The Effects of Feminism

[Saigon]

Progressives think that women are sub-level. A lower type.

Ummm....I think you might have got that a little backwards!!

Try reading the comments again, and maybe it will be a little clearer....!

 

[Roadrunner]

Great job women are doing as single moms.

Greatest ticket to poverty and criminal children there is.

Way to go.

I'm not going to tell you that the single-motherhood scenario is never the woman's fault, but do you realize that guys can step up and be a dad even if he's not married to the mom?

Women are encouraged to have sex with men they aren't interested in building a life with, so that is what they do.

Unfortunately, when the birth control doesn't work, they still aren't interested in building a life with the losers they have been encouraged to fuck...and the losers are not capable of supporting them or their children.

Why are men encouraged to have sex with women they aren't interested in building a life with?

Why are women so prone to having sex with men that aren't interested in building a life with them?

Why do so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies?

Could it be the Democrat policy of rewarding bad behaviour in order to keep the serfs on the manor?

 

[ClosedCaption]

You tell me? Better yet...what does history of man tell you?

No thats part of being a man. Credibility and providing for the family. See, you are pretending as if I'm saying a man CANNOT or SHOULD NOT cook or clean. What I'm saying is that when the roles are clearly defined you dont have a problem. But you cant have a "men are supposed to" list without a womans side. The BEST THING about the feminist movement is they convinced men AND women that men have a "role" and women shouldnt be burdened with a "role" because thats mean. Women should do whatever they want while men maintain those roles.

Seems fair right?

Men dont do things because they are fun...they need to be handled and how would it look if we leaned on you to do it? Ahahaha you'd be thinking he aint handling HIS business. Can a guy say that about a woman who isnt cooking without being called a Chauvinist? Nope....

You're saying that roles should be defined. You're claiming that roles for men are still defined, but they aren't for women, so we have some unfair advantage. I'm saying that it's ideal that people define their own roles, and that a family works out the roles for themselves, rather than thinking in a one-size-fits-all way.

And then you go ahead and project what I'd think about a man who doesn't do the fixing and maintenance. When I've spent a couple of posts telling you that my very real man husband doesn't do that stuff on a regular basis, and I do.

And your "history of man" argument is lame. In the history of man, kids were conceived by rape, and marriages were arranged, and people could own slaves. But hey, everyone's role was beautifully defined.

you're not serious now...be foreal. When I say the history of man are you going to bring up sex with animals too or stick to the topic?

 

[ClosedCaption]

The problem is that when women look around and ask "where are the real men?" they completely forget they created this environment.

Call it King or whatever but roles should be defined. Its not a team if everyone does everything based on feelings

Women can choose the type of husband they desire

If they want a submissive relationship, they can find one
If they want to have a say in their relationship, they can find a man who is cool with that

I've never met a woman who wants a submissive man. Thats a false option.

There have been submissive husbands ever since there have been husbands

Their existence doesnt change the fact that no woman seeks out a submissive dude.

What do you base this on?

And do you really believe this to be an absolute, or are you really saying "almost no woman"?

I base it on my history of 1. Dating 2. knowing woman

and most of all #3. You not denying it that this is the case.

If I said something totally wrong you would say so instead of asking

 

[ricechickie]

Why are women so prone to having sex with men that aren't interested in building a life with them?

Why do so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies?

Could it be the Democrat policy of rewarding bad behaviour in order to keep the serfs on the manor?

1. I don't know that women are "so prone" to those actions.

2. I don't know that "so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies".

Your broad-brush generalizations about women aside, government assistance helps people, it doesn't "reward" them.

 

[Roadrunner]

Why are women so prone to having sex with men that aren't interested in building a life with them?

Why do so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies?

Could it be the Democrat policy of rewarding bad behaviour in order to keep the serfs on the manor?

1. I don't know that women are "so prone" to those actions.

2. I don't know that "so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies".

Your broad-brush generalizations about women aside, government assistance helps people, it doesn't "reward" them.

1. Most American children are now born out of wedlock.

2. Many do, and I base this on 30 years working with kids. I am sure US government has exact stats.

Government assistance keeps people dependent, trapped in poverty.

That is why we have more poor than ever, not BUSH!

Single motherhood is the single easiest path to poverty, and a single mother is the most likely to have criminal children.

Deal with it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Great job women are doing as single moms.

Greatest ticket to poverty and criminal children there is.

Way to go.

I'm not going to tell you that the single-motherhood scenario is never the woman's fault, but do you realize that guys can step up and be a dad even if he's not married to the mom?

