society. Men were the "bread-winners" and women stayed-home to raise families. THAT is indication for Patriarchy.

Women entered the workforce as a result of advancing 'Capitalism', World Wars, and "Economic Prosperity". The sacrifice of this, however, has come at the "destruction of the family" ~ the 'death' of "classic gender roles". With both parents working, who "raises" the children???

Answer: The Government and State/Private School Systems do.

Parents literally are not 'Home' to raise children. This causes a degeneration within Family structures. It also alleviates 'Patriarchy' from the 'Fathers' of family, onto "The State". "The State" therein becomes the 'Father' of the country. Central Government becomes stronger and more influential as a result… (can be good or bad, depending on your politickal worldview)

The beauty of it is that they could make their hours flexible.

That really is not true, on a large scale. Most people work jobs that they can find, and conform to the hours of labor that is accessible to them, not the other way around. It WOULD BE very nice for laborers (like me) to pick our schedules, but, that is not the case. I conform to my Employment, not the other way around…

If they had kids that needed to be taken care of, the woman could work more in the morning before the kids came home from school, and less hours than the man to make up for the housework she would have to do. That would be a perfect world, in my opinion. NO NEED for this ultra-feminist bullshit.

Again, Citizenry conforms to Employment and not the other-way around.

But I do agree with you, I actually would like for one parent to remain home during all hours of the day, in order to watch-over children. That simply is not feasible in our disintegrated Economy now. Too many people are out-of-work, and although people can stay home, must now make "economic sacrifices" in order to feed families. The result of this, probably will be, that hours will become less flexible, as men & women, and people with families, become forced-into more "odd-hours" of work, as people are taking any job they can get their hands on now.

I realize that feminism is in part responsible for women being able to work so freely today, and that's great.

Wait a second Wicked… it's "great" that women work?!?!

Are you nuts?? I would MUCH RATHER PREFER to not work than to work. My time is valuable and I love to spend it doing whatever I please. Not working is great, and fun!

You really must love to 'work' a lot.

I see work as 'hard' and 'tedious'. And although there is a benefit to doing so, I particularly am not "happy" to do it. Are kids in sweatshops also "happy" to work, "happy" that they have an "economic opportunity" to do so? No, I think people are happy when they are able to make an economic living from doing something suitable to their personality, and efficient towards their skillsets.

I only work because I need to pay my bills, and for NO other reason.

I work because I have to, not because I want to. You are implying that people work because they want to. Feminism essentially has "tricked" women into believing that working is a "good thing". It is like selling somebody rope to hang themselves with. That is the justification.

So, why is it 'Good' that YOU are forced-into working, when men used to do this FOR YOU?

Many other rights that were handed to us, like the right to vote (even though I don't really care about politics) were awesome. How can I be against that?

Very easily…

Again, what Feminism "hands you" is MORE RESPONSIBILITIES!!! Feminism essentially has convinced women that "more work" is "better". Is it?!?! Better for whom??

Voting is not a 'Right' but a Responsibility! I hope you will understand this.

It is like working… why are you happy that you become FORCED to work??

Men used to do these things FOR women, so why become happy about acquiring Work and Responsibility?? You used to have "Freedom" and lack of "Responsibility" (in Governance, with voting), so why would you become happy about acquiring such?

Women used to live lives focused on raising the family; now a "single-mother" must also work, raise a child, vote, and kill herself with stress to maintain "economic equality". Why? Is it beneficial for her?

There are reasons for this… but we can get into that with further discussion.

Women should be able to go to the same bars as men, hang out with whoever we want in public and have a good time. That's all great. Here's where it gets edgy...

Feminists and Feminism today has many double-standards. I once heard the term "feminazi", and I think that would be a better word to describe most of today's feminists. We have the same rights as human beings as men do, plus a few "special rights", what more do we need?

Better yet, Wicked…

Why do you WANT to work?

Why do you WANT further responsibilities in Governance/Politicks?

For me, I am much more practical & pragmatic. I DON'T want to work; I enjoy to become lazy. My time is very, very valuable to me. You obviously want to spend your time working, raising children, AND governing the system. Why do women want to take all the 'Work', hard work, that men used to do FOR them??

