Virginity and marriage.

  • Thread starter Thread starter JosephHope
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LethalMouse said:
Both are terrible, but lets just lay this out.

RP jerks = slave wife maybe or maybe nottreated unfairly depebding on the guy

Feninism = murder babies…

Plus yes the RP guys push the envelope. And I agree they take things far too far but

Not all “end false rape” means rape is legal just as not all women who want rape to not happen mean they want free reign to claim rape.

But in the end if you link up with either group, the end advocacy is either extreme.

But in the end only one movement considers the murder of babies an integral part of “equality”

Granted half the other movement is probably cool with it becasue it lwts then “off the hook” but at least I havent YET heard it considered important to have legal baby murder.

Though given the nature of extremists they might get on board to try and mainstream their cause and we can have a whole host iof insane selfish men/women crying out for lopsided things and baby murder.
Click to expand...
I usually get the impression that Red Pill guys dislike abortion primarily because they don’t get to do it, too.

Hence the popularity online of the so-called “paper abortion.”
 
BlueEyedLady said:
Internet feminism? The bastion of fat acceptance and really, really delicate feelings? No, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for those people. They are pretty much the exact same as RPers, just with different parts.

But tackling institutional issues is anything but whiney and pathetic. Right now, public schools are failing boys. It doesn’t make you hateful selfish to want to find a solution to that. It’s a quantifiable problem that should be addressed by leaders and educators of both sexes. There are institutional and civil issues facing women as well. Again, tackling those is not selfish or only looking out for ones own.

But, the people on sites like Jezebel and Dalrock are not people who are looking to solve problems and make the world more equitable. They are there to whine and point fingers. You’ll also find a lot of people in both groups who are at least ok with, if not actively for, advancing their own gender while holding back the other. But that’s not what I’m talking about here either.

You’re comparing my stance that women should be able to decide for themselves what they do in life to the RP stance that men should be in control of women. Your grounds for comparison is that both advocate for their own gender. The difference is, I don’t advocate at anyone else’s expense.
Click to expand...
But you use sensble words and always wjen good idea leave out your advocation to things you know the audience would disagree with…

BUT where you and I differ is that the internet feminists you dislike are an extreme maybe but only slightly more visible than the same poisonous feminists who exist.

I would say we know even though you might deny it, feminism in practice in tosay seeks women over men, not equality.

Hence schools failing boys.

You stand with covert versions of internet feminists and don’t know they are them. That is my point.

When you THINK you pass a bill that helps women you cant see they slipped in a little rider that hurts men.

I am weary of laws being passed J agree with bc fine print.

You pretend there is none.

Thibk of it like this, since for exampke you and Xantippe often agree on much.

You and her submit a rule, she thinks you are both on the same page. But she is unknowing that you slipped in prochoice stuff.

Now Xantippe would not have said yes if she knew but she did not know in this case.

So what I am saying is as you would slip abortion past Xantippe, these radicals slip much past you.

And as you often use disingenuous wording to trick people, many have done the same to you.

You don’t see it but it doesnt change the truth.
 
BlueEyedLady said:
Ok…but I’m still not sure how this fits in with your claim that I want it both ways. You made it sound like I was benefiting greatly from marriage while neglecting my responsibility to have kids. Clearly, that’s not the case as hubby doesn’t want them now either. So I’m still not sure what you’re proposing.
Click to expand...
I am proposing that more than fifty million dead babies over 40+ years was far too high a price for the ‘right’ to go to college.
 
BlueEyedLady said:
If I said “After seeing what men do…I don’t like men” you would have a point. Instead, I said “After seeing what happens when one person is given an inordinate amount of power over another, I want to avoid that system”.
Click to expand...
Yes. I don’t think we should make the assumption that (in the absence of any legal recourse) that people who have power over other people are going to behave well.

This applies to parents and children, too, by the way, and to all sorts of different situations.

In fact, come to think of it, it’s one of the founding American ideas–that unlimited power over others is a Bad Thing, and that there ought to be checks and balances to prevent abuses.
 
SilverShadow22 said:
I reiterate.

No feminists ever do bad things, either? 🤷
Click to expand...
That’s not what you said. You said that women don’t need legal recourse because Christianity would keep them from being cruely treated.

Heck, by your logic there’s no reason to outlaw abortion because Christianity us opposed to it.

Christianity or not, everyone deserves to be able to protect themselves from those who would harm them.
 
BlueEyedLady said:
That’s not what you said. You said that women don’t need legal recourse because Christianity would keep them from being cruely treated.

Heck, by your logic there’s no reason to outlaw abortion because Christianity us opposed to it.

