Positive results of feminism ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter edwest2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
When you dictate the terms for payment, as you have done, you do a serious injustice by inventing a fiction in opposition to reality.
]I’m not dictating anything. Market forces are. Hell, if I were, it wouldn’t have taken my current job 3 weeks to decide what to pay me…I would have told them what I wanted and we could have negotiated from there…
My best friend paid 20% less in car insurance the moment he said, “I do.” Why ? I felt cheated ! I felt robbed ! Why should he pay less insurance than I do ? It took a long time, but I realized why : my best friend is now far less likely to stupidly jeopardize his life, far more likely to drive with care, especially when his wife (who might be pregnant) is in the car with him. It makes perfect sense.
That’s a different ball of wax and you know it. The insurance companies are looking at the chances you will be injured, etc. Just like life insurance will raise rates the older you are. THAT makes sense. It does NOT make sense to pay a (same age, same training, same experience) married male RRT 35.00 an hour, and me 30.00 an hour, simply because I am female. What risk do I pose that the male does not?***
Married men are more stable, in general, than unmarried men. Married men have a reason to subject themselves to the world of work ; unmarried men see the world of work merely as, at most, a means of opportunity and self-gratification, whereas married men need and respect it. This is no insult to either party : unmarried men must work to survive. This debases their natural sense of human dignity. It lacks human fulfillment and value in that sense for them. For them, it is a pure imposition on their time, their liberty, their freedom. The only benefit is the material dainties that it might provide : hardly a motivation to immerse yourself mind, body, and spirit into the world of work. It is a civil dictate from their perspective. For married men, work is the sustenance of their families, of their dearly beloved. Work allows them to have and keep and provide for their families, and is no longer purely an imposition on their freedom, but a means of expanding that freedom. Work is fundamentally different for family men than it is for bachelors, because they relate to it and engage in it for vastly different reasons.
Ok. Just say that that’s all true (personally, some of that I really take issue with) even so…WHY does a single man not deserve the same pay. HE"S DOING THE SAME THING!
Who cares if he doesn’t respect it as much? He’s performing a service…the same service the married man is.***

Your railing against the system is akin to my anger at my friend’s 20% car insurance discount for being married ; nonetheless, you at once and firstly mentioned your child. I am curious : how much do you work for your child ? Are you only “sometimes” working for the child, “most” of the time, “all” of the time, or none of the time ? Something tells me you consciously and actively work for your child, and when you want to throw off the chain of work, the one thing that ultimately prevents you is your child ; therefore, because you have a child to love and provide for, are you more or less likely to willy-nilly quit your job, to ruin your chances of opportunity at that job ?
rolls eyes
I work to provide for myself and my son, who I am responsible for raising…as the single male/female is responsible for themselves. So, because I am responsible for a child, I should get paid more? How unfair is that to a single person? Who’s to say they aren’t supporting their parents? Even if they are NOT, and they use their paycheck to buy the latest Prada bag, why should I care?
You are less. You possess something the single, childless man does not : a reason to work or rather someone to work for. You bring love to your work, the love you have for your child, the single, unwed man does not …
-yeah, I have a REAL problem with this. Just because a man is single, he doesn’t bring importance and joy and love to his work? And why not? So, you want to tell me a single doctor or nurse doesn’t have love of service and devotion to the healing arts? I don’t buy that mess for a second…
…however, for the sake of the chance of having a wife, a home, a family, then a single, childless man may imitate the wed family man, and behave like him, merely for the hope and opportunity of having his own one day. This, too, makes him more valuable than the man who could “care-less.”

***Yeah, I see men and woman who go to work for the paycheck, and don’t give their all to their work…male, female, straight, gay-and I see the converse-I see people who are insanely devoted to their work…don’t MATTER.

They are performing a service, and the service they provide should be paid no matter what they are, married, single, straight, gay, male, female. Don’t matter.***
 
HAnne said:
Allow me, just for the sake of a few kicks, to express my opinion here.