That doesn't make sense to me, are you crazy or something?

You want to WORK when you could have been not working…?

Explain your Rationale.

The problem is, feminists don't just want equality. They want superiority, and to do away with "gender roles". That would really harm society even more.

I agree.

Feminists believe that even though nature/god made men and women different, it shouldn't effect our roles in society in anyway...that we shouldn't be "limited" by our biology. Yeah right. For example, look at the world's top sports leagues. Would women be able to compete in the NHL or other male sports leagues? Hell no. Do you think the average woman would make as good a CEO as the average man? Don't think so. Men and Women are inherently different.

Again, I agree.

Feminists want to 'deny' that men & women have different "biological imperatives" for biological & sexual propagation.

Look at politics, even though there are quite a few good female politicians, the ones that are well-known and open for criticism make us look so bad. Sarah Palin is seen mostly as a sex object, as the mascot of the Republican party. Hillary Clinton is seen as a "mad dyke", an unattractive, grumpy lady. People will always judge females more by their personalities and looks than the views they hold or serious political causes they may try to further. Obama isn't usually ridiculed for his personality or body shape, it's his politics and views that people attack. It's like a woman saying she wants to join her local boxing club or something. I think people just simply have natural biological reactions to people of the two sexes doing different things. I would say Men actually respect and admire feminine women who accept themselves, as opposed to how they view women who try to be men as laughing stalks.

I think so, too. I see that women are trying to "copy" or "emulate" men, when, they really don't need to. Again, why work, when a man can do it for you? Why govern, when men do it for you?

I don't understand. Somebody is willing to do all the hard work (labor) for women, but, Feminists are somehow not content with this.

Then-again, "Feminists" usually are rather 'unattractive' ladies who do not have a great deal of "sexual choices". Maybe there is a correlation between Feminism and that? I mean, for example, if a lady sexually cannot attract men, then she is in deep trouble, isn't she? She would not become able to "find a man" or husband. So, she would become forced into working and making money, for herself…

It happens… but that does not explain the whole notion behind 'Feminism'.

What causes women to become "Feminists" and what does it mean?

Modern feminism in Western countries is unnecessary guys. Feminists often bring up the fact that women have been oppressed throughout history, that's true. But, what should we do now? Take revenge?

Oppressed how?

Men have labored for you, governed for you, fought wars and died for you…

Where is the "oppression"??

Wait, you want to labor (for men), govern (for men), fight wars and die (for men)???

Is that your case here?

Why should today's men be punished for what happened years ago, aren't we just being so utterly hypocritical and taking the sad "haha, we're on top now, it's our turn to oppress you!" stance? If anything, feminists should stop wasting their time and turn their focus to places that really don't have strong woman's rights. There's their chance to prove they they are simply after women's welfare, not to gain an unfair advantage over men.

Sure, guys are bigger and stronger, more "creative" than women in some ways. But, we live longer. We usually don't need to fight in wars.

No no, Wicked, women never need to fight in wars, unless men fail to protect them.

Women usually fight in wars up unto the point where their towns are becoming invaded and all the men/soldiers are already dead.

JackKnight and I, he used to post on AFB, had this exact-same conversation once.

Women overwhelmingly do NOT fight on frontlines in combat. Men have a biological instinct to protect women from doing so. Men unconsciously keep women out of danger in combat. This is the "biological imperative" of men, to protect women (their females), from 'harm'.

Of course there are some seriously wicked crazy things that nature bestowed upon us females. Having periods (I made a post about this before, sorry I was just venting frustration due to an incident), having to give birth and being weaker which would make it easier for someone to take advantage of them. But we also have a bunch of advantages that show over time. We live longer, have less physical diseases over our lifetime and are less prone to mental illnesses.

Another problem with feminism is that they want us to act more like guys. They think that it'll be a perfect world once women start making the same amount of money as men. I don't think that's true. As feminism got stronger, society became weaker and less father-oriented. Why do think we see so many single mothers nowadays? What about the increase in overly-slutty or promiscuous behavior? Girls hooking up with guys without even knowing their name, giving themselves to anyone, trying to do it without remorse, as an average guy would. Girls in flip-flops falling all over people in public like whores. Taking trashy facebook pictures in front of the mirror and in their underwear.

