# Feminism: Has it gone too far?



## Gratitude

Have women lost respect for men in the last 50 years?

Have women gone overboard in the notion of feminism? 

Men, do you feel your wife respects you as the man of the house? Do you believe you are the man of the house? Or do you feel she is overbearing and talks down to you?

Women, do you treat your man like the man of the house? Do you believe he is the leader of your household? If he says yes and you say no, will you do whatever you want anyway, regardless of his word? If he says 'I'm the leader of this household and I'm putting my foot down', would you let him?


----------



## Jellybeans

Feminism means equality so no I don't think equality is "going too far."


----------



## Gratitude

Jellybeans said:


> Feminism means equality so no I don't think equality is "going too far."


Has the role of the "man" become diminished. Because women can now work and have the equality, does that mean men are no longer the leader of the house? Men used to have the authority in the household. They were the providers, the protectors, the head of the family. Now it's equal. And that's good in some aspects. But has it taken away the man's role and definition?


----------



## HazelGrove

My husband is not the leader of the household, because we have an equal partnership and take decisions together. I respect him as a human being (and a lovely one at that), and he respects me as a human being too. He's always supported women's rights, this isn't even an issue between us. He has a 20-year old daughter, that makes him even more supportive of feminism. Sure we have our tiffs - we are both quite verbal and independent-minded - but that doesn't alter respect. Nor does it stop the fact that we relate to each other as man and woman, sexually and emotionally. We are not clones of each other, rather, we are complementary. At the moment we are going through some very challenging times, but that's life - we have to face them together. 

I went through a stage, in the first few months of marriage (we've been married a year), when I felt disempowered - this is my only marriage, and I am over 40. This caused some tension between us. But I was able to talk to him about my feelings, and he understood and has been supportive - eventually I got over this feeling. In turn, he has shared some of his worries and troubles, and I've tried to be supportive to him. In my view, this kind of openness and support in the face of doubts and insecurities is far more important than having some skewered idea of a man being a household leader.


----------



## HazelGrove

Gratitude said:


> Has the role of the "man" become diminished. Because women can now work and have the equality, does that mean men are no longer the leader of the house? Men used to have the authority in the household. They were the providers, the protectors, the head of the family. Now it's equal. And that's good in some aspects. But has it taken away the man's role and definition?


It has changed the role of men from that of 'authority' and effectively the sole adult in a household (because women were infantilised) to that of companion, partner and friend: and you know, that's far more important and necessary - and challenging. It takes courage to share responsibility and decision-making, yet remain fully oneself. Men who take to that new role are still men - in evolutionary terms, still 'hunters' to the bone...but they put that masculinity to the service of a partnership, they don't use it to be boss. Alas, some have given up and become irresponsible, while others still long for the bad old days and are control freaks.


----------



## Gratitude

My husband works long hours away for us, and lets me handle the money and the decisions. He asks me if he can buy something, or do something first. 

He says to my mother and his mother if they try to come in and tell him what to do that he is the leader of the house and it is his decision. He needs to feel that he is the king of his castle, the man of the house, but doesn't act that way by being dominant or giving orders.

I have no problem with men being the king of their castle or the man of the house. Men have for years provided for women and protected them. Women can now do both themselves. But I don't want to take away from a man something that makes him feel worthwhile and respected (some men don't feel this need granted).

I'm not a radical feminist. I want my man to protect me, I can't do it alone. I don't want women playing in our football or commentating (AFL professional). Let the men have something to keep them men! I want to say to my husband 'can you take care of this'. I don't think women need to go do everything a man does. We are different for a reason.


----------



## Jellybeans

Gratitude said:


> I don't want to take away from a man something that makes him feel worthwhile and respected (some men don't feel this need granted).


Then don't--in your marriage. 



Gratitude said:


> . I don't want women playing football.


Whether someone plays a sport or not is really none of your business. Live and let live.



Gratitude said:


> I want to say to my husband 'can you take care of this'. I don't think women need to go do everything a man does. We are different for a reason.


Then if that is how you feel, use that in your marriage.


----------



## Gratitude

I was asking for different view points, not just mine pulled apart.


----------



## bubbly girl

Gratitude said:


> My husband works long hours away for us, and lets me handle the money and the decisions. He asks me if he can buy something, or do something first.
> 
> He says to my mother and his mother if they try to come in and tell him what to do that he is the leader of the house and it is his decision. He needs to feel that he is the king of his castle, the man of the house, but doesn't act that way by being dominant or giving orders.
> 
> I have no problem with men being the king of their castle or the man of the house. Men have for years provided for women and protected them. Women can now do both themselves. But I don't want to take away from a man something that makes him feel worthwhile and respected (some men don't feel this need granted).
> 
> I'm not a radical feminist. I want my man to protect me, I can't do it alone. I don't want women playing football. I want to say to my husband 'can you take care of this'. I don't think women need to go do everything a man does. We are different for a reason.