I’m grateful to the Suffragettes who worked so hard against all odds so I could vote, have a checking account, and own property. Huzzah to my Great-Grandmother - the first woman to get a divorce in her county because her alcoholic husband was beating her and her three daughters nearly to death on a weekly basis. I couldn’t be happier than to have a woman like her in my lineage.

Hooray to my Grandmother, who married a wonderful man but they struggled to make a life together. She found side jobs so that my mother and uncle could have new shoes each year. She worked so hard in so many menial jobs. My grandfather, Lord bless him, had no idea how to handle money. In this day and age he would be considered “slow”. She managed the finances for him while still being a Godly wife in submission because he didn’t know how and I’m pleased to say that when they retired, they were millionaires because of HER investing skills and not because either of them ever made a 6 figure salary in their lives.

Hooray to my Mother, who had the courage to stand up to the feminists of her day and stay home to raise me! She worked part time doing bookkeeping for my father’s business until he left her for his secretary. Then she pulled up her bootstraps and worked 3 jobs to keep us afloat. Even working 3 jobs (down to 1-2 when she eventually remarried) she never missed a special event at school. She was never “not there” when I needed her. My hat goes off to her in thanks each and every day.

Last, but certainly not least, what of MY generation? I’m 30. I’m a stay-at-home Mom who educates my own child. I’m a submissive wife to a wonderful husband who provides for our family. Do you have ANY idea the kind of garbage a woman like me gets on a daily basis because of choosing to live in a biblical manner???

How about working on supporting those who chose to live in this way rather than ridiculing those who choose not to?
Click to expand...
I agree with you. You should be able to do what you see fit, and shame to those who ridicule you. That’s your choice to stay at home and raise your children.
(and it’s good that you CAN. Some moms have no choice in the matter).

Just because I might not want to stay at home (actually, I have no choice in the matter, but even if I did, I would want to work. Hell, I would even be OK with my SO staying home with the boy if’n he wanted)…I have no right to ridicule your choice to do so…
 
Cambridge said:
Wouldn’t you rather of had your mother and father work out their differences and stay married and had your father take care of you, so that you could of had a normal childhood, instead of coming from a broken home, where your mother was so busy working, that she didn’t have time to take care of you and raise you?

Do you really think you should despise your father? Do you think you should feel guilty for that?

Do you think it is good for mothers to work, when they have kids who need them at home?

How exactly are men supposed to take care of women and children, when they have to compete with them for the jobs they need to provide for their families?

If women are such good nurturers, then shouldn’t they be at home, instead of at work?

If men are supposed to be good providers, then shouldn’t we try to help them be providers, instead of sabotaging them?

If men are supposed to take care of their kids, then shouldn’t we make it harder for women to divorce them and throw them out of the house?

If people’s passions running amok is what causes disasters, like broken homes, then don’t you think we should all try and control our passions?

🤷
Click to expand...
Your saying that in the business of life (as it should be conducted) women are just support staff.

That men do and women (merely) assist:rolleyes:

Would you endorse the statement that behind every great woman is a man who should have gotten the credit?
 
Timothy17 said:
Do you realize how tyrannical that statement is ? Who are you to dictate what another should pay someone ?

The logic in your assertion is flawed. It is perfectly reasonable to pay married men more money than unmarried men in general (ceteris paribus). Do you work ? If you do, might I ask your general opinion and observation on which men are more sociable, more cooperative, more eager at times and yet obedient in general, and more willing to work overtime, more willing to invest his time to ensure the overall good of the company he is in ? The married man, in general, is usually more valuable than the single man, because the married man is invested, quite literally, into society. He needs society, he needs work, he needs opportunity, he needs a good reputation, etc.

When you dictate the terms for payment, as you have done, you do a serious injustice by inventing a fiction in opposition to reality.