Exactly, this is also a result of what I mentioned earlier:

A transference of Social/Politickal/Cultural power to females, rather than males: Patriarchy-to-Matriarchy.

The Amerikan Empire really is following the EXACT SAME REPETITION of the Roman Empire, right now. The two histories are almost identical in every way.

These types of things happened before in Human History, and repeat. Patriarchies become Matriarchies, and, Matriarchies become Patriarchies. It depends on the situations and ages. Societies usually go through very long processes. And there really is no sense 'fighting' against the process. People just need to learn and adapt. It is like trying to stop the momentum in a locomotive. You really just need to step out of the way or you'll get run over.

Men do have more power, influence, glory, etc than us. But why do men try so hard to get stuff like that? Why don't you see women lining up to become the next great hero?

It's all about: Sex.

Men acquire Power, in order to increase sexual 'potency' in mate-selection.

The more 'Powerful' a male, the more social affluence he has, the more women he has to choose from to successfully mate with.

LET'S USE SOME COMMON SENSE! Men want these things not only for their personal satisfaction or to show off to their friends, they WANT TO IMPRESS WOMEN! That's one of the reasons why you desperately want to have power. Women don't really need these things, in the end. What do we control? You.

Exactly!

I guess that's all for now. Let me know what you think about this.

Well done!

[Almolfuncomma]

Feminism is just one thing, in a long line of things, that the Jews cooked up to weaken or destroy gentile society. It has definitely been socially destructive. Want proof it was the Jews ? Just look at the major figures of feminism such as Gloria Steinem, Susan Sontag, and Betty Friedan (all Jewish). I'm not a Nazi but it is time like these that I really feel like socking it to the Jews proper and the Nazis did a pretty job of that :

[agracias]

soooo....is everyone on this board convinced on the notion that jews are set out to destroy the world or something??

[Meowmeowz]

Feminists and Feminism today has many double-standards. I once heard the term "feminazi", and I think that would be a better word to describe most of today's feminists. We have the same rights as human beings as men do, plus a few "special rights", what more do we need? The problem is, feminists don't just want equality. They want superiority, and to do away with "gender roles". That would really harm society even more.

Feminists believe that even though nature/god made men and women different, it shouldn't effect our roles in society in anyway...that we shouldn't be "limited" by our biology. Yeah right. For example, look at the world's top sports leagues. Would women be able to compete in the NHL or other male sports leagues? Hell no. Do you think the average woman would make as good a CEO as the average man? Don't think so. Men and Women are inherently different.

First of all, feminism isn't monolithic. I identify as a feminist and I acknowledge that men and women have biological differences. I think most people, feminist or not, understand that men and women or different. The uniting concept of feminism is that women are human beings with the same societal rights as men and that different or not, they don't deserve to be discriminated against because of any real or perceived difference that doesn't impede their ability to function in society.

Actually one of the reasons I personally identify as a feminist is because I think femininity and traditional female roles are often denigrated and considered lesser, even people who want to preserve those traditional roles. Many men who are anti-feminist actually don't respect women at all and don't value the contributions women make to society on any level, they simply want to uphold their own male dominance.


Look at politics, even though there are quite a few good female politicians, the ones that are well-known and open for criticism make us look so bad. Sarah Palin is seen mostly as a sex object, as the mascot of the Republican party. Hillary Clinton is seen as a "mad dyke", an unattractive, grumpy lady. People will always judge females more by their personalities and looks than the views they hold or serious political causes they may try to further. Obama isn't usually ridiculed for his personality or body shape, it's his politics and views that people attack. It's like a woman saying she wants to join her local boxing club or something. I think people just simply have natural biological reactions to people of the two sexes doing different things. I would say Men actually respect and admire feminine women who accept themselves, as opposed to how they view women who try to be men as laughing stalks. Not all women with strong and powerful personalities in positions of leadership are trying to be men. Although there may be some easily identifiable, broad differences between men and women, women are still individuals, just like men. Not all men are capable of being in positions of leadership. Some women are. In fact, select women have held different positions of power within their communities since long before the concept of feminism ever existed.