Yes, my husband is head of the household. I see nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean he doesn't value me or treats me as I'm beneath him. 

As he's said, if there was an emergency or some sort of disaster, he would be the one to take control and protect the rest of the family. What kind of man would he be if he hid behind me? That, he says, is what makes him head of the household.

I'm perfectly happy with the dynamics of our family. My husband and I have different roles, but each is just as important and valued by the other.


----------



## Jellybeans

Gratitude said:


> I was asking for different view points, not just mine pulled apart.


And I gave you a different viewpoint.


----------



## CandieGirl

Bleah. I always get sh!t for my opinions on the subject, but yes, it's gone too far, IMO. We wanted equality, and we've got it, thanks to all those bra-burners in the 1960's. Are we really any better off?


----------



## HazelGrove

Yes, it is important to many men to feel they are able to provide for their families. I honour that - and I honour it in my own husband. I like to feel I'm making a cosy home. But I don't feel that changes anything to the partnership, or to the balance of power. We are interdependent, there is no leader/follower paradigm between us. We're both educated professionals, with our own activities and passions. Recently, he's had some work trouble, which has severely cut his income (he's self-employed) - that makes him feel bad, and so I'm being especially supportive, I know he hates the situation. But this pain is not due to his home life: it's due to his work situation. For his sake - and for the knock-on effect it has on our partnership, which has been quite important - I hope he can resolve it.


----------



## Jellybeans

HazelGrove said:


> Yes, it is important to many men to feel they are able to provide for their families. I honour that - and I honour it in my own husband. I like to feel I'm making a cosy home. But I don't feel that changes anything to the partnership, or to the balance of power.


:smthumbup:


----------



## HazelGrove

CandieGirl said:


> Bleah. I always get sh!t for my opinions on the subject, but yes, it's gone too far, IMO. We wanted equality, and we've got it, thanks to all those bra-burners in the 1960's. Are we really any better off?


For my part, yes! I feel much better off than the women of the 1950s! I am a professional, a free woman, and I am in a happy relationship with a good man. What's not to like? 

I am so proud of the women of my mother's generation, who were tireless in obtaining equality. And I honour the men who loved and supported them, as my father did.


----------



## Gratitude

CandieGirl said:


> Bleah. I always get sh!t for my opinions on the subject, but yes, it's gone too far, IMO. We wanted equality, and we've got it, thanks to all those bra-burners in the 1960's. Are we really any better off?


It's ok when I posted this I was like yep, set yourself up for the firing squad!!! Lol


----------



## FirstYearDown

Feminism has not gone too far. It is just that the original intention of feminism has been twisted by extremist man haters. 

Now it is almost verboten for a woman to admit that she wants protection from a man and trusts him enough to lead her. Feminism was supposed to be about choices, but the crazy feminazis made only a few choices acceptable in society. Many women have given me a hard time about taking my husband's surname or the fact that I enjoy cooking for him.

I don't care what anyone says. I was honored to become my husband's wife and taking his surname is one way I chose to show my commitment to the marriage. I take pleasure in doing things to make him happy and I need my husband in my life.

I feel so sad when I see that men are almost afraid to open a door for a woman or give up a seat.  All in the name of "Feminism".


----------



## This is me

FYD....Nice location!


----------



## Jellybeans

Haha! FirstYear is in an igloo.  



FirstYearDown said:


> Feminism has not gone too far. It is just that the original intention of feminism has been twisted by extremist man haters.


:iagree: 

I also think that a lot of people get the definition of what it even means and think it's this horrible/crazy/negative thing -- equality.


----------



## Gratitude

FirstYearDown said:


> Feminism has not gone too far. It is just that the original intention of feminism has been twisted by extremist man haters.
> 
> Now it is almost verboten for a woman to admit that she wants protection from a man and trusts him enough to lead her. Feminism was supposed to be about choices, but the crazy feminazis made only a few choices acceptable in society. Many women have given me a hard time about taking my husband's surname or the fact that I enjoy cooking for him.
> 
> I don't care what anyone says. I was honored to become my husband's wife and taking his surname is one way I chose to show my commitment to the marriage. I take pleasure in doing things to make him happy and I need my husband in my life.
> 
> I feel so sad when I see that men are almost afraid to open a door for a woman or give up a seat.  All in the name of "Feminism".


I feel like cheering! Lol. Very well put.


----------



## FirstYearDown

Thanks, This Is Me. I was just poking fun at American stereotypes of Canadians. 

When I have visited the U.S, people have _actually _asked me if all Canadians live in igloos or have cell phones.


