Feminisms effect on women

[SeekingCatholic]

the same thing can be said the other way around…if a man shows dominant behavior he’s being a leader…if a woman shows dominant behavior she would be called a witch with a b.

Yeah, and your point is? You have the choice as to whether to call something “dominant behavior” or “leadership”. So is it possible that when women have contempt for men’s alleged “dominant behavior” in actuality they are merely jealous of men’s leadership (but, in reality, much more attracted to these type of men than the “nice guys” they SAY they want…)

most people don’t divorce out of the blue. If a woman initiated teh divorce it prob was b/c the man cheated or was abusive.

So, if a man initiates the divorce, he’s a worthless POS, but if a woman initiates the divorce, she must have had a good reason.
You have no basis whatsoever for making the claim except your prejudiced belief, which has now come to the fore, that women are morally superior. Women never cheat, and are never emotionally abusive? In fact adultery or abuse are NOT the reasons most women give for divorce.

false accusations are unacceptable but you can’t get rid of rape laws for a few idiotic people. Majority of the women that claim to be raped Were! And those men deserve to be severely punished!

We can demand however that the usual protections for the accused apply also in rape cases. (Which is denied today, thanks to feminists and “rape shield” laws. An alleged victim’s sexual history IS relevant because it relates to the credibility of the witness.) You also might be interested to know that rape is one of the most falsely reported crimes. A significant percentage of cases are bogus. There should be some serious criminal penalties for laying an obvious bogus charge. “Women never lie about rape.” Yes they do. And they should do some serious prison time when they do. And they don’t.

No I do not have a practice but I have come into contact with people due to my research in family and child development.

Exactly. So your sample suffers from self-selection bias.

The state taking such liberties would make anyone uncomfortable. They seem to be doing that a lot more lately. I mean social services have been called before b/c a mother spanked their kid for throwing a temper tantrum in the grocery store. If the mother initiates the divorce for no reason then yeah the court should look into the kids staying with the father. If the father cheated or abused the mother then no they should not, more so if it was abuse.

No, if the mother initiates the divorce for no reason the courts should not “look into” the kids staying with the father. It should be automatic.

And if she is caught making a false claim of abuse (which is known to be common practice among divorce lawyers) she loses all rights to everything.

 

[Carolinagirl411]

Yeah, and your point is?

My point was that there is a double standard

So, if a man initiates the divorce, he’s a worthless POS, but if a woman initiates the divorce, she must have had a good reason.You have no basis whatsoever for making the claim except your prejudiced belief, which has now come to the fore, that women are morally superior. Women never cheat, and are never emotionally abusive? In fact adultery or abuse are NOT the reasons most women give for divorce.

You my friend are putting words into my mouth…I do NOT have a prejudiced belief that women are morally superior. NEVER did I EVER say that! Women do cheat and can be abusive but it is more prevalent in men…maybe b/c men decide not to report it, who knows. I’m just saying that things aren’t always black and white like you keep making them with women being deviant, money grubbing , manipulators. We aren’t all like that! only a few are and you are generalizing. Men and women are equal on average as far as morals are concerned.

We can demand however that the usual protections for the accused apply also in rape cases. (Which is denied today, thanks to feminists and “rape shield” laws. An alleged victim’s sexual history IS relevant because it relates to the credibility of the witness.) ** You also might be interested to know that rape is one of the most falsely reported crimes. A significant percentage of cases are bogus. ** There should be some serious criminal penalties for laying an obvious bogus charge. “Women never lie about rape.” Yes they do. And they should do some serious prison time when they do. And they don’t.

Where did you find these statistics or do you “have no basis whatsoever for making the claim except your prejudiced belief” as you put so eloquently earlier. And no I don’t think sexual history is relevant b/c most of the time sick jerks who do rape try to use that to turn people against the victim so he can get off scot free. A women can have sex 50 times and then that 51st time say no. Just b/c she’s promiscuous doesn’t take away her right to say no to that one person. I do not condone promiscuity…I’m just using it as an example. I’m not denying false allegations happen either. I just don’t think they happen as often as you claim.