Women are encouraged to have sex with men they aren't interested in building a life with, so that is what they do.

Unfortunately, when the birth control doesn't work, they still aren't interested in building a life with the losers they have been encouraged to fuck...and the losers are not capable of supporting them or their children.

Why are men encouraged to have sex with women they aren't interested in building a life with?

Why are women so prone to having sex with men that aren't interested in building a life with them?

Why do so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies?

Could it be the Democrat policy of rewarding bad behaviour in order to keep the serfs on the manor?

Some people see any and everything thru a political lense. STFU

 

[koshergrl]

Why are women so prone to having sex with men that aren't interested in building a life with them?

Why do so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies?

Could it be the Democrat policy of rewarding bad behaviour in order to keep the serfs on the manor?

1. I don't know that women are "so prone" to those actions.

2. I don't know that "so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies".

Your broad-brush generalizations about women aside, government assistance helps people, it doesn't "reward" them.

1. Most American children are now born out of wedlock.

2. Many do, and I base this on 30 years working with kids. I am sure US government has exact stats.

Government assistance keeps people dependent, trapped in poverty.

That is why we have more poor than ever, not BUSH!

Single motherhood is the single easiest path to poverty, and a single mother is the most likely to have criminal children.

Deal with it.

When you combine the fact that women are encouraged to act on impulse and focus on their own immediate gratification with the fact that poor women are taught from a very young age that their children are not even human prior to birth, and of no value after birth, you end up with the progressive mess we are now in.

Which of course progressives view as political security. You have a large, uneducated, dependent subclass completely dependent upon them for every mouthful of food, and you can write your own checks. It's the new slavery.

 

[Roadrunner]

Great job women are doing as single moms.

Greatest ticket to poverty and criminal children there is.

Way to go.

I'm not going to tell you that the single-motherhood scenario is never the woman's fault, but do you realize that guys can step up and be a dad even if he's not married to the mom?

Women are encouraged to have sex with men they aren't interested in building a life with, so that is what they do.

Unfortunately, when the birth control doesn't work, they still aren't interested in building a life with the losers they have been encouraged to fuck...and the losers are not capable of supporting them or their children.

Why are men encouraged to have sex with women they aren't interested in building a life with?

Why are women so prone to having sex with men that aren't interested in building a life with them?

Why do so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies?

Could it be the Democrat policy of rewarding bad behaviour in order to keep the serfs on the manor?

Some people see any and everything thru a political lense. STFU

"The truth is an offense, but not a sin."

Deal with it.

 

[Roadrunner]

Why are women so prone to having sex with men that aren't interested in building a life with them?

Why do so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies?

Could it be the Democrat policy of rewarding bad behaviour in order to keep the serfs on the manor?

1. I don't know that women are "so prone" to those actions.

2. I don't know that "so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies".

Your broad-brush generalizations about women aside, government assistance helps people, it doesn't "reward" them.

1. Most American children are now born out of wedlock.

2. Many do, and I base this on 30 years working with kids. I am sure US government has exact stats.

Government assistance keeps people dependent, trapped in poverty.

That is why we have more poor than ever, not BUSH!

Single motherhood is the single easiest path to poverty, and a single mother is the most likely to have criminal children.

Deal with it.

When you combine the fact that women are encouraged to act on impulse and focus on their own immediate gratification with the fact that poor women are taught from a very young age that their children are not even human prior to birth, and of no value after birth, you end up with the progressive mess we are now in.

Which of course progressives view as political security. You have a large, uneducated, dependent subclass completely dependent upon them for every mouthful of food, and you can write your own checks. It's the new slavery.

Single motherhood, the only area of American life that has moved beyond race as we become a nation of dependent bastards.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I'm not going to tell you that the single-motherhood scenario is never the woman's fault, but do you realize that guys can step up and be a dad even if he's not married to the mom?

Women are encouraged to have sex with men they aren't interested in building a life with, so that is what they do.

Unfortunately, when the birth control doesn't work, they still aren't interested in building a life with the losers they have been encouraged to fuck...and the losers are not capable of supporting them or their children.

Why are men encouraged to have sex with women they aren't interested in building a life with?

Why are women so prone to having sex with men that aren't interested in building a life with them?

Why do so many single moms have multiple baby-daddies?

Could it be the Democrat policy of rewarding bad behaviour in order to keep the serfs on the manor?

Some people see any and everything thru a political lense. STFU

"The truth is an offense, but not a sin."

Deal with it.