----------



## okeydokie

i grew up in the middle of the feminist movement. i have been taught (conditioned) to respect women and equality. however, i still cant cuss around them or tell man jokes in their presence for fear of harrassment charges, i still cant go into their locker rooms for interviews even though they are welcome into mine and then they are allowed to make a big deal out of seeing a naked man in said lockerroom, i am still subjected to women who want to power play their gender and use it for gain because they can but when they need help they can play the helpless female card and get what they need, i am still advised on how to man up but dont be overbearing and to make a woman feel good about herself and to elevate her self esteem to keep the peace and the piece.

girls becoming BOY scouts, jeez


----------



## Agast84

At times I can see many forces going against each other. It is a very interesting question that is posed here.
I try to treat everyone at an individual basis. Equality is what we should aim for in our relationships/marriages. My mother for all purposes I would call a feminist, however she maintains a very traditional sense of woman/mother that I feel is very appealing in a broader sense.
I respect women in a very deep way, so much so, I can't properly put it into words. However, I will not let a woman tell me what I am good at based on my gender, nor will I be bullied. 
For example, my m-i-l would constantly make comments about what I should do around the house. In her mind I should do repairs, build, ect, as well as child-rearing, cooking and cleaning(I prefer the later to be honest. I also had a fulltime job and was in school). In other words everything by myself. She constantly made fun of me in passive aggressive ways for this, though I was constantly prevented from doing "man things". This explains my ex so much, though she was different, she rarely said negative things. 
I think we as people should avoid defining ourselves along a spectrum of misogyny at one extreme and misandry at another. Do what makes you happy and find a partner you can agree with or compromise with.


----------



## CandieGirl

Feminists have created men like my youngest son's father. He is second generation 'sit-on-my-ass-and-let-the-woman-earn-a-living'. His father was the same way - he let his wife support the family, and she is still doing it, long after his death, supporting her lazy arsed son. There was a time when a man would feel shame for lazing around letting a woman earn the money; not anymore.

Blast away if you like, I don't care, this is after all only my opinion; women shouldn't be cops, firefighters or priests either!

Rrraaaa ha ha ha haaaa haaa (evil laugh)


----------



## Gratitude

And to clarify about women playing football for example, over here AFL is an all male league (as I imagine other professional sports are over there). They tried to introduce a female commentator and an umpire, which didn't go down too well. If a woman wants to play football, they have their OWN leagues over here too. But some women criticise and want to cross over into the AFL teams with the men and I don't see why they have to jump on everything the man does exclusively and be a part of it, as it's good for them to have something for themselves.


----------



## Gratitude

FirstYearDown said:


> When I have visited the U.S, people have _actually _asked me if all Canadians live in igloos or have cell phones.


People still think Australians get around on kangaroos and hunt crocodiles in our spare time


----------



## Agast84

FirstYearDown said:


> Feminism has not gone too far. It is just that the original intention of feminism has been twisted by extremist man haters.
> 
> Now it is almost verboten for a woman to admit that she wants protection from a man and trusts him enough to lead her. Feminism was supposed to be about choices, but the crazy feminazis made only a few choices acceptable in society. Many women have given me a hard time about taking my husband's surname or the fact that I enjoy cooking for him.
> 
> I don't care what anyone says. I was honored to become my husband's wife and taking his surname is one way I chose to show my commitment to the marriage. I take pleasure in doing things to make him happy and I need my husband in my life.
> 
> I feel so sad when I see that men are almost afraid to open a door for a woman or give up a seat.  All in the name of "Feminism".


:iagree:


----------



## shy_guy

Jellybeans said:


> Feminism means equality so no I don't think equality is "going too far."


That is a quick, pat answer, but that does not answer the question of whether or not feminism has gone too far, and part of the reason it doesn't answer the question is that it assumes this is the reality of what happens.

OP, at home, I partner with my wife and expect she is an equal partner. There are some things that she makes decisions on, and some I make decisions on, and some where both people's input are required. We are different positions on the same team, and we are equal.

At work, there is discrimination against men in a number of areas from providing training to women with no equivalent to men to implied quotas that managers really do fear that bring less qualified women on the job, then give them the extra training that is not available to men. In colleges, 60% of all degrees are now earned by women, and nobody seems to think it that's a problem, but it was a huge problem when the numbers were reversed. In areas such as computer science and engineering, men still outnumber women by a large number, but by selection - women outnumber men in all other fields by a large number and there simply aren't enough women left who are interested in these fields. Instead of respecting the selection of preferences, efforts are put in place to recruit more women into these fields (I would HATE to be recruited into a career path that I didn't truly enjoy, BTW). And when things such as laws that prevent discrimination in training offered on the job based on gender are called out to legislators or employers, the answer is that the intent of the law was to prevent discrimination against groups that have historically experienced discrimination. (So really, a law that says the employer can't discriminate on the basis of gender is twisted to mean that an employer must discriminate on the basis of gender). 

The irony of the OTJ situation is that many of the men there have women at home who depend on them as primary or sole breadwinners for the family. It doesn't seem to matter, though.

So someone can throw out that "Feminism means equality" and I will agree that is what it should mean, but that's not the practical implementation these days. But OP, at home, my wife is an equal partner, and in fact, I tend to put her on the pedestal to take care of her first.