Exactly. So your sample suffers from self-selection bias

Not self selection bias b/c I was not looking for divorced women who have been cheated on. I have been a part of many projects focusing on how attachment to caregivers affects a child…as well as children who suffer abuse/neglect in foster care. The people that we found in the state of NC tended to fall in the divorced/abandoned mothers category due to husbands leaving/cheating/abusing. We didn’t go looking for those types.

No, if the mother initiates the divorce for no reason the courts should not “look into” the kids staying with the father. It should be automatic.

They should look into it to make sure any allegations the mother makes might be true!!! Children’s welfare are at stake and if there is any hint then it needs to be investigated. If the mother is making stuff up, which they would find out, she would prob lose her case in the custody. Nothing should be automatic as rule. Not safe.

 

[juliamajor]

That’s waaay too nebulous. If a woman wants to become CEO, that’s encouraging “female empowerment” but if a man wants to he’s “power hungry”? If a woman refuses to be pushed around, she’s scoring a blow for the sisterhood but if a man takes the same attitude he’s exhibiting “dominant behavior”?

No, indeed. Now couple that in with the fact that it is the woman who initiates the divorce approximately 75% of the time .

I don’t.

A false dichotomy. Laws can be reformed to provide justice for everyone. And, is protecting women a higher consideration than justice? Some feminists would say yes. They’d say it’s an acceptable price to pay, if some men are convicted falsely of rape, in order to ensure the protection of women.

A sad situation. But again equal rights imply equal responsibilities.

I suggest your (abnormally large) sample is skewed by selection bias. You knew these families through your professional practice didn’t you?

Consider why those are the situations you’ve seen personally.

I absolutely reject this interpretation of parens patriae. If the mother initiates the divorce and is the one responsible the children should stay with the father, or at least a joint physical custody arrangement. If the State steps in (and it does) it becomes a kidnapper. Why not go further and remove children even from intact families, without evidence of abuse or neglect, if there is evidence children would be better off with another family? Moreover I don’t buy your argument that psychologically children tend to fare better with mothers. Look at some statistics at how children raised by single fathers do by comparison.

THAT wasn’t the issue. The issue is exactly how often women were victims of sexual harassment.

Unless you’ve been raped or know someone who was raped,you’d know how lousy the laws are in protecting women. Some guys have been falsely accused of rape,but they’ve also been wrongly accused of theft,abuse and murder- does that make the vast majority innocent? Or the vast mass of victims suspect? Rape is one of the most underestimated crimes. the 92,00 reported every year is said to be in reality 60% higher. Why don’t they report it ? Because going to trail is , for many victims, like being humiliated and assaulted all over again. be a little charitable.

 

[Carolinagirl411]

Thank you so much for putting that

Personally I think anyone who rapes another person…whether they rape a woman, man, child, should be chemically castrated and put in jail for a loooooooooooooong time.

Psychologically it is proven that people who commit sexual crimes are not fixable…they do not rehabilitate…they will more than likely offend again and again and again if given the chance. They are the scum of the earth…

makes me physically ill

 

[August_AWeitzel]

There is this company that I know of that was a buisness owned only by women. They seemed to hate men and it would actually effect the working enviornment of the company as well as the abuse of other workers.

I used to work for a few companys earlier back on that had women who were feminists in some higher power positions. And again it made it miserable for some of the workers. So it brings up the question. If feminism is so good in these peoples eyes and so “liberating” why are they themselves so miserable and rude to other people? Because it seems every feminist I have met or heard of has been mean and rude to the bone to people. They seem like extremely unhappy miserable people and have a hatred for people who are religious it seems.

Now if feminism is such a wonderful movement in the eyes of these women, why are they themselves so miserable and angry towards society? On the job I know some feminists who have made it miserable for certains workers simply because they were a man. In fact in general, for myself, it seems nearly everyone I and my friends have had problems with in the workplace from companys in the past were people who were secular and not even religious, let alone Catholic. It seems their immoral ways in their life does effect other people in life who are good hard working God fearing people. And that is a sad thing.