Modern feminism in Western countries is unnecessary guys. Feminists often bring up the fact that women have been oppressed throughout history, that's true. But, what should we do now? Take revenge? Why should today's men be punished for what happened years ago, aren't we just being so utterly hypocritical and taking the sad "haha, we're on top now, it's our turn to oppress you!" stance? If anything, feminists should stop wasting their time and turn their focus to places that really don't have strong woman's rights. There's their chance to prove they they are simply after women's welfare, not to gain an unfair advantage over men. How are men being oppressed? I haven't noticed any particularly strong "male oppression" movements in my country. I do agree that, for instance, boys are being left behind in schools due to our school systems adapting to female learning styles, but I don't think there's some conspiracy going on.


Another problem with feminism is that they want us to act more like guys. They think that it'll be a perfect world once women start making the same amount of money as men. I don't think that's true. As feminism got stronger, society became weaker and less father-oriented. Why do think we see so many single mothers nowadays? What about the increase in overly-slutty or promiscuous behavior? Girls hooking up with guys without even knowing their name, giving themselves to anyone, trying to do it without remorse, as an average guy would. Girls in flip-flops falling all over people in public like whores. Taking trashy facebook pictures in front of the mirror and in their underwear. There are plenty of feminists out there who agree with you about "third wave" and/or "sex positive" feminism encouraging promiscuity at a great price (check out Ariel Levy's book 'Female Chauvinist Pigs'). I don't agree that it's explicitly feminism that's to blame, it's a complex issue.

Oh, and as someone actually raised by a single-mother, I place the blame on my deadbeat daddy for his lack of involvement in my life, not "feminism". There's something called personal responsibility that feminists and anti-feminists alike seem to neglect acknowledging these days.

[DoterForeva]

I think there should be a balance. Before women did not have rights. And no it isn't just a responsibility, it is a right. Women weren't allowed to vote, they were not allowed to do a lot of things. They were oppressed in the sense that they were (maybe not all) told what to do and how to behave. They had less choice in what to do, in what they -wanted- to do.

Women had no say, they didn't have much of a choice.

If they did have these things (rights/choices) and were treated like equals, but women were to stay home and take care of the children (etc etc.) and the men were to go to work to take care of the family, then I think there would be a balance.

The family structure would stay intact and women would have a right to speak their minds, to vote, to do all sorts of things. And also work if they would want to (part time for example).

Believe it or not some people want to work. I don't want to stay home the whole day every day.

I want to do something for myself. I want an education, I want to learn things. Can I explain it to you? No. It's always been a part of me. I've been a nerd since I was a child. Whereas my siblings were the complete opposite.

Maybe another solution would be for women to be able to work and study from their home (depending on the job of course) and maybe 1-2 a week actually having to go to work (i.e. if you're a lawyer and would have to go to court).

Maybe you should see these 'rights' not just as responsibilities, but also as choices. That you have these options before you and not just be limited and unable to do the certain things.

Also why would I want a man to go and vote for me? I am my own person. I have my own thoughts, my own feelings and all of that is very personal. I want to be able to do that, to have the choice to speak my mind, to vote for the candidate I feel/believe is the most suited in regards to my own personal views and so on.

Regarding wars...there have always been things/tasks that are more 'male' or more 'female'. Certain jobs are more suited for men and certain jobs seem to be more suited for women, if that makes any sense. It's more a 'man' thing to go fight wars and protect their country/family.

But like I said I think it's all about a certain balance and I don't consider it healthy to limit women in their choices/rights/responsibilities we should be able to choose for ourselves.

[15Praxanant]

...great...I'm actually gonna write a mini-essay on here that's not going to be for high school/college. Wow haha.

What you refer to is the Architect Career and Specialization as a "work skill". Men excel at Architecture, and dominate over females, because of the "biological imperatives" inherent behind the Specialization. For example, in the past, men had to build Castles in which to protect their children, women, and peasants. This is where 'Architecture' truly began…

Women did NOT build castles in order to protect their children, men, and peasants, because they were not 'Lords'/Men. Men did this. And to presume otherwise is a case of Feminism's "Revisionist History".

100% Agree. You described my point very well, thanks.

This relatively new, Wicked.