----------



## okeydokie

Gratitude said:


> And to clarify about women playing football for example, over here AFL is an all male league (as I imagine other professional sports are over there). They tried to introduce a female commentator and an umpire, which didn't go down too well. If a woman wants to play football, they have their OWN leagues over here too. But some women criticise and want to cross over into the AFL teams with the men and I don't see why they have to jump on everything the man does exclusively and be a part of it, as it's good for them to have something for themselves.


very few woman will ever be the physical equal of men when it comes to certain professional sports. football, i doubt there are many women who can take the physical abuse brian urlacher can dish out. golf, women play much shorter courses for a reason. baseball, dont see it. nba, never


----------



## Lovebug501

_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## CandieGirl

FirstYearDown said:


> Thanks, This Is Me. I was just poking fun at American stereotypes of Canadians.
> 
> When I have visited the U.S, people have _actually _asked me if all Canadians live in igloos or have cell phones.


For any Americans with a sense of humour, check out Rick Mercer's "Talking to Americans".

Rick Mercer - Talking To Americans - YouTube

LMAO!


----------



## CrazyGuy

Jellybeans said:


> Feminism means equality so no I don't think equality is "going too far."


Even the word FEMinism implies a group and excludes half the human race. I do not think it is about being equal. I also think it is filled with man haters. Main speakers at feminist events are often the radical man hater types. You do not see the term Gayism, Africanism but certainly in the past or currently those are or where about equal rights.

That said my wife is not a feminist but... She likes to control everything. Everything is a power struggle. She goes out and buys stuff we cant afford. We argue how our son should be raised. My goals are unimportant to her. So no, I do not think she respects me. 

But when the crap hits the fan then I have to bail us out. When "her car" got stolen I had to deal with the insurance company and police.

As for equal rights, I can not wait for the day when the woman next door can mow her grass with no top on.


----------



## Agast84

Gratitude said:


> People still think Australians get around on kangaroos and hunt crocodiles in our spare time


The television show "SWAMP PEOPLE" does not do much for people that live in my part of the US.:rofl:


----------



## COguy

I'm of the opinion that men and women should share the same fundamental rights. The right to work, the right to own property, the right to live without being harassed or oppressed. That being said, there are clearly differences between men and women.

I think trying to make men and women equal, or put them on the same level, diminishes the value in each sex's natural strengths.

Where I feel the failure of "feminism", is that it supplies that it is for women's equality, but in reality, it is just for the advancement of women.

If feminists ruled the world, women would have all the advantages of men but none of their weaknesses, like some sort of half-man half-vampire mutant. Feminists want all the advantages that men have had historically, but none of the problems. They don't want to be blackballed if accused of rape, or jailed for an offhand comment about domestic abuse, they don't want child custody to go 50/50 in favor of the father, they don't want it to be acceptable for a man to hit a woman if she initiated violence. They don't want their couches removed in the bathrooms, or breaks halted for "that time of the month". I don't hear any feminists insisting women are eligible for the draft, to be placed in the front line when the next world war happens.

If you REALLY want equality in every area, you have to accept all the sh*t that comes with it. If men and women were equal in everything, it would be socially acceptable to beat the piss out of a woman if she slapped you. Does anyone want to live in that world?


----------



## bubbly girl

FirstYearDown said:


> Thanks, This Is Me. I was just poking fun at American stereotypes of Canadians.
> 
> When I have visited the U.S, people have _actually _asked me if all Canadians live in igloos or have cell phones.


:lol:

I once had a woman from Indiana tell me she was shocked to find out we have grass in New Jersey. She thought it was all concrete.:scratchhead:

Yes, the entire state is void of all grass, trees, flowers, dirt. LOL

Duh. Yes we have grass! We have cities, suburbs, country...farms, orchards, beaches. LOL


----------



## Jellybeans

CrazyGuy said:


> As for equal rights, I can not wait for the day when the woman next door can mow her grass with no top on.


When I think of "equal rights," I don't think of it as "mowing the lawn topless." I think of it as political, economic, voting rights.


----------



## shy_guy

CrazyGuy said:


> As for equal rights, I can not wait for the day when the woman next door can mow her grass with no top on.


I know it's not what you're talking about, but you reminde me of something. I had an involved discussion with a friend a few weeks back about women breastfeeding in public. Personally, I think if she WANTS a place with privacy, she should be provided that. If she WANTS to cover up while breastfeeding in public, then no problem. If she WANTS to just feed her baby while shopping and doesn't feel a need to cover up or go to a private room, then that is NOT a problem - she's just using what God gave her to care for her baby exactly like she is equipped to care for that baby, and I don't think she should have to hide if she doesn't want to. My friend had a rather contorted (IMO) opinion to disagree with me on that ... I find it silly that public breast feeding is disturbing to some people ...


----------



## Jellybeans

COguy said:


> If men and women were equal in everything, it would be socially acceptable to beat the piss out of a woman if she slapped you. Does anyone want to live in that world?


Hell no. But it's also not acceptable to beat the piss of out a man if he slaps you. Abuse is never ok, and that ain't gender-specific.


