What does God make of feminism?

[elts1956]

elts1956;3976955]

What about the women who get jobs over men simply because they are a woman? I’d say they cancel each other out, if that indeed is true that women earn less than men simply because they are a woman. The way lawyers work today, it would be a liability for a company to pay a woman less.

A minority. And most divorces are not because of abusive reasons or infidelity. Of divorces, 75% of them are instigated by women.

I wonder why?? Until you, or I, take a poll of all divorced women and show statistics to prove the cause of divorce, I don’t believe either you, or I can make an absolute statement as to such cause.

Part of the reason for the need for duel incomes, is because of feminism. The business world knows that two incomes can afford to pay more.

Only now, there is additional stress on both the men and the woman. Child care costs, loss of quality time, guilt, tired after work, etc, stress on the relationship because everyday is go, go, go.

Stress wasn’t invented by the feminists, nor the movement of. Stress has always been a part of daily, even single and married life.

We who are against abortion say that even though action has not been taken to repeal roe vs. wade, one life (a baby’s) saved rather than aborted is a positive. Why can’t you say the same of one woman’s life in escaping an abusive situation because she can now support herself due to the influence of the feminist movement? Isn’t the women’s suffragate movement giving women the right to vote a part of the feminist movement? Would you want your right to vote taken away from you, no more a voice in national policies, just as women before 1916 were made to conform to? Until the 60s we women had few legal rights in the home, or in the public forum.

 

[neat62]

And I wonder what the reason for that is? Do you know for a certainty? Do you have an opinion? Until you, or I, go out to gather the statistics on this, I don’t think either of us can say for a certainty.

Well, age comes into play here, first of all. AARP did a poll of people between 40 and 79 who were divorced.

“The majority of midlife divorces are initiated by women. Don’t believe it? In the AARP survey, 66 percent of women reported that they asked for the divorce, compared with 41 percent of men. And men more often than women were caught off-guard by their divorce (the news blind-sided 26 percent of men, compared with 14 percent of women).”

“A higher number of women in their 50s have had careers and are more independent,” she says. “They’re more likely to get out of a bad marriage sooner.”, says psychologist Constance Ahrons, Ph.D., professor emeritus at the University of Southern California

aarpmagazine.org/family/Articles/a2004-05-26-mag-divorce.html

I hear money is another factor, probably in younger people. Ah, but guess what? A working woman can now leave and support herself. And I think they are. My two aunts did it. 4 of my friends(women) did it.

It seems logical that because women can support themselves independantly, and the divorce rate has climbed since the 60’s.

And there is no fault divorce. California started it in 1970 I think and by 1983 all but one state, I think, had no fault divorce. But, divorce started to climb in the mid 60’s and actually started to drop in the mid 80’s. It seems logical, based on the data, that no fault didn’t really play that much, if at all, into it.
census.gov/population/socdemo/marr-div/p23-180/p23-180.pdf

We who are against abortion say that even though action has not been taken to repeal roe vs. wade, one life (a baby’s) saved rather than aborted is a positive. Why can’t you say the same of a woman escaping an abusive situation because she can now support herself due to the influence of the feminist movement?

When my grandparents got married after WW2, it was my grandmothers job for the phone company that supported the two newlyweds. I look at what is best for society as a whole, not just the women of it. There are women today who are abused(or are the abusers) who choose to not leave their relationship even though they can. And if it were only the abused who left the marriage, I could swallow that easier than the high divorce rates of today because women have the ability to live on their own. Men and women do not need each other today. Hell, women can even make a baby without the man in a commited, loving relationship. How fair is that to a would be father?

Isn’t the women’s suffragate movement giving women the right to vote a part of the feminist movement? Would you want your right to vote taken away from you, no more a voice in national policies, just as women before 1916 and after until the 60s had few legal rights in the home, or in the public forum.

We are drifting closer to socialism more than ever today, primarily due to feminism and Liberalism. Plus women generaly decide right before the election and vote for the Party of Death. So yes, women should not vote. But feminism has gone way beyond voting, to the point where it has hurt our society.

 

[elts1956]

Well, age comes into play here, first of all. AARP did a poll of people between 40 and 79 who were divorced.

“The majority of midlife divorces are initiated by women. Don’t believe it? In the AARP survey, 66 percent of women reported that they asked for the divorce, compared with 41 percent of men. And men more often than women were caught off-guard by their divorce (the news blind-sided 26 percent of men, compared with 14 percent of women).”