About 80-years-ago, in the 1930s, this was NOT the case at all in Amerikan Society. Men were the "bread-winners" and women stayed-home to raise families. THAT is indication for Patriarchy.

Women entered the workforce as a result of advancing 'Capitalism', World Wars, and "Economic Prosperity". The sacrifice of this, however, has come at the "destruction of the family" ~ the 'death' of "classic gender roles". With both parents working, who "raises" the children???

Answer: The Government and State/Private School Systems do.

Parents literally are not 'Home' to raise children. This causes a degeneration within Family structures. It also alleviates 'Patriarchy' from the 'Fathers' of family, onto "The State". "The State" therein becomes the 'Father' of the country. Central Government becomes stronger and more influential as a result… (can be good or bad, depending on your politickal worldview)

That totally makes sense. And in a "perfect world" for me, as far as my views go, that's the way it should be. The government having so much influence over you and your family's life is pretty fucked up, luckily I was raised in a family where we didn't involve the government into our lives. We were very happy with that decision. My mom stayed at home for pretty much all of my childhood, but she recently started working part-time to support my dad (it was necessary). My mom was always there for me as a kid, and my dad was there when I needed him to be.

That really is not true, on a large scale. Most people work jobs that they can find, and conform to the hours of labor that is accessible to them, not the other way around. It WOULD BE very nice for laborers (like me) to pick our schedules, but, that is not the case. I conform to my Employment, not the other way around…

Again, Citizenry conforms to Employment and not the other-way around.

But I do agree with you, I actually would like for one parent to remain home during all hours of the day, in order to watch-over children. That simply is not feasible in our disintegrated Economy now. Too many people are out-of-work, and although people can stay home, must now make "economic sacrifices" in order to feed families. The result of this, probably will be, that hours will become less flexible, as men & women, and people with families, become forced-into more "odd-hours" of work, as people are taking any job they can get their hands on now.

That's true, people can't always choose their work-hours...but the woman could at least take a part-time job while the man has a full-time job. That would give her more time to stay with the kids at home/do house chores, etc.

Wait a second Wicked… it's "great" that women work?!?!

Are you nuts?? I would MUCH RATHER PREFER to not work than to work. My time is valuable and I love to spend it doing whatever I please. Not working is great, and fun!

You really must love to 'work' a lot.

I see work as 'hard' and 'tedious'. And although there is a benefit to doing so, I particularly am not "happy" to do it. Are kids in sweatshops also "happy" to work, "happy" that they have an "economic opportunity" to do so? No, I think people are happy when they are able to make an economic living from doing something suitable to their personality, and efficient towards their skillsets.

I only work because I need to pay my bills, and for NO other reason.

I work because I have to, not because I want to. You are implying that people work because they want to. Feminism essentially has "tricked" women into believing that working is a "good thing". It is like selling somebody rope to hang themselves with. That is the justification.

So, why is it 'Good' that YOU are forced-into working, when men used to do this FOR YOU?

Haha! Well, I definitely didn't mean it literally! I would love to, as you say, stay home and only worry about having fun, never having to work. Letting someone else do it for me, etc. That would be wicked awesome, but would only work if I were married to a famous athlete or someone very rich. However, I really don't like the idea all that much for one reason- it would make me feel useless. I don't want to have that feeling, I want to work for myself most of all. To make my own money that I don't have to feel guilty about spending and to feel like I'm contributing to the household the best I can. That's why I think it's great that women can work, as opposed to being forced to stay home.

Very easily…

Again, what Feminism "hands you" is MORE RESPONSIBILITIES!!! Feminism essentially has convinced women that "more work" is "better". Is it?!?! Better for whom??

Voting is not a 'Right' but a Responsibility! I hope you will understand this.

It is like working… why are you happy that you become FORCED to work??

Men used to do these things FOR women, so why become happy about acquiring Work and Responsibility?? You used to have "Freedom" and lack of "Responsibility" (in Governance, with voting), so why would you become happy about acquiring such?

Women used to live lives focused on raising the family; now a "single-mother" must also work, raise a child, vote, and kill herself with stress to maintain "economic equality". Why? Is it beneficial for her?