----------



## Gratitude

shy_guy said:


> I know it's not what you're talking about, but you reminde me of something. I had an involved discussion with a friend a few weeks back about women breastfeeding in public. Personally, I think if she WANTS a place with privacy, she should be provided that. If she WANTS to cover up while breastfeeding in public, then no problem. If she WANTS to just feed her baby while shopping and doesn't feel a need to cover up or go to a private room, then that is NOT a problem - she's just using what God gave her to care for her baby exactly like she is equipped to care for that baby. My friend had a rather contorted (IMO) opinion to disagree with me on that ... I find it silly that public breast feeding is disturbing to some people ...


Breastfeeding in public ... I think that would end up being a whole other thread!!


----------



## HazelGrove

"Equal" doesn't mean we are all the same - either between genders or within a single gender. I get a bit fed up when everything is put down to gender. There are some nerdy men who hate sports and some athletic women who excel at them. Who is to say that they are not real men and women? I'm a better skier than many men I know, I've climbed mountains of 6000 metres, but I'm still small and I have an hour-glass figure, I love to dance and cook and do traditional woman things. We are individuals - to be stuck in some kind of 'role' is like being in a prison for life. We are more than a role, we are living, thinking, feeling human beings, men and women both. So what if some women earn a good living and some men stay at home to care for the kids? If it makes them happy, why not? I was brought up in a household where both my parents worked, and both made quality time for me and my sisters. We were taught independence and respect for other people, men and women. Theirs is a partnership that has lasted 46 years and counting, and is very much on an equal footing. Yet my father is still very much a A-type provider man, and my mother, a woman who loves her home and has turned it into a place of grace and beauty. They are that way because it makes them happy. 

With my husband, what matters is that we both feel we can be ourselves, and express who we are. My husband paints, I write, we both cook at different times, though I do so more often because I enjoy it so much. My husband is a fantastic handyman and I bless my lucky stars for that. But he loves that kind of thing. I can't hold a hammer. On the other hand, I am more intellectual and sporty than him. All this is part of our personalities, rather than our genders or our roles.


----------



## bubbly girl

What feminism what set out to be originally and what it has become today are two completely different things. So, yes, I do believe it has gone to far.

It doesn't matter that fem-nazi's aren't what feminism was originally about. It is what it's become. That's the problem.


----------



## FrankKissel

CandieGirl said:


> Feminists have created men like my youngest son's father. He is second generation 'sit-on-my-ass-and-let-the-woman-earn-a-living'. His father was the same way - he let his wife support the family, and she is still doing it, long after his death, supporting her lazy arsed son. There was a time when a man would feel shame for lazing around letting a woman earn the money; not anymore.
> 
> Blast away if you like, I don't care, this is after all only my opinion; women shouldn't be cops, firefighters or priests either!
> 
> Rrraaaa ha ha ha haaaa haaa (evil laugh)


Curious ... Why shouldn't a woman be a police officer, firefighter, religious leader, etc., assuming she is fully capable of doing the job (as many women have proven they are)?
Call me crazy, but denying someone a career on the basis of their sex and nothing else seems no better than doing it on the basis of one's race, ethnicity or faith.

And feminism doesn't create lazy men. Bad parenting and enabling women do.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## shy_guy

Gratitude said:


> Breastfeeding in public ... I think that would end up being a whole other thread!!


Agreed. I shouldn't have brought it into this thread. The post I was responding to wasn't really about that, and in fact was an attempt at humor. It just reminded me of this discussion with a friend. Sorry to bring that subject into this thread.


----------



## shy_guy

bubbly girl said:


> :lol:
> 
> I once had a woman from Indiana tell me she was shocked to find out we have grass in New Jersey. She thought it was all concrete.:scratchhead:
> 
> Yes, the entire state is void of all grass, trees, flowers, dirt. LOL
> 
> Duh. Yes we have grass! We have cities, suburbs, country...farms, orchards, beaches. LOL


It goes the other way as well. I live on the west coast, and have lived and worked outside the US as well. I grew up in the central part of the US. You should hear (from my perspective) the ridiculous stereotypes both from people on the coasts of the US and from people outside the US about people where I come from.


----------



## CandieGirl

FrankKissel said:


> Curious ... Why shouldn't a woman be a police officer, firefighter, religious leader, etc., assuming she is fully capable of doing the job (as many women have proven they are)?
> Call me crazy, but denying someone a career on the basis of their sex and nothing else seems no better than doing it on the basis of one's race, ethnicity or faith.
> 
> And feminism doesn't create lazy men. Bad parenting and enabling women do.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I'll clarify for you since I obviously wasn't clear enough.

THESE ARE MY OPINIONS ONLY - I AM AS ENTITLED TO THEM, AS YOU ARE TO CHALLENGE THEM.

And I reject your challenge. Bu-bye, Frank.


