E
edwest211
Guest
Now, now - looks at watch – it’s a little early for such comments. My watch is set to ‘mud-slinging time.’
- Status
B
Bradskii
Guest
Reset it to ‘reasonable discussion’ Ed. There is still time for you to make a contribution.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
so now women are uneducated? Its clear we disagree on much.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
I’m not a post modernist. I don’t invent definitions for words that have established defintions.
B
Bradskii
Guest
The wonders of forum discussion…niceatheist:
so now women are uneducated? Its clear we disagree on much.
I can keep asking you what you meant by equality of outcome. Any response?
E
edwest211
Guest
It appears ‘sex education class’ or biology class do not cover it, which is false. Not including all the young women who know other young women who got pregnant.
B
Bradskii
Guest
Yet again…Bradskii:
I’m not a post modernist. I don’t invent definitions for words that have established defintions.
The words are yours. You don’t have to invent definitions. You need to explain what you meant by saying that you object to equality of outcome. As opposed to equality of opportunity.
You must know what you meant. Can you please explain it.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
I realize she was laughing at me but that doesn’t change anything. People laugh when they dont understand something or refuse to give up having their own way.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
You also believe women are uneducated? sad
B
Bradskii
Guest
Sorry. I just asked her. She did understand. She’s a smart girl.
N
niceatheist
Guest
I’m not the one saying that women have somehow been deluded in to putting off having children until they’re in the 40s. The insinuation here is that women apparently don’t know the risks of putting off having children. My answer would be that women who do this are aware of the potential sacrifice, that they do know. I’m not the one treating women like foolish people easily swayed by “radical feminists”.niceatheist:
so now women are uneducated? Its clear we disagree on much.
In a free society, which you and I both live in, people are permitted to make choices that either one of us may feel are suboptimal. Heck, they’re even allowed, with few constraints, to advocate that other people make suboptimal choices. “Radical feminists”, whomever they may be (and the definition seems nebulous, other than the epithet “Marxism” gets thrown around a lot) aren’t breaking any laws. Just because the Church, or at least some in the Church, may disagree, doesn’t mean that some great evil has been done.
People in wealthier societies have fewer children. This is a demographic shift that has been observed time and time again. Prior to modern contraception, there was a bit of hit and miss, but still, it’s something that has been observed as a demographic shift even in Early Modern times in Western Europe in particular. The wealthier a family was, the less children were born. It was often severe enough that aristocratic and noble families could die out due to lack of any legitimate male heir. It’s why some titles of nobility in England have had multiple “creations”, as the Sovereign would appoint some new family to hold an extinct title.
If you’re railing against women putting off having children, then you’re complaining against what appears to be the byproduct of a pretty successful society that by and large has increased opportunities for women, in part because of needed labor, and in part because, well, we don’t view women as chattel anymore and have accepted (well most of us have accepted) that they are equals and citizens, and are entitled to the same rights and privileges as men. That some of them don’t want to have children, or don’t want to have lots of children, is something you may disagree with, but they are under no obligation to do as you please. Since most people in the English-speaking world are of Protestant background, most women don’t even recognize the Church’s authority to dictate the rules of family planning.
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
“don’t even recognize the Church’s authority…” But when it’s replaced by loud and angry words from women who hate men and the traditional family, that’s better? Why do their words carry any weight, much less greater weight?
Everybody can and will do whatever they want. But if all organized women want is to promote birth control and abortion then they need to know a little history.
“As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the “unfit” and the “fit”, admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”
Margaret Sanger
Everybody can and will do whatever they want. But if all organized women want is to promote birth control and abortion then they need to know a little history.
“As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the “unfit” and the “fit”, admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”
Margaret Sanger
Last edited:
N
niceatheist
Guest
One can be in favor of birth control and not be an advocate for eugenics, just as one can be a Catholic, and so far as I can tell, not actually believe that wives are like centurions to their husband’s emperor. This is a pretty good example of a guilt by association fallacy, a form of ad hominem fallacy.
E
edwest211
Guest
It’s never good to assume.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
And yet you’re treating women like foolish people easily swayed into marrying “foolish men” and “tyrants” who are “going to put the family in crisis”
N
niceatheist
Guest
Well, when I took sex education in the 1980s, that fertility in both sexes drops off over time certainly was part of the curriculum, and that for women the clock ticks a lot faster (since then we’ve learned a lot more about the risks of fathering children later in life as well). So I don’t know what curriculum you’ve seen.
B
Bradskii
Guest
I was going to say that I know a few women who don’t support the idea of a ‘traditional family’. But then I realised that it was a only a term that you use from an age long gone (oh, the Horror!) and it’s only people like you who still use it.
And here we go again, asking questions of you that will never be answered. But name me some women who hate men if you could.
E
edwest211
Guest
B
Bradskii
Guest
Not the answer to the question that was asked, Ed.
N
niceatheist
Guest
We all make mistakes in life. And some women marry foolish men, just as some men marry foolish women. Sometimes two fools marry, and that can be even more unpleasant.niceatheist:
And yet you’re treating women like foolish people easily swayed into marrying “foolish men” and “tyrants” who are “going to put the family in crisis”
But that’s literally taking my point out of context. That seems rather dishonest, since that was response to someone making a citation to an article that suggested that husbands outranked wives, and putting it in military terms, which would suggest any wife refusing to go along with a foolish decision made buy their husband would be insubordinate, possibly even mutinous.
Perhaps marriages aren’t like armies.
- Status