There are reasons for this… but we can get into that with further discussion.

It's true...Feminism does hand women more responsibilities. But, I think since feminists have pushed forward so hard with their plans, it's pretty much too late for us non-feminists to change the course. From what I've seen, many feminists are very hypocritical. They expect us to receive all these rights that would make us "the same" as men, yet they still want to keep the "special rights" that we have. It's socially acceptable for a woman to hit a man who did her wrong, to be protected by them simply because they are female. "Women and Children first" anyone?

Back to what you were saying, I agree that voting should be recognized more as a responsibility. I personally don't care for it, voting just for the sake of voting is pretty lame. Feminists piling tons of responsibilities on us that most of us don't care about is also lame. It's like taking your special privileges and throwing them away in exchange for things that will just burden your life further. Then again, some people are just so obsessed with being someone else, and having as much "power" as them that they would be willing to take on various aspects of their lives, even if they are hardships.

Work is something that I'm grateful to feminism for obviously because of what I said earlier. It prevents the unthinkable happening for me, I can't imagine waiting for my boyfriend/husband to give me my "allowance" that I would need to buy clothes or go out with friends. That would make me feel like shit, fuck that!

Oh, that doesn't include him paying the bulk or at least half of the bills, paying for dinner, movies, gifts, etc. That's expected

Again, I agree.

Feminists want to 'deny' that men & women have different "biological imperatives" for biological & sexual propagation.

Yup. And if you remember our discussion in the other thread, we were talking about this a bit. Women are biologically set to look for someone that would be able to protect them. Socially, the need for protection isn't needed nearly as much in a civilized area, and even though that's true, most women want someone bigger than they are.

I think so, too. I see that women are trying to "copy" or "emulate" men, when, they really don't need to. Again, why work, when a man can do it for you? Why govern, when men do it for you?

I don't understand. Somebody is willing to do all the hard work (labor) for women, but, Feminists are somehow not content with this.

Then-again, "Feminists" usually are rather 'unattractive' ladies who do not have a great deal of "sexual choices". Maybe there is a correlation between Feminism and that? I mean, for example, if a lady sexually cannot attract men, then she is in deep trouble, isn't she? She would not become able to "find a man" or husband. So, she would become forced into working and making money, for herself…

It happens… but that does not explain the whole notion behind 'Feminism'.

What causes women to become "Feminists" and what does it mean?

I think I have some "partial" answers. Of course I can't really speak for feminists, because I'm not one but I'll give my opinion. It would be great for a feminist to express his (men can be feminists too technically) or her rationale on it.

I think that some feminists usually can't accept their femininity or see the positives of it. They could simply have a negative view of all men because of past events (being cheated for example) or they are ultra-competitive and don't want to be "over-shadowed". There ARE some women who care too much about power. But, if you look at some of the world's greatest female rulers in history like Cleopatra and Victoria, they all accepted their femininity. I don't think they wanted to be men, they accepted that they were different and it showed up in how they ruled.

Oppressed how?

Men have labored for you, governed for you, fought wars and died for you…

Where is the "oppression"??

Wait, you want to labor (for men), govern (for men), fight wars and die (for men)???

Is that your case here?

Oppressed in many ways. Women being treated more like objects, being considered "beneath" men, us not being able to choose our husbands, stuck with someone we don't love, having a strict curfew, not being about to congregate in public or go to bars, etc, etc. That's all a part of history now, but you have to admit women were oppressed and treated poorly compared to men. Sure, men usually were the ones building the house, bringing home food, and materials... but trust me, I would rather work 8 hours a day, 7 days a week than having an arranged marriage, and all the other things we went through hundreds of years ago.

No no, Wicked, women never need to fight in wars, unless men fail to protect them.

Women usually fight in wars up unto the point where their towns are becoming invaded and all the men/soldiers are already dead.

JackKnight and I, he used to post on AFB, had this exact-same conversation once.

Women overwhelmingly do NOT fight on frontlines in combat. Men have a biological instinct to protect women from doing so. Men unconsciously keep women out of danger in combat. This is the "biological imperative" of men, to protect women (their females), from 'harm'.