Christianity or not, everyone deserves to be able to protect themselves from those who would harm them.
Click to expand...
I said nothing of the kind. I said the ideology of Christianity advocated equal treatment of all people looooooong before feminism became a thing. The failure of those claiming to be Christian to live up to the ideal doesn’t invalidate the ideal any more than you would say that those ‘feminists’ who want to destroy men invalidate the totality of feminism as you espouse it.
 
Xantippe said:
Took a while…
Click to expand...
Christians have failed miserably when it came to living up to ideals.

Such things like domestic violence, slavery, racism, and abuse of workers have given rise to movements that while addressing real evils brought about consequences that were not so good.

They say all it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing. There were a few faithful ones who spoke and acted against the evils listed above but the rest did nothing.
 
SilverShadow22 said:
I said nothing of the kind. I said the ideology of Christianity advocated equal treatment of all people looooooong before feminism became a thing. The failure of those claiming to be Christian to live up to the ideal doesn’t invalidate the ideal any more than you would say that those ‘feminists’ who want to destroy men invalidate the totality of feminism as you espouse it.
Click to expand...
While it’s certainly not Islam, I don’t understand how anyone could make the argument that Christianity calls for the equal treatment of all people. Catholicism is overall better than most forms of Protestantism, but even it has its issues and it was nowhere near as influential as Protestantism in pre-1960’s America.
 
BlueEyedLady said:
While it’s certainly not Islam, I don’t understand how anyone could make the argument that Christianity calls for the equal treatment of all people. Catholicism is overall better than most forms of Protestantism, but even it has its issues and it was nowhere near as influential as Protestantism in pre-1960’s America.
Click to expand...
I’ll partially agree with you there, to a point. I used Christianity in the sense of pre-split. Prudish puritans brought about much of the evil that resulted in the harmful over-compensation.

Catholicism isn’t ‘mostly’ better, however. It’s THE best. It says all human beings are equal in worth and dignity and equally worthy of protection regardless of any other consideration. (including unborn ones:rolleyes:)
 
BlueEyedLady said:
That’s not what you said. You said that women don’t need legal recourse because Christianity would keep them from being cruely treated.

Heck, by your logic there’s no reason to outlaw abortion because Christianity us opposed to it.

Christianity or not, everyone deserves to be able to protect themselves from those who would harm them.
Click to expand...
Right.

There needs to be legal protection under the law to protect vulnerable people from violence and exploitation by the more powerful.

We can’t expect people with power over others to be good without laws to punish them when they are caught being bad.
 
SilverShadow22 said:
I’ll partially agree with you there, to a point. I used Christianity in the sense of pre-split. Prudish puritans brought about much of the evil that resulted in the harmful over-compensation.

Catholicism isn’t ‘mostly’ better, however. It’s THE best. It says all human beings are equal in worth and dignity and equally worthy of protection regardless of any other consideration. (including unborn ones:rolleyes:)
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly disagree. I hear that said often, but looking at the Bible, the teachings and structure of the Catholic church, and the treatment of women in predominantly Catholic countries, I’m unconvinced.

Again, everyone should have the right and recourse to protect themselves.
 
Xantippe said:
Right.

There needs to be legal protection under the law to protect vulnerable people from violence and exploitation by the more powerful.

We can’t expect people with power over others to be good without laws to punish them when they are caught being bad.
Click to expand...
There’s a very famous experiment that could never, ever be repeated that illustrates that perfectly…😉
 
Xantippe said:
Right.

There needs to be legal protection under the law to protect vulnerable people from violence and exploitation by the more powerful.

We can’t expect people with power over others to be good without laws to punish them when they are caught being bad.
Click to expand...
Obviously this country is in a mess because a whole lot of people claiming to follow Jesus…don’t. I am saying we had a perfectly good ideology that says beating and abusing and lying and cheating and stealing are wrong. We did NOT ‘need’ feminism to tell us these things, nor did we ‘need’ it to instigate any needed reforms. We needed Catholics to act like Catholics and address these problems. Because, surprise, the Church advocates good things without the bad things thrown in.

And I would point out that while I am NOT an anarchist, something being illegal doesn’t actually stop it. One could argue that in a lot of cases, it barely deters it. Look at how rampant drug use is even though it’s very illegal and vigorously prosecuted.

Wife-beating has been illegal for as long as assault has been illegal… And making a new law isn’t the only, let alone the best, way of stopping something. The best way of stopping something is to get people to see why it shouldn’t be done.

And my point is that we didn’t ‘need’ feminism to do that. In fact, it could be argued that feminism has made a lot of things worse by increasing distrust and dislike between the sexes. Now we have a ‘us vs them’ mentality on every side and everybody is trying to hit harder than everyone else.

Maybe we should have focused on the (Christian) Golden Rule, if not the Great Commandment? 🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top