“A higher number of women in their 50s have had careers and are more independent,” she says. “They’re more likely to get out of a bad marriage sooner.”, says psychologist Constance Ahrons, Ph.D., professor emeritus at the University of Southern California

aarpmagazine.org/family/Articles/a2004-05-26-mag-divorce.html

I hear money is another factor, probably in younger people. Ah, but guess what? A working woman can now leave and support herself. And I think they are. My two aunts did it. 4 of my friends(women) did it.

It seems logical that because women can support themselves independantly, and the divorce rate has climbed since the 60’s.

And there is no fault divorce. California started it in 1970 I think and by 1983 all but one state, I think, had no fault divorce. But, divorce started to climb in the mid 60’s and actually started to drop in the mid 80’s. It seems logical, based on the data, that no fault didn’t really play that much, if at all, into it.
census.gov/population/socdemo/marr-div/p23-180/p23-180.pdf

When my grandparents got married after WW2, it was my grandmothers job for the phone company that supported the two newlyweds. I look at what is best for society as a whole, not just the women of it. There are women today who are abused(or are the abusers) who choose to not leave their relationship even though they can. And if it were only the abused who left the marriage, I could swallow that easier than the high divorce rates of today because women have the ability to live on their own. Men and women do not need each other today. Hell, women can even make a baby without the man in a commited, loving relationship. How fair is that to a would be father?

We are drifting closer to socialism more than ever today, primarily due to feminism and Liberalism. Plus women generaly decide right before the election and vote for the Party of Death. So yes, women should not vote. But feminism has gone way beyond voting, to the point where it has hurt our society.

I have also “heard” it is not only women who don’t decide on a candidate until right before the elections. Men do this too. Neither men, nor women study the votes and bent of political candidates. It is usually a gut decision.

Women should NOT vote??? Now that I don’t understand. What poll said women decide who they are going to elect right before the election? Probably it is those who don’t give a darn about life?

And yes, we are not only drifting, we are poling the raft toward socialism. It makes me sick.

 

[Kaninchen]

The United States is drifting towards state ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange?

Wow!

 

[Sair]

I’m pretty sure that God loves feminism. I’m sure that He loves the breakup of the family, divorce rates, women conceiving children without a man, promiscuity, cohabitation, willful and intentional single motherhood, rises in STD’s. I’m sure He is happy with the unintended consequences of feminism. I’m pretty sure that. Yeah.

Family breakdown, promiscuity, single motherhood and rampant STDs have been with us for centuries. Feminism is not to blame. As for one good thing that has come out of the feminist movement - as long as people still think there should be one set of rules for men and a different - and more restrictive - set of rules for women, feminism has still fallen short of achieving its ultimate aim.

 

[elts1956]

Family breakdown, promiscuity, single motherhood and rampant STDs have been with us for centuries. Feminism is not to blame. As for one good thing that has come out of the feminist movement - as long as people still think there should be one set of rules for men and a different - and more restrictive - set of rules for women, feminism has still fallen short of achieving its ultimate aim.

You have that right.

 

[Sair]

For any and all who have been watching or contributing to this thread, and who have doubts as to the necessity of feminism’s continuing struggle for equality and justice for women, and their recognition as human beings in the fullest sense, I have just read an article that spells out some hard truths. You’ll find it here:

latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-solnit13apr13,0,526991.story

Incidentally, there seem to have been several men-who-explain-things posting to this thread…

 

[marietta]

Sair:

You have absolutely *nailed it *with this article from the LA Times! I am 56 years old and have struggled with Mr. Very Important my entire personal and professional life.

“Most women fight wars on two fronts,” the writer, Rebecca Solnit says, “one for whatever the putative topic is and one **simply for the right to speak, to have ****ideas, to be acknowledged to be in possession of facts and **truths, to have value, to be a human being [my bold]. Things have certainly gotten better, but this war won’t end in my lifetime. I’m still fighting it, for myself certainly, but also for all those younger women who have something to say, in the hope that they will get to say it.”

I am forwarding this piece to every woman and most of the men that I know. Thank you.

neat62 writes:

“When my grandparents got married after WW2, it was my grandmothers job for the phone company that supported the two newlyweds. I look at what is best for society as a whole, not just the women of it.”

You are looking at “what is best for society as a whole” through a 63-year-old prism - what about when you were married or, if you are not married, when any of your peers married? Are you longing for a “simpler time”, when women’s roles were more well-defined? “So yes,” you declare, “women should not vote.” Can you really mean this? Want to try again?

marietta

 

[Dale_M]

Sair's last article:

Dude, if you’re reading this, you’re a carbuncle on the face of humanity and an obstacle to civilization. Feel the shame.