"Opinions are like assholes"

 

[ricechickie]

Women can choose the type of husband they desire

If they want a submissive relationship, they can find one
If they want to have a say in their relationship, they can find a man who is cool with that

I've never met a woman who wants a submissive man. Thats a false option.

There have been submissive husbands ever since there have been husbands

Their existence doesnt change the fact that no woman seeks out a submissive dude.

What do you base this on?

And do you really believe this to be an absolute, or are you really saying "almost no woman"?

I base it on my history of 1. Dating 2. knowing woman

and most of all #3. You not denying it that this is the case.

If I said something totally wrong you would say so instead of asking

#3 is absurd. I never can and never will claim to speak for all women.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I've never met a woman who wants a submissive man. Thats a false option.

There have been submissive husbands ever since there have been husbands

Their existence doesnt change the fact that no woman seeks out a submissive dude.

What do you base this on?

And do you really believe this to be an absolute, or are you really saying "almost no woman"?

I base it on my history of 1. Dating 2. knowing woman

and most of all #3. You not denying it that this is the case.

If I said something totally wrong you would say so instead of asking

#3 is absurd. I never can and never will claim to speak for all

Its simple psychology. If I said you are a thief you wouldnt ask how. lol.

If you said I was gay I wouldnt ask you why? lol.

 

[bendog]

Yeah, its really inexcusable to teach kids that boys and girls are equal.

What is it with you fools who have to look down the front of your pants to know what you're capable of doing?

Males and females are NOT equal. It is biologically impossible.
Males and females brains do not function in the same way. Males and females process information differently.
Males and females have different body types, bone structures, chromosomes, muscle mass types, etc.
The typical feminist's failure is their obsession with plumbing. You said so yourself. "look down the front of your pants"..
Hey genius, that cuts BOTH ways.
The shrill scream from the radical feminist in reaction to the above illustrated scientific facts is almost humorous.
The fembots get all crazy over "different" To them that means "compare". And when human being make comparisons the eventual conclusion is that "one is better than the other"....
Men and women are NOT the same.
Now, watch this reaction. This is going to fun watching the knee jerk reactions to follow. Come on little lemmings. Have at it. Right off the cliff.

Sooo? You're attempting to prove what here?

That the quest for equality can only progress so far. Eventually it stops when it reaches the subject of human biology and anatomy.

Again, you are proving nothing. No two people are the same, yet the law presumes equal protection.

You assert nothing, you spout talking points. All women are afforded equal protection. Show me how they are being denied, I challenge you. This isn't the 1800's anymore, Ben.

Law has no control of whether you are a man or a woman. The law cannot make two unique individuals the same.The law cannot mandate that a woman be completely equal with her male counterparts, unless our code is some sort of magic spellbook that can turn women into men... or something. Anyhow, the law should work independent from the practice of identity politics. Your quest is not one of equality, but of vengeance and hatred. You wish to raise women to a higher status than men, not to an equal status.

I think a woman should be free to get any education she can afford, master and any job that she wants and can do, and if she works the same hours as a man at the same competency level, get equal pay. You still haven't identified what your "bitch" is.

 

[koshergrl]

Progressives think that women are sub-level. A lower type.

Ummm....I think you might have got that a little backwards!!

Try reading the comments again, and maybe it will be a little clearer....!

No, it's clear to me and every other thinking person.

Progressives devalue females, and they devalue the one thing that makes females special..their ability to bear children. They devalue the children of single women altogether...a child is deemed worthless to a progressive if there is no father in the picture..yet at the same time, they encourage women to engage in sexual relationships outside of marriage, the result of which is single parenthood. You jeer at and attack females who embrace motherhood and wifehood...you demean and mock them as stupid if they dare to be proud of those roles.

We know who devalues women and sees them as a lower class..and who works hard to keep them subservient.

 

[Roadrunner]

Males and females are NOT equal. It is biologically impossible.
Males and females brains do not function in the same way. Males and females process information differently.
Males and females have different body types, bone structures, chromosomes, muscle mass types, etc.
The typical feminist's failure is their obsession with plumbing. You said so yourself. "look down the front of your pants"..
Hey genius, that cuts BOTH ways.
The shrill scream from the radical feminist in reaction to the above illustrated scientific facts is almost humorous.
The fembots get all crazy over "different" To them that means "compare". And when human being make comparisons the eventual conclusion is that "one is better than the other"....
Men and women are NOT the same.
Now, watch this reaction. This is going to fun watching the knee jerk reactions to follow. Come on little lemmings. Have at it. Right off the cliff.

Sooo? You're attempting to prove what here?

That the quest for equality can only progress so far. Eventually it stops when it reaches the subject of human biology and anatomy.

