Not once did I say "I don't need a man". In fact I have said repeatedly here that my husband is a fantastic father and I would not want to go it alone. I also in no way blamed single motherhood on fathers who leave. What I was blaming was the situation AFEH mentioned in that he blamed the women for being single parents and said nothing about the 1MM+ men who failed to support their children.
Do you really believe that a single mother with no means to support herself, yet choosing to have 5 kids from 5 different fathers, is acting in a mature and responsible way? That is what AFEH wrote.
If you set your sites on the fathers when casting your blame, as you have already done, you might want to seriously reconsider how badly that woman would have incentive to marry a man. Especially one that had a more mature sense of responsibility and stability than her own.
I think that there are also many women anymore who see marriage as a bad deal. I'm sure that there are many women who wonder why they would need a man to take care of when the woman can just as easily and perhaps more happily take care of just herself. It is interesting that statistically, women after divorce are much happier than men after divorce, are more willing to file for divorce, and are more willing to stay unmarried (by choice) after divorce.
I think part of it is a shift in what is considered important for each party to bring to a marriage. No longer can a man simply bring financial security and no longer can a woman simply bring sex and nurturing. BOTH men and women now need to bring a much greater bag of relational skills to a marriage.
I also think that men are having a hard time (some women too maybe) when a woman is pulled off of the virtuous pedestal she had been placed upon in generations past. When you have believed that women are naturally more monogamous, believe that women are somehow better morally than to cheat, or believe that women have a more naturally conservative sexuality, and you actually find out that women are in fact more like men that you would have ever thought (in that none of those beliefs is actually truth), a little bit of the fairy tale dies and disillusionment in women and marriage sets in. It is some of the same disillusionment women have perhaps had about marriage, but often had little choice, until recently, to do anything about.
This is essentially what I am getting at. One has to weigh putting their future in the hands of another, whether male or female. Finding faults in your partner and creating drama is encouraged instead of accepting our partner's flaws and moving on with things, because, of course, the grass is greener. And this is a sad indictment of society today. I don't have rose-colored glasses about the way things were in the past, but I do make it a point to speak with the older generations and ask them point blank, "Were people happier 'back in the day?'" A lot of the times the answer is yes. Sure, there was less information and visibility into how people act as there is today with the speed of connectivity and social networking, et al; there were less options in regards to opportunity or flexibility, either when dealing with societal and behavioral issues to economic and familial (in regards to the law). And yes, a lot the "goings on" were kept hidden behind closed doors and now they are not.
It is tough because modern life requires a ton of flexibility and having a relationship or even kids does take, as you say, a "much greater bag of relational skills to a marriage." We know that 50 - 60 percent of people today do not have what it takes to pull off a lifetime commitment.
But again, if neither side is willing to engage the other, it does not bode well for your children's future, whether you are a feminist or an alpha male. We reward bad behavior: it's so "cool" and "fun" to not be responsible. Political correctness gone wild.
Women are choosing to remain single in droves too. What incentive does she have to marry? None.
Right, and she'll never be getting a baby and 18 years+ of child support and/or alimony. You are on your own and I hope it is all it was cracked up to be for you.
Right, and she'll never be getting a baby and 18 years+ of child support and/or alimony. You are on your own and I hope it is all it was cracked up to be for you.
Uh, she can adopt/use a sperm donor and support that child on her own. Where does that leave men?
Males are not being raised to be real men. I get SICK when I see the mothers of my male students just cater to them and really baby them (they're 11). They have no responsibilities in the home and they are treated like little princes.
This is no way to raise a man.
Sorry for the mini-hijack, but in what ways do you see catering from parents? My kids are getting to that age, would love to hear your perspective so I might learn something.
Getting blamed for not supporting their kids when things go wrong.
Nobody is doing that. BOTH parents are at fault when things go wrong. AFEH didn't mention that part though, he just focused on single mothers raising yobs and not a peep about the men who left.
Because what you were stating about entitlements, etc., is not what feminism is/was about. Now it gets blamed for everything by people who don't understand anything about it.
Systems of thought fail all of the time and it's past time we admit feminism is one of them. Noble cause for a select group of women ages ago that has wreaked havoc on the social fabric for a long time. We should move on and rebuild this once great nation. And make no mistake, what is going on today is a structural issue and as has been stated by a few other posters here, it is going to take a very long time to correct it, if that is even possible.
I don't mean to pick on you, Ian, but I do find it ironic that you brought up this point as, ummm, the industry you are associated with is well-known for objectifying women and portraying them in only a sexual light. As you said here, it just gets painful after awhile for one sex to be seen in such a singular dimension. Now, I hope, perhaps you can understand some of the objections many of the women have made regarding that topic. They are no different than the objection that you have stated here.
Actually, there are some key and important differences:
Porn is not shown on prime-time TV where it can be absorbed by millions of impressionable minds. It is a highly regulated, highly-restricted genre of entertainment designed for one primary purpose: to induce an erotic response. Sitcoms, of course, are designed to induce a humorous response (at which they don't particularly excel) in a much wider-ranging audience.
Secondly, in no way does porn attempt to portray itself as anything other than fantasy. Most sitcoms make a point of showing a "typical American family", and try to establish themselves as mainstream from the outset.
Thirdly, porn objectifies men and women equally. Sitcoms decidedly do not. Men are the preponderant butt of jokes on sitcoms since 1970. One study that I read in an entertainment industry journal (this was about three, four years ago, and I can't remember which one or which issue, so I'll understand if you discount this) showed an analysis of scripts of 120 sitcoms in the US, Canada and the UK where the male lead was the butt of the joke over 70% of the time, with an average of like 12 gags per episode. Women got by with just 4.
So while I agree that it may seem ironic that I would bring that up, the real irony is that someone within my industry would even attempt to post on this forum, in this topic, much less attempt to have an informed debate about it.
Actually, there are some key and important differences:
Porn is not shown on prime-time TV where it can be absorbed by millions of impressionable minds. It is a highly regulated, highly-restricted genre of entertainment designed for one primary purpose: to induce an erotic response. Sitcoms, of course, are designed to induce a humorous response (at which they don't particularly excel) in a much wider-ranging audience.
Secondly, in no way does porn attempt to portray itself as anything other than fantasy. Most sitcoms make a point of showing a "typical American family", and try to establish themselves as mainstream from the outset.
Thirdly, porn objectifies men and women equally. Sitcoms decidedly do not. Men are the preponderant butt of jokes on sitcoms since 1970. One study that I read in an entertainment industry journal (this was about three, four years ago, and I can't remember which one or which issue, so I'll understand if you discount this) showed an analysis of scripts of 120 sitcoms in the US, Canada and the UK where the male lead was the butt of the joke over 70% of the time, with an average of like 12 gags per episode. Women got by with just 4.
So while I agree that it may seem ironic that I would bring that up, the real irony is that someone within my industry would even attempt to post on this forum, in this topic, much less attempt to have an informed debate about it.
Ian, is it possible, just remotely even possible for you to NOT reduce a thread down to porn?
Re: Feminism.... 