I think its a why we need to bring God back in schools. Because this is what secular society spits out. Cold, hard, uncaring, secular people who would stab their mothers in the back if they were offered enough. This “secular” mindset creates problems later in life for people who are honest and good and unfortunatly have to deal with such people in life.

 

[August_AWeitzel]

Most of the women feminist I have encountered are very nice, they just want to have the same oportunities than men, and not to be treated as slaves.
The ladies you mentioned just displayed the same greedy qualities as some men, I don’t think that makes them feminist.
Women should vote, should receive the same pay for the same work as a man, should have paid leave to have a child. I don’t think they should abort a child, but that is their choice, even if it is a mortal sin for them.

 

[EasterJoy]

And I don’t think any of the gals here are going to get it either. Equal rights means equal responsibility. Demand equal rights in the workplace and lose the right to be supported by a man. Anyone that demands the right to both under “equal rights” is a hypocrite, and is in fact demanding not equal rights but special rights. That’s the problem with feminism. It’s pure hypocrisy, demanding not equal but special rights for women.

Most of the women feminist I have encountered are very nice, they just want to have the same oportunities than men, and not to be treated as slaves.
The ladies you mentioned just displayed the same greedy qualities as some men, I don’t think that makes them feminist.
Women should vote, should receive the same pay for the same work as a man, should have paid leave to have a child. I don’t think they should abort a child, but that is their choice, even if it is a mortal sin for them.

By feminism, I mean that differences in how people are treated, in the workplace for example, should be based on real and relevant differences, not on their gender. In the old days, women were treated differently for reasons that weren’t real (“Women can’t drive forklifts”) or weren’t relevant (“He needs the money/job more”: as if guys with new babies got an automatic pay raise or single guys were denied jobs). When the difference is real–that is, when a woman is denied a position because she isn’t as physically strong as the chosen candidate, in a case when a man of her size, strength, and other qualifications would also have missed out–that is different. If the physical qualifications for some job have been set artificially high, then lower them to a realistic level, and let the men with less physical qualifications also compete.

I think there are some bitter people who are feminists and some bitter people who vehemently oppose feminism. Ah, well, in some things we are all equal!

 

[Dale_M]

Does that include allowing abortion for a college student if she wants one? It would certainly make life better for her, in her mind.

But the Church teaches that abortion is murder.

 

[Pope_Gregory]

Naztakuan;3613636]

Nope. But I had to find out what it meant lol. So, Thank You.

Well, I don;t know. That is actually a personal issue that I am dealing with now, so I have no official comment or position. Although, the more Catholics I see supporting abortion and other things, the more disturbed I get. When abortion becomes fully accepted, and we are on our way there now, the more I will see the Church as being attacked. When a “comment” is more disturbing than an increase of immorality(rampandt sex, abortion, divorce), then someone needs to take a stand for what is right. Right for society, right for God.

Thats what I dont understand. How Catholic people who are professing Catholic support things like Abortion and vote for people like Hilliary Clinton. Are they so prideful that they think morals don’t apply to them anymore and that they are special? When I see demonic places like “Catholics” for a Free Choice, all I see is them just barking orders at the Pope and the Church as how THEY want the church to be. Personally I think Catholics who support things contrary to doctrine have a big problem with Pride and that they thing they are somehow special and that the Law of God dosen’t apply to them. These types almost make me almost more frustrated than the atheists do because they confuse people who are trying to learn more about what the Church really teaches and gives them a bad impression. Its makes us look like we Catholics don’t follow our church

 

[neat62]

Thats what I dont understand. How Catholic people who are professing Catholic support things like Abortion and vote for people like Hilliary Clinton. Are they so prideful that they think morals don’t apply to them anymore and that they are special? When I see demonic places like “Catholics” for a Free Choice, all I see is them just barking orders at the Pope and the Church as how THEY want the church to be. Personally I think Catholics who support things contrary to doctrine have a big problem with Pride and that they thing they are somehow special and that the Law of God dosen’t apply to them. These types almost make me almost more frustrated than the atheists do because they confuse people who are trying to learn more about what the Church really teaches and gives them a bad impression. Its makes us look like we Catholics don’t follow our church

I don’t understand how Catholics can in fact, turn their backs on the basic doctrines of the Church and decide they “know better”…basically, that is what is termed heretic.

