Things I learned from feminism I wish I'd learned from Christianity

[steve93]

I’m not sure what city centers you’re talking about, since the post was about Africans.

Blacks sucking the blood, welfare speaking, of the Northern urban centers. We gave our lives to free them, and the moment they are free they abandon the South and come up north to socialistically loot us, when it was us who freed them. It would be like if they Jews got saved from Germany but then instead of thanking them, took over France.

 

[pensmama87]

Blacks sucking the blood, welfare speaking, of the Northern urban centers. We gave our lives to free them, and the moment they are free they abandon the South and come up north to socialistically loot us, when it was us who freed them. It would be like if they Jews got saved from Germany but then instead of thanking them, took over France.

Wow. Um, this has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

ETA: it’s also super historically inaccurate.

 

[DarkLight]

Blacks sucking the blood, welfare speaking, of the Northern urban centers. We gave our lives to free them, and the moment they are free they abandon the South and come up north to socialistically loot us, when it was us who freed them. It would be like if they Jews got saved from Germany but then instead of thanking them, took over France.

I think you’re confusing Africans with African-Americans. Pensmama87 was talking about Africans, as in people who live in Africa.

Also, have you been on welfare? I have. It’s not a fun life, and it’s also often set up so that if you make any attempt to better yourself, you get cut off.

 

[steve93]

I think you’re confusing Africans with African-Americans. Pensmama87 was talking about Africans, as in people who live in Africa.

Also, have you been on welfare? I have. It’s not a fun life, and it’s also often set up so that if you make any attempt to better yourself, you get cut off.

You evidently have never seen the backwater northeast areas of the US (the kind of places that used to be industrial/semirural).

 

[DarkLight]

You evidently have never seen the backwater northeast areas of the US (the kind of places that used to be industrial/semirural).

Lived there, actually. Looked at welfare. Found out the only way to stay on it was to stay in a dead-end job and never ever try to get an education or save up money or do anything that might improve my job prospects.

Edit: In any case, this is getting rather off topic. Can we at least stick to stuff about feminism here?

 

[Xantippe]

And why should we work to give them these things? They can get jobs like the rest of the country. We didn’t even enslave them, the rural southerners did. Why do they think they can take over our city centers and promote socialistic garbage?

I’m noticing a trend of there being very little relationship between the ongoing discussion and your comments.

I just reported your reply to pensmama87 to the mods as a “rude non sequitur.”

 

[starshiptrooper]

Blacks sucking the blood, welfare speaking, of the Northern urban centers. We gave our lives to free them, and the moment they are free they abandon the South and come up north to socialistically loot us, when it was us who freed them. It would be like if they Jews got saved from Germany but then instead of thanking them, took over France.

I gotta say something about this because as one of the few actively pro-white posters on this site I cannot afford to be associated with this level of historical ignorance.

Blacks moved up North long before LBJ’s failed welfare schemes. They wanted to escape Jim Crow and take advantage of the manufacturing jobs available in the North.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

We’re talking about a very diffuse historical movement, or series of movements.

It’s difficult enough with something like conservatism. I’ve been a conservative my whole life and every so often I encounter a member of “the family” that makes me think–who are you, where are you from, and what could we possibly have in common? (This has happened a lot the last couple years.) I would need to narrow it down to get a sense of who my “immediate family” is. For myself politically, that might mean kinship with people who value individual rights (freedom of the press, freedom of association, freedom of religious practice, etc.), private property ownership, subsidiarity, the value of vibrant voluntary organizations, the rule of law rather than of charismatic personalities, the government refraining from playing favorites with industries or companies, public order, checks and balances, etc. You’ll notice that a number of those categories are going to infringe on each other, and it’s quite the mouthful…

I can’t help but notice that a lot of the newer sort of internet right people don’t seem very keen on a lot of those concepts.

“The thing with Plato and Aristotle however are that, I think it’s a good bet that if they had lived after the coming of Christ, they would have been devout Catholics like Aquinas.”

I grant that if they’d lived within the Christian era, they would have been Christians, but at the same time, I think that if they lived at the time of St. Paul, it’s quite likely that they would have died pagans. Even St. Augustine (died 430 AD) took his own sweet time converting to Christianity, and he’d had a Christian mother and had lived his whole life with Christianity being legal in the Roman Empire. Even his mother had been born after the legalization of Christianity.