Again, you are proving nothing. No two people are the same, yet the law presumes equal protection.

You assert nothing, you spout talking points. All women are afforded equal protection. Show me how they are being denied, I challenge you. This isn't the 1800's anymore, Ben.

Law has no control of whether you are a man or a woman. The law cannot make two unique individuals the same.The law cannot mandate that a woman be completely equal with her male counterparts, unless our code is some sort of magic spellbook that can turn women into men... or something. Anyhow, the law should work independent from the practice of identity politics. Your quest is not one of equality, but of vengeance and hatred. You wish to raise women to a higher status than men, not to an equal status.

I think a woman should be free to get any education she can afford, master and any job that she wants and can do, and if she works the same hours as a man at the same competency level, get equal pay. You still haven't identified what your "bitch" is.

In any given job, women work fewer hours a year due to greater absenteeism.

Pay is pretty much equal, hours worked, not.

 

[bendog]

Sooo? You're attempting to prove what here?

That the quest for equality can only progress so far. Eventually it stops when it reaches the subject of human biology and anatomy.

Again, you are proving nothing. No two people are the same, yet the law presumes equal protection.

You assert nothing, you spout talking points. All women are afforded equal protection. Show me how they are being denied, I challenge you. This isn't the 1800's anymore, Ben.

Law has no control of whether you are a man or a woman. The law cannot make two unique individuals the same.The law cannot mandate that a woman be completely equal with her male counterparts, unless our code is some sort of magic spellbook that can turn women into men... or something. Anyhow, the law should work independent from the practice of identity politics. Your quest is not one of equality, but of vengeance and hatred. You wish to raise women to a higher status than men, not to an equal status.

I think a woman should be free to get any education she can afford, master and any job that she wants and can do, and if she works the same hours as a man at the same competency level, get equal pay. You still haven't identified what your "bitch" is.

In any given job, women work fewer hours a year due to greater absenteeism.

Pay is pretty much equal, hours worked, not.

Not universally true. Some women work more, some less. Each woman should have the freedom to choose her course. And, if that's feminism, I'm for it. If we're just saying females should get the same pay as males per job classification, then I'm against it.

 

[ricechickie]

Progressives think that women are sub-level. A lower type.

Ummm....I think you might have got that a little backwards!!

Try reading the comments again, and maybe it will be a little clearer....!

No, it's clear to me and every other thinking person.

Progressives devalue females, and they devalue the one thing that makes females special..their ability to bear children. They devalue the children of single women altogether...a child is deemed worthless to a progressive if there is no father in the picture..yet at the same time, they encourage women to engage in sexual relationships outside of marriage, the result of which is single parenthood. You jeer at and attack females who embrace motherhood and wifehood...you demean and mock them as stupid if they dare to be proud of those roles.

We know who devalues women and sees them as a lower class..and who works hard to keep them subservient.

This is what I disagree with - that the ability to bear children makes me so "special."

Bearing children is the part women play in reproduction, but it's only one half of the equation.

And what I've done since having my babies - like raising them to be great people - is more important.

 

[bendog]

Progressives think that women are sub-level. A lower type.

Ummm....I think you might have got that a little backwards!!

Try reading the comments again, and maybe it will be a little clearer....!

No, it's clear to me and every other thinking person.

Progressives devalue females, and they devalue the one thing that makes females special..their ability to bear children. They devalue the children of single women altogether...a child is deemed worthless to a progressive if there is no father in the picture..yet at the same time, they encourage women to engage in sexual relationships outside of marriage, the result of which is single parenthood. You jeer at and attack females who embrace motherhood and wifehood...you demean and mock them as stupid if they dare to be proud of those roles.

We know who devalues women and sees them as a lower class..and who works hard to keep them subservient.

This is what I disagree with - that the ability to bear children makes me so "special."

Bearing children is the part women play in reproduction, but it's only one half of the equation.

And what I've done since having my babies - like raising them to be great people - is more important.

Sure, but more men are caring for kids at home with the mothers working. People should be free of gender typing at work and at home so they can live their lives to their fullest extent.

Not that I'd care to be home with a kid for more than a weekend. (-:

 

[ricechickie]

Sure, but more men are caring for kids at home with the mothers working. People should be free of gender typing at work and at home so they can live their lives to their fullest extent.

Not that I'd care to be home with a kid for more than a weekend. (-:

Personally, I think if a couple decides (or even if they haven't decided, but it just happens) to have kids, one should be able to stay home for at least the first 3 years. To me, that is the perfect parenthood scenario.

I just don't happen to think that it HAS to be the mother.