Many seem to forget that once you are aware of the full TRUTH, you must obey it…for:

Luke 12:48 - And unto whomsoever much is given, of him much shall be required

 

[mom4truth]

neat62:

I fully agree with your insert from Pope Gregory. These so-called Catholics are only "cafeteria"Catholics. Maybe they shouldn’t be Catholic at all.

 

[Naztakuan]

neat62:

I fully agree with your insert from Pope Gregory. These so-called Catholics are only "cafeteria"Catholics. Maybe they shouldn’t be Catholic at all.

So…people who sin, can’t be catholic? If a person has an issue with sin, you shouldn’t encourage them to leave. That’s why my brother left. You make it sound like some sort of exclusive club that if you fail, you get kicked out.The point of the church is to get everyone to participate.

 

[neat62]

So…people who sin, can’t be catholic? If a person has an issue with sin, you shouldn’t encourage them to leave. That’s why my brother left. You make it sound like some sort of exclusive club that if you fail, you get kicked out.The point of the church is to get everyone to participate.

We were told when you sin…you must go confess and then promise to do your best to go and sin no more.

We weren’t told that its acceptable to encourage sin…nor were we told that we can commit sin time and time again and be forgiven, in other words, you can’t say "oh well, I know better, but I am going to do what I want instead, cause if “feels” better.

You are supposed to have true remorse and sorrow in your heart for the sins you commit and do your best not to sin again…in other words, you are still held to the laws of the Church, you can’t just suddenly decide to throw out what you don’t agree with.

The point of the Church is NOT get to everyone to participate…but rather for everyone who does, to honor, worship, praise and love God forever…which we are not able to do when we constantly disobey Him and the laws He set forth.

Those who leave the Church generally do so, because they are looking to make their own rules…they do not want to commit the all that the Church asks of us, because its not "easy or fun, to do so. They do not wish to be held to the responsible for their actions or lack their of.

But the whole point is that…if faith was easy to have…we’d all be in Heaven already!

Sorry that your brother left…perhaps if you talk with him and explain the Truth, he will be able to understand better and want to come back.

 

[juliamajor]

So…people who sin, can’t be catholic? If a person has an issue with sin, you shouldn’t encourage them to leave. That’s why my brother left. You make it sound like some sort of exclusive club that if you fail, you get kicked out.The point of the church is to get everyone to participate.

Naztakuan-must be nice to be so judgmental as some of these folks- thank God they aren’t in charge of the church.Must be nice to be a reader of souls-be careful how you judge folks that same measure will be used upon you in return .Unless you’re approaching sainthood you shouldn’t be calling folks heretics or trying to cast people out. That’s not your job. Hang in there Naztakuan

 

[neat62]

Naztakuan-must be nice to be so judgmental as some of these folks- thank God they aren’t in charge of the church.Must be nice to be a reader of souls-be careful how you judge folks that same measure will be used upon you in return .Unless you’re approaching sainthood you shouldn’t be calling folks heretics or trying to cast people out. That’s not your job. Hang in there Naztakuan

Actually, it is our duty to “judge” one another…as if you love your neighbor you would want to help them not sin…just as you would want them to help you not sin.

There is nothing wrong with trying to state the Truth and the whole “your judging me” is a lame excuse for the lack of it.