I am not familiar with the biographies of all of the 19th/20th century characters you mention, but with regard to Margaret Sanger, this bit from Wikipedia sounds like it explains a lot:

“Anne Higgins [Sanger’s mother] went through 18 pregnancies (with 11 live births) in 22 years before dying at the age of 49. Sanger was the sixth of eleven surviving children, and spent much of her youth assisting with household chores and caring for her younger siblings.”

Somewhat OT, but what I find sort of “ironic” (in a good way) is that you speak of feminism (quite well, I might add) and your screen name is that of Xantippe.

Some would call HER sort of a feminist.

At the very least, she has been (to me and others) wrongly maligned for centuries—and is only recently been “rehabilitated.”
Mostly due to Xenophon’s portrayal of her as a shrew whom Socrates married (according to him) for the children she bore the great man.

Plato, though, seems to treat her (when he does, like two times in the Canon) with the utmost respect—and HIS Socrates seems to do so too.

Must not have been great dealing/living with Socco on a daily basis, at the very least. But apparently Socco loved her, after all. Her family was all but destitute, Socrates being great or not. And he was also bisexual and cheated on her at least with Alcibidades, so that counts against the man.

For her fort-rightness and outspokenness, for her willingness to stand up to the great Socrates, she does deserve to be called a feminist.

Just noticed that, that’s all.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

It is a big problem that porn is probably the primary source of sex education for young men today.

As a recovering porn addict, I would add that pornography has decimated American men and manhood. No doubts.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Oh yes, by all means spread misogynistic stupidity to secular Asia. Can’t leave anywhere un-ruined.
America is composed largely of Europeans who fled the rise of rational thought in Europe. The Catholic misogynists are somewhere in the Napoleonic era mentally. The Fundi Prots are in the middle ages.
And yes, rapists should be lynched, nobody disagrees with that.

And yes, rapists should be lynched, nobody disagrees with that.

Speak for yourself. Not EVERYBODY agrees with that. And I am not a bleeding-heart liberal, either.

 

[DarkLight]

Speak for yourself. Not EVERYBODY agrees with that. And I am not a bleeding-heart liberal, either.

The main trouble is that “lynched” implies an extra-judicial killing. That almost never works out well.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

You say it’s a huge relief to men and women, married and single. That’s your opinion. There are plenty of men and women who don’t find it a ‘huge relief’ to take contraceptive pills in order to ‘prevent a baby’. Anecdotal evidence about ‘cramps for contraception approval’ is just that, anecdotal.

And even if it were true that for a large number of people in the West at some point from the 1960s through now there was some kind of ‘relief’, that doesn’t mean said relief was for all or most, most of the time. Maybe there are people who might have used something once. . but only once. You couldn’t count them as being part of that ‘group of relieved people’. Or how about people who used as teens for acne, and never did use it when they married? They aren’t part of the ‘relieved group’, either. Or those who used it maybe often when younger and then regretted it? Those who maybe used it only when older (to lessen risk of Down syndrome, say) and later regretted it?

Or those who may not regret it now, but will in the future? So they loved it for maybe a decade, two, three, four, then stopped?

I’ll say again, as a woman, the society that has separated the procreative and uniative nature of sex, in order to 'relieve men and women from unplanned pregnancy" (and let me tell you, there are still plenty of unplanned pregnancies out there so contraception doesn’t seem to be working all that well if that is its major role), is a society that is hastening its own death, physically and morally. Maybe many of the men and women who are killing themselves spend much of their lifetimes ‘relieved’ from the ‘curse’ of babies. Doesn’t make them any less dead (physically, morally, etc) that they had what they perceived as less ‘suffering’ here on earth for a few years.

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

 

[ThePCWife]

Many, possibly most pregnancies are still unplanned, but fewer women are having procreative sex, or even sex with another person at all. If you have 1000 pregnancies and 500 are unplanned, but you go down to 400 pregnancies and 200 are unplanned, nothing’s changed percentagewise, but waaaay fewer kids are being born obviously.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

And why should we work to give them these things? They can get jobs like the rest of the country. We didn’t even enslave them, the rural southerners did. Why do they think they can take over our city centers and promote socialistic garbage?