I really do hope that things have improved over the past 35 years. I think they have, but being a guy my perspective is different.

 

[marietta]

Dale_M writes:

“I really do hope that things have improved over the past 35 years. I think they have, but being a guy my perspective is different.”

I’m interested to know which specific things you hope have improved over the last 35 years. What, exactly, is your perspective?

Thanks. :tiphat:

marietta

 

[Dale_M]

I’m interested to know which specific things you hope have improved over the last 35 years. What, exactly, is your perspective?

Whether guys aren’t such pompous fools like the old fart in the article; whether guys don’t drown a woman’s voice when she is trying to make a point (especially if the guy disagrees with the woman’s point of view); whether guys ask for women’s opinions and actually listen to them.

 

[mlchance]

Family breakdown, promiscuity, single motherhood and rampant STDs have been with us for centuries.

No, they haven’t. They’ve been with us for about 40 years. Prior to the 1960s, the problems associated with all of the above pale in comparison to the epidemics we face today.

Feminism is not to blame.

Not entirely, no. The largest part of the blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the so-called Sexual Revolution, out of which certain streams of feminism flow.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[marietta]

mlchance:

Originally Posted by Sair:

“Family breakdown, promiscuity, single motherhood and rampant STDs have been with us for centuries.”

**Your response: **

No, they haven’t. They’ve been with us for about 40 years."

Please reconsider this excerpt from post # 333:

"Do you not think these conditions existed before the rise of feminism? Consider this list (from ‘Wikipedia’) of people who, over the centuries, suffered from syphilis:

'Notable known and suspected syphilis-infected people in previous centuries
Keys: S - suspected case; † - died of syphilis

Idi Amin (1928-2003) Ugandan dictator S
Maurice Barrymore (1849-1905) actor †
Charles Baudelaire (1821-1867), poet †
Karen Blixen (1885-1962), writer
Manuel Maria Barbosa du Bocage (1765-1805), poet †
António Botto (1897-1959), poet
Camilo Castelo Branco (1825-1890), writer
Beau Brummell (1778-1840), fashion arbiter
Al Capone (1899-1947), gangster †
Randolph Churchill, Lord (1849-1895), British statesman and father of Winston S. Churchill S
Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley (1545-1567), second husband of Mary Queen of Scots
Frederick Delius (1862-1934), composer †
Gaetano Donizetti (1797-1848), composer
King Edward VI (1538-1553), King of England and third Tudor monarch S
Mihai Eminescu (1850-1889), poet S
Paul Gauguin (1848-1903), painter †
Heinrich Heine (1797-1856), poet †
King Henry VIII (1491-1547), King of England and second monarch of the Tudor dynasty S
Adolf Hitler (1889–1945), German dictator S
Ivan the Terrible (1530-1584), Czar of Russia
Scott Joplin (1867/8-1917), composer †
Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924), communist leader S
Édouard Manet (1832-1883), painter †
Guy de Maupassant (1850-1893), writer †
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (1844-1900), 19th century German philosopher S
Jack Pickford (1896-1933), actor †
Martin Alonzo Pinzon (1441-1493) captain of the Pinta †
Franz Schubert (1797-1828), composer S
Robert Schumann (1810-1856), composer S
Bedřich Smetana (1824-1884), Czech composer S
Tongzhi (1856-1875), ninth Manchu emperor in the Qing dynasty S
Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec (1864-1901), painter †
John Wilmot (1647-1680), 2nd Earl of Rochester, writer, debaucher S
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900), writer S
Hugo Wolf (1860-1903), composer †
Mikhail Vrubel (1856-1910), painter
Vincent Van Gogh (1853-1890), painter’

“Now, this is just one STD. No need to address every single flag you’re waving. But families did break up, divorces did take place, and all the other societal situations which you list did, in fact, occur with regularity before anyone even spoke of ‘feminism’ . . .”

God must be somewhat dismayed at some of the choices men and women have been making over the centuries, no doubt. But for you to label feminism as the direct cause of these situations is myopic at best.

If there are “certain streams of feminism”, can you explain, please, what you might consider to be any *other *“streams of feminism”?

marietta

 

[Calliso]

We are drifting closer to socialism more than ever today, primarily due to feminism and Liberalism. Plus women generaly decide right before the election and vote for the Party of Death. So yes, women should not vote. But feminism has gone way beyond voting, to the point where it has hurt our society.