----------



## Gratitude

shy_guy said:


> Agreed. I shouldn't have brought it into this thread. The post I was responding to wasn't really about that, and in fact was an attempt at humor. It just reminded me of this discussion with a friend. Sorry to bring that subject into this thread.


I think it's great to find these subjects you can really get a discussion going with different opinions ... remember that one for a new thread next week!


----------



## Jellybeans

I don't think he was "challenging" you, CandieG. He was just asking why you think a woman shouldn't be in those professions.


----------



## Gratitude

COguy said:


> If you REALLY want equality in every area, you have to accept all the sh*t that comes with it.


:iagree:


----------



## CandieGirl

You're right JB. I'm just tired of (some) women thinking they have to insert themselves in any and all male roles. Just because they can.

Then he goes and blames bad parenting for lazy a$$ed men! Who was doing all the 'parenting' 50-60 years ago? "Ooooh, just wait til your father gets home!!", you got it, traditionally, the female. Men were out working while women stayed home taking care of kids/home. Feminism changed all that, *IMO*.


----------



## Runs like Dog

Men and women are in fact mentally and emotionally and physically different. That's just reality. Do those distinguishing characteristics make a material difference? Not usually, no they don't. Sometimes they do.


----------



## HazelGrove

FrankKissel said:


> Curious ... Why shouldn't a woman be a police officer, firefighter, religious leader, etc., assuming she is fully capable of doing the job (as many women have proven they are)?
> Call me crazy, but denying someone a career on the basis of their sex and nothing else seems no better than doing it on the basis of one's race, ethnicity or faith.


Well said. I don't understand denying anyone what they happen to be good at. The fact I'd make a lousy firefighter - too small and too weak - doesn't mean another woman wouldn't be fantastic at it. I know plenty of weedy men who'd be poor firefighters, but make good computer geeks :smthumbup:



FrankKissel said:


> And feminism doesn't create lazy men. Bad parenting and enabling women do.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Don't get me started with the mothers who've so indulged their sons, they have created self-indulgent permanent children. Add to that absentee fathers... 

Feminism absolves nobody from personal responsibility, not men and not women. Those who say otherwise are just using it as an excuse, whether they support it or oppose it.


----------



## CrazyGuy

Although my previous comment was stupid. A channel on my satellite tv had a program on it a few years ago. It was kind of a free speech channel. Most of the time it was a lot of stuff for the gay and lesbian community. Anybody that had some money could put up whatever they wanted. But one time I was flipping through the channels and they were doing a show about a bunch of girls that wanted to walk around the city topless. They thought it was unfair that guys can do this and not them. To prove the point one of the girls went out topless with a guy who also did not have a shirt on. The police showed up to give her a ticket for indecent exposure. In the end they let her off the hook if she put her shirt back on. Just saying that there are people out there that this actually is a concern.


----------



## chillymorn

FrankKissel said:


> Curious ... Why shouldn't a woman be a police officer, firefighter, religious leader, etc., assuming she is fully capable of doing the job (as many women have proven they are)?
> Call me crazy, but denying someone a career on the basis of their sex and nothing else seems no better than doing it on the basis of one's race, ethnicity or faith.
> 
> And feminism doesn't create lazy men. Bad parenting and enabling women do.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


the standared for women to be a police officer/fireman are different the the standards for a man.

they don't have to carry as much weight during their test and so forth. so in reality they are not as good at thoese particular vocations.


example: your on the secound floor of a burning building do you want to jump into a womans arms or a mans.

you are passed out in the same building do you want a woman TRYING to carry you out or a much physically supiorier male.


----------



## Mistys dad

Feminism is no different than many noble ideals.

At it's base is the thought of improvement in a society. Holding each other to higher standards and treating everyone with respect.

Then, a few opportunistic people hijack those ideals when they find an avenue for power, money or fame. The way to achieve those ends is to become more and more radical. They must always keep their individual names at the top of a once noble movement. They become self-appointed, media fed, "spokespersons".

In the end, the higher standards are lost among the radical, vitriolic rhetoric of the few.


----------



## FrankKissel

chillymorn said:


> the standared for women to be a police officer/fireman are different the the standards for a man.
> 
> they don't have to carry as much weight during their test and so forth. so in reality they are not as good at thoese particular vocations.
> 
> 
> example: your on the secound floor of a burning building do you want to jump into a womans arms or a mans.
> 
> you are passed out in the same building do you want a woman TRYING to carry you out or a much physically supiorier male.


Great. Now re-read my post, paying special attention to the part where I say so long as the woman is capable.

Oh, and I would venture to guess that if you are trapped or passed out in a burning building, you won't care a bit about the sex of your rescuer. You'll just be happy that someone is there to rescue you.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## HazelGrove

chillymorn said:


> example: your on the secound floor of a burning building do you want to jump into a womans arms or a mans.


Depends on the man and the woman...better a big woman than a weedy man, for that kind of work. 

Basically, anyone who can do a job and likes doing it should be admissible, regardless of gender. After all, we have some amazing male nurses, don't we?


