Should women be treated as equals

[edwest211]

Since you seem to want to understand the past in only a certain way, a few comments.

Motherhood and being a wife and mother, were respected. I see the opposite extreme. Don’t care. Qualified. Whatever. No or little social order.

No, women did not use Ms. just so they could get a job. What? When the husband calls or picks her up at work, everyone looks the other way? “We can’t let anyone know we’re married.”

“forward in society” And who determines any direction of movement? The woman or total strangers? When mom, dad and the Church, not to mention relatives, were cut out of the picture, what happened? It was better to listen to total strangers? Total strangers had her best interests? They somehow knew and understood her better?

 

[JMMJ]

You express a very negative view of the beautiful world we live in.

I am a woman, wife, mother, as well as a hundred other things. I have never felt disrespected in any of the roles I have taken on in my life.

Just because one’s husband picks them up or drops them off at work doesn’t mean the world knows that is their husband. And if he is picking up or dropping off, that meant the woman was already hired. Possibly because she didn’t disclose that she was married. Back in the good old days, you know.

 

[edwest211]

Yes, of course. It’s nobody’s business unless you are creating a sociological fiction. Then everyone has to know.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Daughters are not slaves to their fathers. Wives are not slaves to their husbands. We need to stop describing family this way and definitely need to stop telling this stuff to young girls.

We’re not describing families this way generally; we’re acknowledging some families do approach marriage and family this way. Some do it in a systematic way based on a faith tradition and some cobble together bits and pieces of these fringe practices.

There are families who follow toxic leaders - I’ll use Gothard as an example - and I’ve read tons of stories from ex-Gothardites, ex-BPL, ex-ATI and what is supposed to be righteous parenting is actually abusive. When I observe Catholics adopting certain aspects of this (probably from watching the Duggar’s, although some have family that are in the quiverfull movement) it’s concerning. The children raised in those homes that managed to get out are traumatized; a lot of them leave the faith they were raised in and many leave Christianity.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

We’re not describing families this way generally; we’re acknowledging some families do approach marriage and family this way.

There are always extreme examples of mothers or fathers who treat their children horribly or abuse them but the idea that a father is enslaving his wife and daughters by being a husband and father seems like a pretty dangerous ideology to follow.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

but the idea that a father is enslaving his wife and daughters by being a husband and father seems like a pretty dangerous ideology to follow.

And aside from the extremes that I and others have acknowledged, no one is saying that.

 

[Lea101]

Not when it has nothing to do with you, or really, anything.

 

[Lea101]

Motherhood and being a wife and mother, were respected. I see the opposite extreme. Don’t care. Qualified. Whatever. No or little social order.

Frankly speaking…so what? If that’s the only role women were respected for, then feminists did the right thing by making society respect women for other things as well.

People keep going on and on about how SAHMs were respected. OK, how about older unmarried women? Infertile women? Women on the spectrum? Women of other races? Women with different passions? They have described their experiences,

Women’s freedom was legally limited back then. Now we have equal opportunities. Your complaint is that SAHMs are judged. Okay, but they still have the freedom to be one. Women in the past didn’t have the freedom to do certain things outside of being a SAHM.

I rather live with some judgmental looks, and have the freedom to do what I want VS give women the freedom to only do what I deem was appropriate. People who insist that we should go back to that time are often very selfish, because they’re only thinking for a very specific group of people.

Women weren’t respected in general. Only women who fit the mould did. That’s often the case with most time periods.

 

[edwest211]

feminists did the right thing by making society respect women for other things as well.

What did feminists do? Think for the woman? Make her into their image as if she had no brain?

When total strangers want to take over some part of society, a closer look at their motives is in order. Destroy the family, destroy marriage and destroy male-female relationships. And tell women that being a stay at home mom was the worst possible choice they could make. That was selfish. That was manipulative.

Today, too many women live in wreckage. No commitment, no stability, and for too many, single motherhood. That’s not progress.

 

[jlc2k2]

What did feminists do? Think for the woman? Make her into their image as if she had no brain?

You keep saying this. Were all the original feminists male? Or were they women who were thinking for themselves? And if they were women thinking for themselves, how would making other women in their own image be making them as if they couldn’t think for themselves?

 

[Lea101]

People aren’t dumb. They can think for themselves. They have the freedom now to choose a path that would help them instead of being made to feel worthless that they’re not married or fertile.

You keep ignoring this part, because of course it goes against your view.

Now women are unhappy, but they have the tools needed if they want to fix themselves. That’s fine by me. Women back then couldn’t do some things. Now they can. That’s all that matters. We aren’t babies, we have the Church and tools to make society better yet maintain freedom for all.

As to what they did? They advocated for certain policies that had a hugeeeee impact on women’s freedom. You can keep acknowledging the bad stuff all you want, and ignore the freedom society got. But it doesn’t change reality.

Thanks to them, even women in my country and area got the opportunity to pursue what they want.