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

 

[lemongrass80]

I gotta say something about this because as one of the few actively pro-white posters on this site I cannot afford to be associated with this level of historical ignorance.

Blacks moved up North long before LBJ’s failed welfare schemes. They wanted to escape Jim Crow and take advantage of the manufacturing jobs available in the North.

What do you mean by “actively pro-white”?

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

And baaaaaannned as of sometime last night, apparently. That came as no surprise.

So I wouldn’t waste too much time on replying to this (former) poster.

 

[DarkLight]

That’s even more problematic for people who don’t know each other really well.

I kind of get how long-married people could manage more or less like that, given lots of experience with each other, but otherwise, it sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Let’s say, for example, that somebody is showing me how to do some sort of complicated technical procedure (let’s say disarming a bomb), and instead of telling me stuff like:

“Yes, that’s right. Keep doing that. A little right. A little further right. Yep!”

they instead choose to just let me keep bumbling around without guidance until I am in imminent danger of detonating the bomb.

There’s actually some interesting studies that suggest a lot of men actually change how they interpret social cues when it comes to romantic possibilities.

Basically, things like the “soft no” aren’t just tricks women play when rejecting men - they’re part of our society everywhere, and both men and women use indirect refusals on a regular basis. For example, if your buddy invites you to a party you’re not interested in, you don’t typically say “nah sounds boring.” You say “aw man I’d love to, but I’ve been so tired out with work lately, I just can’t make it!” And both parties understand that as a no. In fact, if you just came out and said “nah I don’t want to”, it would probably be regarded as rude.

But a lot of men suddenly don’t seem to get those social cues when it comes to romance or sex. And that suggest there’s something more going on than just women not being direct enough.

 

[edwest2]

As a recovering porn addict, I would add that pornography has decimated American men and manhood. No doubts.

Yes, it a major contributing factor. Wives become understandably upset when they find out their husband is watching porn.

Ed

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Yes, it a major contributing factor. Wives become understandably upset when they find out their husband is watching porn.

Ed

It is more than that, Ed.

Some men now care more about the fantasy than their partner. How can you compete as a partner fight against an idealized fantasy that does what you will not do?

Your sex drive decreases due to a lot of factors, some of which you can imagine (and you know what I am talking about) and which I will not mention here for decency reasons.

It also stays in your mind, sticking in your memory like it is part of your physical brain. And when you remember it, the memory comes at importune times when IT LIKES IT.

So yeah, it is not as simple as you think. What you said is art of the truth, though.

 

[Crown_of_Stars]

Says whom? I’m a female. While at 60 I’m past the worries of an 'unplanned pregnancy" (sheesh), I certainly lived through the whole ‘reproductive freedom’ years. Are you aware of the health risks associated with contraceptive pills? Especially for women like me who are older but were exposed to earlier pills with more long term side effects?

And really, the idea that babies are just things to either embrace or avoid, ‘your choice’ is an offshoot of the sexual revolution. If sex is something just to embrace or avoid based on whether you want the feelings or not, if there is no child to consider, no idea of family, no idea of coupledom (unless you want, and just as long as you want, then buh-bye as if sex were nothing more than a clothing style you tried and discarded), this is the unnatural byproduct.

The modern “feminist” mentality is far from how it was in ancient times. Women wanted their wombs to be opened. They prayed and made sacrifices to fertility goddesses. And these women were married. Eve was married to Adam, in the sense that he was her husband. Ancient methods of trying to “get rid of” an unwanted child were natural herbs, not pills with awful side effects. I find the whole sex thing more trouble than it’s even worth. Really? Really? It’s that great? Not really, and I should know. I would much rather relax in a warm bath than worry about a messy, painful, nerve wracking thing that could very well have a result I don’t want. Something I never enjoyed anyway, so why the hell bother or take the risks? It’s ridiculous. All the worry and fuss over having access to pills, testing, and all the rest, when there’s a perfectly natural way to avoid the whole thing. Legs closed, womb closed. God, it’s just so damned frustrating!