----------



## that_girl

No, equality means equality. Most feministic (sp? even a word?) views are about man bashing and man hating.

I'm not a feminist. I don't believe men have to fall for women to be lifted up.


----------



## Kricket

I think there have been some much needed changes for women's rights as with all groups at some point in history.

Many have been a step forward for both men and women and some have been a step back for men. In some instances, a step back was needed. 

Do I think it went too far? Yes I do. I look around and see so many men that in lack of a better term need to "man-up". 

I do believe that a woman should be able to whatever profession that she wants unless her being there is somehow dangerous to others. The woman should be able to perform as well as any man on the team and not be a burden to the job or mission.

I will admit that female football commentators do annoy the hell out of me.


----------



## CWM0842

Feminism in terms of allowing women in the workplace, equal rights under the law, and so forth has not gone too far. However, the result has been that elements of society want to make men and women perfectly equal beings in every way. Obviously they are inherently unequal and this notion has done detrement to a number of things, mainly marriage, I think.

Before there were defined gender roles. While there are plenty of people now who can handle modified roles and/or easily fall into the old gender roles (disclaimer before people get angry I didn't acknowledge any exceptions- I am speaking in generalities and trends), there are also plenty that can't work this out and without society's assumption that the man is the man and the woman is the woman, it creates marital strife. 

Women's increasing presence in the workplace, while good in many respects (increased pool of ideas, different approaches to problems, making women less reliant on a man's income), I think has also undermined marriage in some ways (I am not saying marriage is the end-all, be-all component of society- there are reasons why having women in the workforce as much as men is good for society. Whether these outweigh the positive aspects of an easier pre-set and readily-followed structure for marriage is another debate). I think women's inherent biological instinct is to seek out a man of the best possible value/stock, or at least greater value/stock than herself- a man who will provide good offspring. While I realize it is much more complicated than that in the present day, I think the biological underpinning holds true. 

So, if women are of equal or greater stature in terms of career development, they are less likely to respect or seek out men who are only equal to them or below them in terms of career prospects. This not only narrows the pool of men that women would be content with and seek out as mates but can also result in marital difficulties for those already married if the woman does not respect the man's value. Why would the woman listen to her husband or his ideas at all at home if she's supervising men at work? I think some of the traits that women (and men) take on in the workplace that are positive in the workplace are bad traits in what the woman's role at home might be. 

While there are other ways that a man can show his value to the woman than just his career (or lack thereof), this just happens to be one of the easiest, most common, and most relevant variables in everyday life on which someone can be judged. And again, I am mainly speaking about what feminism's role in the workforce has been and how it has affected the institution of marriage, not the overall merits of feminism's role in the workforce and society.


----------



## chillymorn

FrankKissel said:


> Great. Now re-read my post, paying special attention to the part where I say so long as the woman is capable.
> 
> Oh, and I would venture to guess that if you are trapped or passed out in a burning building, you won't care a bit about the sex of your rescuer. You'll just be happy that someone is there to rescue you.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


pointing out that standards are different based on gender. if people don't know this they assume the standards are the same.

capablle to which standard.

and my point about if passed out is that I want some one who can actually safe me because they a strong enough.


----------



## bubbly girl

chillymorn said:


> the standared for women to be a police officer/fireman are different the the standards for a man.
> 
> they don't have to carry as much weight during their test and so forth. so in reality they are not as good at thoese particular vocations.
> 
> 
> example: your on the secound floor of a burning building do you want to jump into a womans arms or a mans.
> 
> you are passed out in the same building do you want a woman TRYING to carry you out or a much physically supiorier male.


I could be wrong, but I think it's very rare that women are firefighters. I saw a show on it a few years ago, and unless things have changed, the women had to be able to do the same things the men were capable of in order to get in. It was for the reasons you mentioned. I think they had to be able to carry a 200 lb man down a flight of stairs as one of the requirements. 

Female police officers do have lesser requirements in the physical test than men, but I do think there is a necessity for them. In cases of questioning a rape victim, for instance. A woman who has just been raped by a man is going to be much more comfortable and feel safer speaking to a woman than a man. Women are known to be more nurturing than most men, plus even if a woman has never been raped, she can relate on some level the fear of a man overpowering her and hurting her. We've spent our lives being careful when we're out alone.

That being said, I believe it's the differences in males and females that make it important for there to be female cops, not because they are the same or equal in physical strength. It's for opposite reasons than the "women can do anything a man can do" mentality.

Men and women are different in many aspects and I think the differences complement each other. I don't think a woman should be exactly like a man or a man just like a woman.


----------



## FrankKissel

chillymorn said:


> pointing out that standards are different based on gender. if people don't know this they assume the standards are the same.
> 
> capablle to which standard.
> 
> and my point about if passed out is that I want some one who can actually safe me because they a strong enough.