My best friend paid 20% less in car insurance the moment he said, “I do.” Why ? I felt cheated ! I felt robbed ! Why should he pay less insurance than I do ? It took a long time, but I realized why : my best friend is now far less likely to stupidly jeopardize his life, far more likely to drive with care, especially when his wife (who might be pregnant) is in the car with him. It makes perfect sense.

Married men are more stable, in general, than unmarried men. Married men have a reason to subject themselves to the world of work ; unmarried men see the world of work merely as, at most, a means of opportunity and self-gratification, whereas married men need and respect it. This is no insult to either party : unmarried men must work to survive. This debases their natural sense of human dignity. It lacks human fulfillment and value in that sense for them. For them, it is a pure imposition on their time, their liberty, their freedom. The only benefit is the material dainties that it might provide : hardly a motivation to immerse yourself mind, body, and spirit into the world of work. It is a civil dictate from their perspective. For married men, work is the sustenance of their families, of their dearly beloved. Work allows them to have and keep and provide for their families, and is no longer purely an imposition on their freedom, but a means of expanding that freedom. Work is fundamentally different for family men than it is for bachelors, because they relate to it and engage in it for vastly different reasons.

Your railing against the system is akin to my anger at my friend’s 20% car insurance discount for being married ; nonetheless, you at once and firstly mentioned your child. I am curious : how much do you work for your child ? Are you only “sometimes” working for the child, “most” of the time, “all” of the time, or none of the time ? Something tells me you consciously and actively work for your child, and when you want to throw off the chain of work, the one thing that ultimately prevents you is your child ; therefore, because you have a child to love and provide for, are you more or less likely to willy-nilly quit your job, to ruin your chances of opportunity at that job ? You are less. You possess something the single, childless man does not : a reason to work or rather someone to work for. You bring love to your work, the love you have for your child, the single, unwed man does not ; however, for the sake of the chance of having a wife, a home, a family, then a single, childless man may imitate the wed family man, and behave like him, merely for the hope and opportunity of having his own one day. This, too, makes him more valuable than the man who could “care-less.”

Pax,
Tim
Click to expand...
The main problem with your system is that it tells married men in a very concrete and material way that they are more important and more valuable than women and unmarried men.

It disrespects and discriminates against women and unmarried men.
I am an unmarried man, I am offended by that.
 
Timothy17 said:
Now this myth perhaps trumps the other you mentioned (“real men don’t cry”) in silliness.

Teams depend on one another most intimately. If my pitcher sucks, we all lose. If I can’t throw from short-stop to first-base, then we all suffer ; however, when we work together, we flourish. Now, very often teams depend especially on the skills of one players to help prop up the less skillful ones, and we often find the most winning teams are those that balance this equation best.

Pax,
Tim
Click to expand...
But what you and other conservative Catholics mean by good/Godly marriages isn’t a team at all, or for that matter a partnership.

Its closer to the relationship between master and slave, or at least employer and employee (where one person is obedient and submissive and the other person has most of the power and privileges).

Partnerships are between equals (or at least peers) not master and slave.
 
Kaninchen said:
I’d agree, it’s better not to tell other women how we should all live our lives.
Click to expand...
Thank you! 🙂
edwest2 said:
The National Organization for Women should hear that.
Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Agreed. Along with the Girl Scouts and several other organizations!!!
phoenixrrt62 said:
I agree with you. You should be able to do what you see fit, and shame to those who ridicule you. That’s your choice to stay at home and raise your children.
(and it’s good that you CAN. Some moms have no choice in the matter).

Just because I might not want to stay at home (actually, I have no choice in the matter, but even if I did, I would want to work. Hell, I would even be OK with my SO staying home with the boy if’n he wanted)…I have no right to ridicule your choice to do so…
Click to expand...
I know some moms have no choice in the matter. As stated above, my Mom was one of them at one point in her life. I feel immensely blessed to have that opportunity.