Again, we were told to lead by example, but that doesn’t mean, don’t say anything to others. In fact, its sort of like having a teenager…you don’t let them just run amock and do whatever they want right? You tell them what they can and can’t do, guiding them, based on the laws you and your spouse set within your own family. Your teenager is then expected to obey those laws…or face consequences…doesn’t mean at all that you don’t “love” them…or that you are “judging” them…as all you are doing is guiding them in (hopefully) the right direction so that they avoid getting hurt or hurting others and you do so out of complete love and concern for them.

To do nothing and say nothing…to allow them to do whatever they please…indicates lack of love and in fact, implies neglect.

It is the responsibility of each of us to help one another…to do so, not simply by handing over money to charities, but by also speaking up when another member of the Body of Christ is about to commit heinous sin…as their sin, hurts not only themselves, but each of us within that Body and most of all God.

 

[juliamajor]

Actually, it is our duty to “judge” one another…as if you love your neighbor you would want to help them not sin…just as you would want them to help you not sin.

There is nothing wrong with trying to state the Truth and the whole “your judging me” is a lame excuse for the lack of it.

Again, we were told to lead by example, but that doesn’t mean, don’t say anything to others. In fact, its sort of like having a teenager…you don’t let them just run amock and do whatever they want right? You tell them what they can and can’t do, guiding them, based on the laws you and your spouse set within your own family. Your teenager is then expected to obey those laws…or face consequences…doesn’t mean at all that you don’t “love” them…or that you are “judging” them…as all you are doing is guiding them in (hopefully) the right direction so that they avoid getting hurt or hurting others and you do so out of complete love and concern for them.

To do nothing and say nothing…to allow them to do whatever they please…indicates lack of love and in fact, implies neglect.

It is the responsibility of each of us to help one another…to do so, not simply by handing over money to charities, but by also speaking up when another member of the Body of Christ is about to commit heinous sin…as their sin, hurts not only themselves, but each of us within that Body and most of all God.

Honey- you totally misread it- I said to be careful in your judgments- because- the same standard will be used upon you- if you are pristine in your beliefs and and follow Christ without any hypocrisy- then Alleluia. But most Catholics I know-even ‘good’ ones can struggle with doctrine or biblical matters.I have huge feet of clay- so it’s a term I would not bandy about.

 

[neat62]

Honey- you totally misread it- I said to be careful in your judgments- because- the same standard will be used upon you- if you are pristine in your beliefs and and follow Christ without any hypocrisy- then Alleluia. But most Catholics I know-even ‘good’ ones can struggle with doctrine or biblical matters.I have huge feet of clay- so it’s a term I would not bandy about.

Well, I think its pretty safe to say that when we see someone about to commit the sin of abortion, it will be okay for me to speak up.

As for being judged the same way…I do, indeed, hope Christ “judges” me as I judge others…of course, I know that His judgement will be far greater than mine could ever be…and of course, He alone has the power to condemn…so I am not afaid to do what I can to try to convince those around me and even strangers to not commit grevious sin.

I don’t pretend to be perfect, because I know that only Christ was…but I do what I can to follow the ALL the teachings that Christ gave to us…I would think that for one to consider themself as faithful, they woud try to do the same, wouldn’t you?

 

[neat62]

Do not be afraid to go out on the streets and into public places…This is no time to be ashamed of the Gospel. It is time to preach it from the rooftops…You must feel the full urgency of the task. Woe to you if you do not succeed in defending life.
~ Pope John Paul II

 

[SeekingCatholic]

My point was that there is a double standard

Yeah, by you. You can complain that women’s leadership is called “bitchiness” but you can not then turn around and deride men’s leadership as “dominant behavior”. Make up your mind.

I do NOT have a prejudiced belief that women are morally superior. NEVER did I EVER say that! Women do cheat and can be abusive but it is more prevalent in men…maybe b/c men decide not to report it, who knows.

OK, you are contradicting yourself on what is more “prevalent” but at least you agree then that it is not always the fault of a man if a woman files for divorce.

Where did you find these statistics or do you “have no basis whatsoever for making the claim except your prejudiced belief” as you put so eloquently earlier.