Really now and you know this how? I am assuming it is because you have talked to the majority of the adult women in the world right? or at least in the United States. And I am sure you have then talked to most of the men as well to know that they are better voters then women.

And think about it for a second…do you really think that a society that would take the right for women to vote after they have given them that right would stop at just that? Cause I serious doubt it. How long would it be before women couldn;t own property? or couldn;t charge their husbands with rape if they were raped. Actually that is something that in some countries and states wasn;t changed until maybe the 1980;s or even more recently. You could charge your spouse with sexual assault but not rape. And really the list goes on on the things that could happen and that would even be likely to happen. It;s a slippery slope and I am willing to bet the result would be something even you wouldn;t enjoy.

 

[Sair]

Whether guys aren’t such pompous fools like the old fart in the article; whether guys don’t drown a woman’s voice when she is trying to make a point (especially if the guy disagrees with the woman’s point of view); whether guys ask for women’s opinions and actually listen to them.

I can tell you for a fact that all guys aren’t like that - I know some wonderful men - am engaged to one of them - but I also know some men who are like the pompous old fart who won’t allow that any other opinion can exist except his own. I try to make sure I don’t tar all men - or all women - with the same brush.

 

[elts1956]

I really do hope that things have improved over the past 35 years. I think they have, but being a guy my perspective is different.

Hi Dale. Yes, I think attitudes have changed, but it’s going to take a lot more ranting and raving by us crazy females to keep it going and keep everyone’s attention.

 

[elts1956]

I really do hope that things have improved over the past 35 years. I think they have, but being a guy my perspective is different.

I can tell you for a fact that all guys aren’t like that - I know some wonderful men - am engaged to one of them - but I also know some men who are like the pompous old fart who won’t allow that any other opinion can exist except his own. I try to make sure I don’t tar all men - or all women - with the same brush.

Have there been studies done of age, locale, socio-economic distribution as to which group of men continue to be in denial?

 

[neat62]

For any and all who have been watching or contributing to this thread, and who have doubts as to the necessity of feminism’s continuing struggle for equality and justice for women, and their recognition as human beings in the fullest sense, I have just read an article that spells out some hard truths. You’ll find it here:

latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-solnit13apr13,0,526991.story

Incidentally, there seem to have been several men-who-explain-things posting to this thread…

Oh nonsense. There are plenty of women here who act exactly how the man in her article supposedly behaved. Watch The View.

The author of this tripe is a Liberal, Feminist,Communist. Her whole family is, as she admits.

“Her hero – and the one family member Solnit is entirely comfortable talking about – is her younger brother, David, 40, who was a key organizer of the anti-World Trade Organization protests in Seattle in 1999. A full-time activist since the age of 18, he enticed his sister to join in front-line demonstrations in the early '80s.”

“and Solnit has dedicated one of her books to an activist aunt who lived in Sonoma County in a Victorian she called the Che Guevara Memorial Chateau.”



She is clearly wrong and clearly biased.

And I tend to agree with this WOMAN who wrote this article:

pajamasmedia.com/blog/are-privileged-western-women-being-crushed-into-silence/

 

[neat62]

Calliso;3979466]

Really now and you know this how? I am assuming it is because you have talked to the majority of the adult women in the world right? or at least in the United States. And I am sure you have then talked to most of the men as well to know that they are better voters then women.

I know this from listening to those who research the ins and outs of elections, in an effort to get their guy elected. They study elections so they know when to make certain moves, like George Bush had a DUI right before the election.

And think about it for a second…do you really think that a society that would take the right for women to vote after they have given them that right would stop at just that?

Nope. And don’t worry, once the Libs give, it is almost never taken away. And funny how the existance of the slippery slope comes into play when convenient.

How long would it be before women couldn;t own property? or couldn;t charge their husbands with rape if they were raped. Actually that is something that in some countries and states wasn;t changed until maybe the 1980;s or even more recently. You could charge your spouse with sexual assault but not rape. And really the list goes on on the things that could happen and that would even be likely to happen. It;s a slippery slope and I am willing to bet the result would be something even you wouldn;t enjoy.

So we need all of this(feminism) so a woman can charge her husband with rape? And I guess we just disagree on which slippery slope is worse. I see the feminist slippery slope as damaging to the society as a whole. Yours effects only women.

 

[Dale_M]

Elts and Sair, thank you for your responses. I had figured that some progress had been made, but its harder for me to gauge.