That said, I can’t STAND stay-at-home moms who look down on working moms either. So many of them miss so much of their children’s lives and truly wish they had the opportunity to stay home but the option just isn’t there.

Believe it or not, the concept of my DH staying home with my son is already on the table. He’s an 80% disabled veteran who may be elevated to 100% and unable to work. IF that happens, then he will be a stay-at-home Dad and I’ll work part time to help make ends meet because he will no longer be able to.

I was called by God to be his helpmeet…whatever that’s going to mean for today. Right now he’s recovering from surgery because of his disability. Guess who lugged the 75 lb new vanity for the bathroom into the house three days ago singlehandedly! 😃
 
HAnne said:
Thank you! 🙂

Agreed. Along with the Girl Scouts and several other organizations!!!

I know some moms have no choice in the matter. As stated above, my Mom was one of them at one point in her life. I feel immensely blessed to have that opportunity.

That said, I can’t STAND stay-at-home moms who look down on working moms either. So many of them miss so much of their children’s lives and truly wish they had the opportunity to stay home but the option just isn’t there.

Believe it or not, the concept of my DH staying home with my son is already on the table. He’s an 80% disabled veteran who may be elevated to 100% and unable to work. IF that happens, then he will be a stay-at-home Dad and I’ll work part time to help make ends meet because he will no longer be able to.

I was called by God to be his helpmeet…whatever that’s going to mean for today. Right now he’s recovering from surgery because of his disability. Guess who lugged the 75 lb new vanity for the bathroom into the house three days ago singlehandedly! 😃
Click to expand...
What do you have against the Girl Scouts?
 
I read all the posts and what I’m confused about is why there is a debate and why some people seem so passionate about it, even to the point of seeming, at times, rude.

I DON’T THINK ANYBODY GOT A VOTE ON THIS! We don’t get to decide what the future of our country will be; it is being decided for us. All we can do is try to understand it.

So, the intensity that I’m sensing here, seems misplaced. You should be authentic, but don’t delude yourself into thinking you are making a difference in the future of this country.

Wether the entire internet was for or against Feminism, wouldn’t make a hill of beans difference in Washington, except in a few speeches blah, blah, blah and then it’s back to business as usual. So face it, you are as powerless as your ancestors were, who lived on somebody else’s land and farmed it for them. Actually, you are probably weaker, because they were more free on the inside, than Modern Man seems to be.

On the other hand, if you are trying to rationalize your own misbehavior, then your passion makes some sense at least, however misplaced it may be.
 
I thought of something else while I was reading the posts and that was, that defenders of Modernity, always seem to point to the most extreme and then try to generalize from that. So, the morality of divorce, in all cases, is decided by one case, where a husband was sawing his wife’s limbs off and eating them, for example. So, if you want to defend Marriage, you have to defend Cannibalism! Well, you can’t 🤷

Of course, it’s just like Adoption, instead of Abortion. You could live at your Father’s house, instead of terminating your marriage.
 
Cambridge said:
I thought of something else while I was reading the posts and that was, that defenders of Modernity, always seem to point to the most extreme and then try to generalize from that. So, the morality of divorce, in all cases, is decided by one case, where a husband was sawing his wife’s limbs off and eating them, for example. So, if you want to defend Marriage, you have to defend Cannibalism! Well, you can’t 🤷
Click to expand...
Why are you so angry abot the idea of women being educated?
 
Cambridge said:
I thought of something else while I was reading the posts and that was, that defenders of Modernity, always seem to point to the most extreme and then try to generalize from that. So, the morality of divorce, in all cases, is decided by one case, where a husband was sawing his wife’s limbs off and eating them, for example. So, if you want to defend Marriage, you have to defend Cannibalism! Well, you can’t 🤷

Of course, it’s just like Adoption, instead of Abortion. You could live at your Father’s house, instead of terminating your marriage.
Click to expand...
It makes perfect sense to me. There is no other reason to divorce besides extreme circumstances, so if you want to talk about divorce, it is reasonable to talk about when it is possible. 🤷

I don’t know why you mention a parent’s house in the context of divorce, nor the termination of marriage. Divorce is not about terminating your marriage, not in Catholic eyes. Divorce is a civil/legal affair, having to do with protecting/terminating money and property rights in the eyes of the State. It does not terminate an actual sacramental marriage. You do something about finances/children and go live somewhere else. That is divorce. Living in your parent’s house does not protect you from having to pay the debt your spouse may amass after you leave, for example. You need a divorce for that.
 