It’s well known by prosecutors. Have you been following the news lately? Heard about the Kobe Bryant “rape” case or the Duke “rape” case?

According to a nine-year study conducted by former Purdue sociologist Eugene J. Kanin, in over 40 percent of the cases reviewed, the complainants eventually admitted that no rape had occurred (Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 1, 1994). Kanin also studied rape allegations in two large Midwestern universities and found that 50 percent of the allegations were recanted by the accuser.

…

Kanin’s findings are hardly unique. In 1985 the Air Force conducted a study of 556 rape accusations. Over one quarter of the accusers admitted, either just before they took a lie detector test of after they had failed it, that no rape occurred. A further investigation by independent reviewers found that 60 percent of the original rape allegations were false.

…

A Washington Post investigation of rape reports in seven Virginia and Maryland counties in 1990 and 1991 found that nearly one in four were unfounded. When contacted by the Post, many of the alleged victims admitted that they had lied.

…

According to a 1996 Department of Justice Report, of the roughly 10,000 sexual assault cases analyzed with DNA evidence over the previous seven years, 2,000 excluded the primary suspect, and another 2,000 were inconclusive. The report notes that these figures mirror an informal National Institute of Justice survey of private laboratories, and suggests that there exists "some strong, underlying systemic problems that generate erroneous accusations and convictions."

Craig Silverman, a former Colorado prosecutor known for his zealous prosecution of rapists during his 16-year career, says that false rape accusations occur with “scary frequency.” As a regular commentator on the Bryant trial for Denver’s ABC affiliate, Silverman noted that “any honest veteran sex assault investigator will tell you that rape is one of the most falsely reported crimes.” According to Silverman, a Denver sex-assault unit commander estimates that nearly half of all reported rape claims are false.

http://www.glennsacks.com/research_shows_false.htm

And no I don’t think sexual history is relevant b/c most of the time sick jerks who do rape try to use that to turn people against the victim so he can get off scot free.

You see that is not a rational argument. That is only emotion speaking. You are assuming that the accused is in fact guilty. Whereas our system has a presumption of innocence. Sexual history is relevant because it goes to the credibility of the witness.

A women can have sex 50 times and then that 51st time say no. Just b/c she’s promiscuous doesn’t take away her right to say no to that one person.

Her claim to having said no has less credibility in that case. Just like someone with a rap sheet a mile long for violent offenses is not going to be as credible if he claims self-defense in an assault or murder case.

I do not condone promiscuity…I’m just using it as an example. I’m not denying false allegations happen either. I just don’t think they happen as often as you claim.

Read the studies cited above.

Not self selection bias b/c I was not looking for divorced women who have been cheated on. I have been a part of many projects focusing on how attachment to caregivers affects a child…as well as children who suffer abuse/neglect in foster care. The people that we found in the state of NC tended to fall in the divorced/abandoned mothers category due to husbands leaving/cheating/abusing. We didn’t go looking for those types.

Looking for children who suffer abuse/neglect in foster care is NOT a representative sample. How did they get into foster care in the first place? And just who did you interview to determine the mothers were “abandoned”?

They should look into it to make sure any allegations the mother makes might be true!!! Children’s welfare are at stake and if there is any hint then it needs to be investigated.

And, this allegation mysteriously surfaces only during the divorce proceedings, whereas everything was supposedly just hunky-dory before then. If the abuse actually occurred, and the mother said nothing about until then, then she is also an unfit parent and both parents should lose custody.

If the mother is making stuff up, which they would find out, she would prob lose her case in the custody.

Hardly. It’s well known in the divorce industry that she has much to gain and little to lose by making the accusation.

Nothing should be automatic as rule. Not safe.

“Safety” should not be preferred to the expense of “justice”. To say otherwise is the absolute dream of totalitarians everywhere.

 

[Carolinagirl411]

I’ll respond to this later when I have time and when I have a clearer head.

Anything I say now would be said out of anger/annoyance/frustration