 

[edwest211]

Those total strangers wanted only what they wanted. And they only wanted as many women as possible not to think for themselves but to think like them - only.

Abortion
Contraception
Stay at home mom is really bad.

 

[jlc2k2]

That didn’t answer the question.

 

[edwest211]

“feel worthless” according to who? Total strangers. I grew up around many women who loved being mothers, who loved their husbands, and their relatives. Then a group of total strangers come along and tell them how to feel, how to think? That’s not freedom. That’s coercion. And those who fell for that are now living in utopia?

“They advocated for certain policies” like contraception, abortion, and the created out of thin air, No-Fault Divorce. That has created a utopia?

“the freedom society got.” Unstable relationships, no commitment and lots of single mothers with no one else. Fathers became obsolete?

That freedom has not resulted in a better society.

 

[Lea101]

…according to the women who lived those lives.

Again you only brought up a specific group of women. Not the groups of women I mentioned. You only care about them.

They advocated for certain policies” like contraception, abortion, and the created out of thin air, No-Fault Divorce. That has created a utopia?

Like I said, keep bringing up the bad stuff and completely ignore the good that came out if it, if you want. You believe the 50s was some sort of utopia for women. It only was for a specific group of women who were inclined to that lifestyle.

Things like equal pay, making it illegal to discriminate women, normalising women in education and in the workforce, women being allowed to get credit cards etc. This came around later on, pretty much.

I now can choose to go to university, get a degree, get a job. I can also choose to quit that job and raise children if I have any. If I’m infertile, or choose to be single, I wouldn’t be seen as 2nd class. I enjoy this freedom. I choose over judgemental gossip over actually being restricted or hurt.

I also don’t like living in the past. Sahms are judged now? Okay, I will defend them when they’re being insulted. I will praise them for their hard work. I’m not going to whinge about the past, when it was only good for them and not others. That’s how progress works.

 

[edwest211]

I have seen no evidence of a better society or progress for anyone. Now that women have the freedoms you mentioned, they are all happy? I have seen no evidence of that either. I care for those women. I know them. They have nothing permanent. They have a shadow. I watch what happens in other countries. I am seeing the shadow retreating in some today.

I am glad that women have certain opportunities today. I am sad that some have only their self-interest.

 

[Lea101]

Life is better now than in the past, even with the crap that’s going on today. If we’re speaking generally. I would rather stay here than to go back.

You don’t see the evidence because you have always closed your eyes. People have shown you many, many times. Even those who lean towards the traditional view of things.

Women have the tools. Like I said, we’re not babies. I fight for freedom. I do not think one choice is better than another because this will differ from each individual.

I know women who would be terrible as SAHMs. Them working would actually be best for their families since they thrive that way. I don’t judge.

I also know women who are terrible working mothers. They would want to stay at home and care for their families. It would be best for their families since they thrive that way. I don’t judge.

When someone belittles once choice over the other, I usually say something. I want a balance where men and women can choose what’s best for their families and themselves without judgement. But gun to my head, I would rather choose the actual freedom to do what they want VS others being judged for not going on a particular path.

 

[edwest211]

I understand. In the end, society suffers. I need to remind and warn everyone. Moral relativism may work for a while in certain situations, then the individual, man or woman, must come to terms with those choices. If people don’t choose well, they affect others whether they want to or not.

 

[Lea101]

This isn’t about moral relativism. A woman working, owning property, having a credit card, not marrying etc is morally neutral.

The church says this, and I rather follow them than a 50s ideal of gender roles.

You know what isn’t morally neutral? Hurting people or restricting their freedom, when their actions doesn’t infringe on your rights, of course.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Then a group of total strangers come along and tell them how to feel, how to think?

You’ve mentioned these people before. How come they didnt have agency? What compelled them to embrace “radical feminism?”

I can think of a couple reasons.
One is similar to how Nazi Germany functioned. It was oppressive and obedience was demanded. This was how most German children were raised. And it made them ideal marks for the Nazis and obedience to the state. There is research on why some Germans went along with the Nazis and others helped the Jews.

I guess if women don’t have or don’t feel they have agency, they will be ready targets for the next group that wants them to go along with them.

I guess my other example is too specific but maybe those women’s lives weren’t as idyllic as you think and any kind of feminism was a relief.

I imagined my grandmother was happy as a wife and mother when I was little. She never complained. She prayed (she died praying the rosary in Polish). She gardened and kept the chickens. I don’t think my grandpa mistreated her and her kids turned out well. Except they didnt. One became an alcoholic and the others save for one, married an alcoholic. And my grandma was sad. On the outside things looked okay but on the inside, not so much. They grew up in a very rural area and everyone was the same, standing out was a no-no. And most had a “City folk! Hide the kids!” attitude. Nary a feminist in sight. I haven’t figured out the roots of the trauma (the war? Being immigrants? Being poor?) but there was something they were hiding, or ignoring because my cousins and I bear the scars from it.