Cambridge said:
I read all the posts and what I’m confused about is why there is a debate and why some people seem so passionate about it, even to the point of seeming, at times, rude.

I DON’T THINK ANYBODY GOT A VOTE ON THIS! We don’t get to decide what the future of our country will be; it is being decided for us. All we can do is try to understand it.

So, the intensity that I’m sensing here, seems misplaced. You should be authentic, but don’t delude yourself into thinking you are making a difference in the future of this country.

Wether the entire internet was for or against Feminism, wouldn’t make a hill of beans difference in Washington, except in a few speeches blah, blah, blah and then it’s back to business as usual. So face it, you are as powerless as your ancestors were, who lived on somebody else’s land and farmed it for them. Actually, you are probably weaker, because they were more free on the inside, than Modern Man seems to be.

On the other hand, if you are trying to rationalize your own misbehavior, then your passion makes some sense at least, however misplaced it may be.
Click to expand...
If you think this debate is meaningless why are you even posting?

Based on your own logic anyone who read your posts would just be wasting their time anyway.
 
Cambridge said:
I thought of something else while I was reading the posts and that was, that defenders of Modernity, always seem to point to the most extreme and then try to generalize from that. So, the morality of divorce, in all cases, is decided by one case, where a husband was sawing his wife’s limbs off and eating them, for example. So, if you want to defend Marriage, you have to defend Cannibalism! Well, you can’t 🤷

Of course, it’s just like Adoption, instead of Abortion. You could live at your Father’s house, instead of terminating your marriage.
Click to expand...
An abused woman could just live with her father instead of divorcing her abusive husband?
THAT is your better solution:mad:

The idea of independent women really disturbs you doesn’t it.
 
AngryAtheist8 said:
What do you have against the Girl Scouts?
Click to expand...
I’m a lifetime member of the organization so one would think nothing. I’m a nationally certified trainer for outdoor education…again, one would think nothing.

I can only say that one should do their homework on EVERY organization they THINK they are supporting. This particular organization has supported abortion rights as well as other things Catholics SHOULD be opposing (according to what my basic, 5 week journey into Catholicism has been).

What most volunteers and outsiders see is the local organization as you know it. It is often not following what is promoted by GSUSA (Girl Scouts of the United States of America) and WAGGS (World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts).

I will leave that statement there as to not insert my personal opinions into a thread that has nothing to do with Girl Scouts and everything to do with other things. If you wish to know more about my choice in no longer supporting them, please PM me and I will gladly share why.
 
Pug said:
It makes perfect sense to me. There is no other reason to divorce besides extreme circumstances, so if you want to talk about divorce, it is reasonable to talk about when it is possible. 🤷

I don’t know why you mention a parent’s house in the context of divorce, nor the termination of marriage. Divorce is not about terminating your marriage, not in Catholic eyes. Divorce is a civil/legal affair, having to do with protecting/terminating money and property rights in the eyes of the State. It does not terminate an actual sacramental marriage. You do something about finances/children and go live somewhere else. That is divorce. Living in your parent’s house does not protect you from having to pay the debt your spouse may amass after you leave, for example. You need a divorce for that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, well I don’t think the intention was to make civil divorce/annulment banal. So, marriage is still supposed to be permanent. However, the divorce rate is around fifty percent. Thus, it would seem as if marriage has become, in practice, a temporary arrangement. Certainly, that is something that we should condemn.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top