True. But what happens when you fail to protect us? Your children and us both get either enslaved or killed. I think if a woman wanted to become a soldier (I seriously don't) and fight for her country, that should be her choice. Women don't often fight on the frontlines, but that doesn't mean we can't be good soldiers. I read that the Soviet Union used female snipers during world war II, and women actually can be pretty good killers.

It's all about: Sex.

Men acquire Power, in order to increase sexual 'potency' in mate-selection.

The more 'Powerful' a male, the more social affluence he has, the more women he has to choose from to successfully mate with.

Putting it that way makes it seem so gloomy and animalistic. But, I suppose it is true...biology can give your system a wicked shock sometimes because of how we were conditioned.

Well done!

Thanks a lot! You really made a great response that got me thinking.

[hwood]

Productive women are good for society. Also there is absolutely no need for increased population growth either these days. However although my problem with feminism is that it is itself a form of discrimination.

People shouldn't (don't and never will as far as I am concerned) have rights because they belong to a particular group. People have rights as individual people. Feminism specifically, affirmative action and its ilk in general, and the reverse discrimination that it causes angers me like you wouldn't believe.

It is evil, coercive when perpetrated by the government, and is a wholly unethical means even if it were achieving its end, which it isn't. Can't we see that we are perpetuating and/or accentuating the very problem we are trying to solve?

[sasquatch999]

old post, thought i'd bring it back up.

[drlifeech]

Agree with you femenist are anti-femenine, i like the role distribution between genders.
Non feminist girls are more exigent with guys than the feminist one.

[leadmoffer]

What feminist have you read? Who wants revenge? Do you think creativity is something men are genetically predisposed to? Obviously the average man is stronger than the average woman, I've never met a feminist who would contest this. I don't see an issue with women being in charge of anything, if they are qualified. I think the use of feminism, is and has always been to question the institution of gender, and the essentiality of the "female" and the "male" gender. One of the biggest issues of feminism in it's early phases was to demystify the female (the virgin), and recognize her as a sexual and creative animal. Her emancipation was personal first.

Feminist thought wanted to establish the full female, not as simply a defective male, but as her own being, to establish the "other" which seemed lost in the west, and to create sister hood, amongst women who had become rivals through the "masculine economy" of possessions. I see Fight Club as sort of the male counterpart. I think feminism has accomplished a lot, but I'm not sure it's useless yet. I still see a lot of ignorance, and growth happening before my eyes.

---------- Post added 2011-02-27 at 16:05 ----------

Agree with you femenist are anti-femenine, i like the role distribution between genders.
Non feminist girls are more exigent with guys than the feminist one.

I don't agree that feminists are anti-femenine. That just depends on the women. However, generally speaking I find them much cooler, than the "typical girl", with the exception of the Valerie Solanas maniacs, but I call them "masculinists". I prefer feminine women (not "too feminine") in romantic relationships, however not every women is feminine (feminist or no feminist), and not every relationship between genders has to be romantic.

[fedordzen]

Oppressed in many ways. Women being treated more like objects, being considered "beneath" men, us not being able to choose our husbands, stuck with someone we don't love, having a strict curfew, not being about to congregate in public or go to bars, etc, etc. That's all a part of history now, but you have to admit women were oppressed and treated poorly compared to men. Sure, men usually were the ones building the house, bringing home food, and materials... but trust me, I would rather work 8 hours a day, 7 days a week than having an arranged marriage, and all the other things we went through hundreds of years ago.

It isn't that simple. Throughout much of history, women were viewed as being tantamount to property because they were a financial and legal burden. Before the industrial revolution, the vast majority of jobs were based on labor skills. As you admitted, women are generally not built for labor and labor skills. Therefore, men were expected to be the sole breadwinners for their families. Men were also expected to sacrifice their lives for women and children if it was necessary. A man who did not bring home the bread or sacrifice his own safety for his wife and children was looked down upon by society. To a somewhat lesser degree, men are still looked down upon if they do not provide financial security and personal safety for their families.

Arranged marriage isn't an institution of oppression. Forced marriages and arranged marriages are two different things. An arranged marriage is one in which someone other than the couple getting married makes the selection of the persons to be wed. It's done in order to curtail or avoid the process of courtship. Forced marriages were usually done to an unmarried woman who became pregnant and her impregnator in order to make sure that the woman and child had a man to provide for them.

