"Most women would prefer to be stay at home housewives. Women's lib did alot of damage to women!"

by purrpurr 70 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Diogenesister

  he Women's Liberation movement didn't come up with the idea of women working outside the home. Women have been working outside the home, growing crops or earning money for thousands of years to feed their children

  Absolutely Xanthippe, it was only ever an option for the upper classes.

  With the opening up of the middle class during the Victorian era there was a brief time where women who where not part of the aristocracy would 'manage'the home & servants but WW 1 brought an end to much of that.

  Poor women have always worked their fingers to the bone. If they didn't die in childbirth, that is.
• 

  TD

  sowhatnow
  

  so, I am not entitled to half my x husbands assets because why?

  With respect, you appear to be conflating two related but very different things.

  A SAHM who has sacrificed her career and her earning potential for the good of the family is absolutely, positively, entitled to half the estate. No question about it.

  However in your early post, you made a general statement about men and commitment which ostensibly would include people who are not currently married.

  And I stand by my statement. Men (And women too) have become gun shy of a legal system that rewards bad behavior in marriage.
• 

  TD

  Umm, no.

  Please note, Talesin, that I said, "radical feminism" and so that there is no misunderstanding here, let me elaborate.

  In sociology, there are two schools of thought about how gender relations came to be so unfair.

  One holds that societies drifted into patterns that although horribly unfair, were brutally efficient. Peaceful egalitarian societies simply could not complete and were supplanted.

  The other holds that men got together and deliberately crafted systems that favor males at the expense of females. And these men are threatened when they see their precious power slipping away because their fragile male egos and even their sense of manhood is so heavily invested in the idea that they are superior.

  IMO, this is fairly decent litmus test. I could have an absolute field day with quotes from authors who espouse the latter view. I'm a little surprised that you're disagreeing though. Could I ask why?
  
• 

  cofty

  The word "patriarchy" is imminent.
• 

  Sabin

  Strong, independent girl with her own income, home, friends etc who stays interesting viable & challenging. Wont be obsessed with you. Only $400 an hour.
• 

  talesin

  TD, thanks for your reply and interest in my thoughts on the matter. Your statement did have a ring of truth, but I think you made a broad stroke.

  Radical feminism opposes the patriarchy, not men. That is *the* mainstay of the movement. What does "the patriarchy" mean? It is a system that is seen as dividing rights, privileges and power primarily by gender, and as a result oppressing women and privileging men.

  (Of course at this point, some people will interrupt "What about men who are poor? They are not privileged." In a patriarchal system, these men, though they are perceived as more or less powerless, most likely have full dominance over their wives and daughters.)

  As the word 'radical' implies, these women (and men, believe it or not - yes, men can oppose the patriarchy as well - just ask Gloria Steinem) tend to be more militant, and 'in your face' (kinda like a successful businessMAN hehehe).
  

  "Some men are emasculated by equality." So, is it your position that zero men are emasculated by equality? That seems hardly likely.
  

  Perhaps it would be more correct to say "Some men feel emasculated by equality".
  

  It's true that the patriarchy has resisted goals of the movement, such as pay equity and maternity leave for BOTH parents. Women still have great difficulty in breaking through the "Glass ceiling", and face horrendous treatment by the "old boys' club' when they become firefighters, cops and work in many other male-dominated fields.
  

  We usually attack things we fear - why such [hatred] fear of women in the workplace?
  

  I think it would be true to say, "some feminists claim that men feel emasculated by equality". And of course, we always have 'the fringe'; that is to say: those who veer off from the mainstream, and make a lot of NOISE about their ways of thinking, and therefore receive a lot of attention.
  

  To wrap up, I think your statement would be more accurate if it did not claim to be a 'mainstay of radical feminism'.
  

  t :sunglasses:
• 

  LongHairGal

  LISA ROSE:

  Good post! I agree that women should be grateful for the work that feminists have done in the area of equal pay and sexual harassment laws!

  Of course, it's not perfect now but it's better than the nothing that women had in those areas for so long...and nobody wants to go back to the way it was. As another poster mentioned, some women have always had to work outside the home because of circumstances and they certainly need laws to protect them in the STILL hostile work environment that discriminates against women. They have to be "beautiful" and forever young!

  I worked my whole life and am now retired. I took a lot of flak in the Witness religion because I needed to support myself at a full-time job. But, I'm happy I had my own money and am my own boss. I wasn't concerned how mentally "distressed" my independence made any man feel (Witness or otherwise). Too bad about these idiots! Totally ridiculous when you think about it.

  I knew way back when that there were no desirable JW men for me and that any woman over 30 with a brain had to look outside! Never mind that "marry in the Lord" crap....They just wanted single women around to do favors for all the users. Not ME!! They know once a woman is married that they can't come up to her and bother her. They might also figure she'll leave her money to the religion. (This is probably the REAL reason why years back they were urging couples to stay childless.)

  Yes, single women anywhere are happier rather than being married to the wrong man. Personally, at my stage in life, I'm glad I have my freedom!👍
• 

  cofty

  The word "patriarchy" is imminent. - Cofty

  Radical feminism opposes the patriarchy, not men - Talesin

  See told you so

  The modern radical feminist movement is nothing more than misandry hiding behind a facade of of victimhood.

  They make videos about "manspreading" and "microaggressions" while ignoring the real sources of female inequality in the world.
• 

  DJS

  @Sabin: "Strong, independent girl with her own income, home, friends etc who stays interesting viable & challenging. Wont be obsessed with you. Only $400 an hour."

  That's FUNNY!!! Maybe that explains my relationship issues.
• 

  TD

  T
  

  Radical feminism opposes the patriarchy, not men.

  There is an important difference between the observation that societies have been strongly patriarchal and that women have suffered as a result vs. the notion of "the patriarchy" in the same vein that other groups have coined and used terms like, "the establishment" and "the man."

  (As an aside, I would say there is an element of circularity in defining a group using terms internal to that group.Like I said, sociologists (and historians too) are not of one mind on this.)

  I'm a little confused though. I didn't say that radical feminism opposes men. I said that the idea that men are emasculated by equality is a mainstay of radical feminism and you've come very close to agreeing with me by accepting the term, "the patriarchy" at face value. (Which is a mainstay of radical feminism)

  In the book, Are Men Necessary? When Sexes Collide, for example, Maureen Dowd pounds away at this idea and offers all sorts of uncomplimentary explanations for why she thinks men are threatened and fearful of intelligent, successful women. (Which is news to most of us....)