I tend to look at gender roles as pragmatic cultural-biological adaptations that have pros and cons for both sexes. Depending on the society, one sex may have more pros or cons than the other or the pros and cons may be equal depending on perspective. For example, most women would prefer to stay home and raise children over being drafted into the military and dying in a foxhole.

[Plulpangepler]

Agree with you femenist are anti-femenine, i like the role distribution between genders.
Non feminist girls are more exigent with guys than the feminist one.

Not really. I celebrate and embrace femininity, even in a culture that degrades it. That's why I'm a feminist.

What feminist have you read? Who wants revenge? Do you think creativity is something men are genetically predisposed to? Obviously the average man is stronger than the average woman, I've never met a feminist who would contest this. I don't see an issue with women being in charge of anything, if they are qualified. I think the use of feminism, is and has always been to question the institution of gender, and the essentiality of the "female" and the "male" gender. One of the biggest issues of feminism in it's early phases was to demystify the female (the virgin), and recognize her as a sexual and creative animal. Her emancipation was personal first.

Feminist thought wanted to establish the full female, not as simply a defective male, but as her own being, to establish the "other" which seemed lost in the west, and to create sister hood, amongst women who had become rivals through the "masculine economy" of possessions. I see Fight Club as sort of the male counterpart. I think feminism has accomplished a lot, but I'm not sure it's useless yet. I still see a lot of ignorance, and growth happening before my eyes.

---------- Post added 2011-02-27 at 16:05 ----------



I don't agree that feminists are anti-femenine. That just depends on the women. However, generally speaking I find them much cooler, than the "typical girl", with the exception of the Valerie Solanas maniacs, but I call them "masculinists". I prefer feminine women (not "too feminine") in romantic relationships, however not every women is feminine (feminist or no feminist), and not every relationship between genders has to be romantic.

As you admitted, women are generally not built for labor and labor skills. Therefore, men were expected to be the sole breadwinners for their families.

That is a myth. Women have always worked and women have always done manual labor.

[Skete]

Not really. I celebrate and embrace femininity, even in a culture that degrades it. That's why I'm a feminist.

Welcome back la_bombe,

I dunno what is your concept of feminism, but the ones i see instead of embrace the femininity they try to be like men, wearing pants and no make up.

[Lilji]

Welcome back la_bombe,

I dunno what is your concept of feminism, but the ones i see instead of embrace the femininity they try to be like men, wearing pants and no make up.

la bombe played bass guitar for Bikini Kill in the early 90s.

[mygalinasoo]

Welcome back la_bombe,

I dunno what is your concept of feminism, but the ones i see instead of embrace the femininity they try to be like men, wearing pants and no make up.

lol

la bombe played bass guitar for Bikini Kill in the early 90s.

I wish I was that cool

[alskdjreyfd]

Welcome back la_bombe,

I dunno what is your concept of feminism, but the ones i see instead of embrace the femininity they try to be like men, wearing pants and no make up.

so to be feminine you have to wear makeup, and misrepresent your looks? Most women I know wear tight pants, that few men would wear. They wear dresses as well though, none of the feminist I know seem to find male style attractive. I do know maybe one very masculine girl, who may be a feminist, she dresses like a man, but I'm pretty sure she is into women (like that), and I never heard her call herself feminist. My professor in who introduced me to feminist theory wore pretty dark dress it seemed most days, usually long boots though, not high-heels, only a bit of makeup, she was already married, no need for her to fake her beauty. You realize a girl who is attractive without makeup is always attractive, I've seen girls who looks good with makeup, and horrible in the morning so I don't see makeup at all to be necessary to femininity, but I'm not the female, she's the one who decides what's feminine to her, not us dudes.

Make up does however make women more competitive as products, cause you can always enhance what you have if you understand the art (I've seen some bad make-up jobs) at the same time you are only competing for men as sexual objects, make up doesn't make you any better a girl. What looks feminine is a creation of man (or mankind), not an absolute abstract. John Paul Sartre was in love with a beautiful feminist, not because she wore a lot of makeup, but because she was beautiful without it.