Are you assuming that a woman can't be strong enough to pull you out a building?
The standards can be (not always) different, but so long as they're both set to ensure the person is capable, that's fine with me. The reality is there are very few women firefighters (only about 2.5 percent nationwide) because the standards are set so high - even for women - that most women who try can't pass them. And those who do pass them are fully capable of dragging a normal person out of a building.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## chillymorn

FrankKissel said:


> Are you assuming that a woman can't be strong enough to pull you out a building?
> The standards can be (not always) different, but so long as they're both set to ensure the person is capable, that's fine with me. The reality is there are very few women firefighters (only about 2.5 percent nationwide) because the standards are set so high - even for women - that most women who try can't pass them. And those who do pass them are fully capable of dragging a normal person out of a building.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


as we are talking equality and what feminism means I think that woman should have to pass the exact same standards that men do in evey situation.

even in the service they give women lesser jobs with less danger that dosn't seem like equality to me that seem like special rights not equal rights.


yes there are a small % if women who can handle thease types of vocations but a a rather large cost and some ramafications.

as in the fire house situation now every firehouse needs a male dressing room and a female dressing room at the cost to the tax payer. by your own figures less that 2.5 % even can make it.

all in the name of equality which we all know isn't every equal.


----------



## CrazyGuy

In my job as a man I have actually been sexually harassed by female managers. I ignored it though, nothing would have come from it. I worked with a bunch of feminazi's.

What got me though is the class we had to take every year about sexual harassment.(female always taught it) She also demonstrated on me the inappropriate places you should not touch. I found it odd that she could put her hands all over me in this demonstration. It was also made clear the perspective for evaluating a claim of sexual harassment is that of the reasonable WOMAN and not A REASONABLE PERSON. This is the law in the U.S. If you do not believe me Google it.


----------



## Runs like Dog

In Russia there's virtually no difference between the roles of men and women. Partly out of necessity from the vast death of WW2 partly because they did not find there were any meaningful differences. About the only roles where women are steered away from are Military Special Forces and mobile armor (Tank Corps). The Soviet Army had 2,000 women snipers. The Soviet Air Force had thousands of women combat pilots and aircrew.


----------



## FirstYearDown

Jellybeans said:


> Hell no. But it's also not acceptable to beat the piss of out a man if he slaps you. Abuse is never ok, and that ain't gender-specific.


Abuse is never okay, but self defense sure is in my world.

A woman slapped me across the face once. I beat the crap out of her and I have no remorse because she struck first.


----------



## Complexity

I don't think feminism has gone too far, I think men have been progressively emasculated. I was raised by my mother and have 2 sisters, I can never be in a relationship with a feminist though.


----------



## FirstYearDown

I have noticed that most militant feminists are either unhappily single or struggling with their marriages.

No man can get along with a woman that makes every issue a power struggle, all because of "feminism."


----------



## Lydia

Anyone who thinks feminism has gone too far should open a book and learn what feminism truly is. And don't go by your crazy 'feminist' friend who has had a few bad experiences with men, so now thinks they're all evil.

Additionally, this website has a lot of great info pertaining to women's rights: Women From developed nations to third world countries, it discusses how women are NOT equal as well as provides what FEMINISM really means.

Women's football league? I really couldn't care less. I prefer to be paid equally and treated equal to my male counterparts.

So no, I do not think feminism has gone too far.

I am actually really saddened to read this thread and see a sample of what a joke the majority of people think feminism is. 

(Why can't you be in a relationship with a FEMINIST, aka someone who thinks women should be treated equally the same as men?)


----------



## okeydokie

Lydia said:


> Anyone who thinks feminism has gone too far should open a book and learn what feminism truly is. And don't go by your crazy 'feminist' friend who has had a few bad experiences with men, so now thinks they're all evil.
> 
> Additionally, this website has a lot of great info pertaining to women's rights: Women From developed nations to third world countries, it discusses how women are NOT equal as well as provides what FEMINISM really means.
> 
> Women's football league? I really couldn't care less. I prefer to be paid equally and treated equal to my male counterparts.
> 
> So no, I do not think feminism has gone too far.
> 
> I am actually really saddened to read this thread and see a sample of what a joke the majority of people think feminism is.
> 
> (Why can't you be in a relationship with a FEMINIST, aka someone who thinks women should be treated equally the same as men?)


i havent seen one post that says women shouldnt be treated equally. it would be foolish to think women can do everything equal as a man can. just like it would be foolish to think men can give birth, nurse babies or look good in a sundress.


----------



## Gratitude

Lydia said:


> Anyone who thinks feminism has gone too far should open a book and learn what feminism truly is. And don't go by your crazy 'feminist' friend who has had a few bad experiences with men, so now thinks they're all evil.
> 
> Additionally, this website has a lot of great info pertaining to women's rights: Women From developed nations to third world countries, it discusses how women are NOT equal as well as provides what FEMINISM really means.
> 
> Women's football league? I really couldn't care less. I prefer to be paid equally and treated equal to my male counterparts.
> 
> So no, I do not think feminism has gone too far.
> 
> I am actually really saddened to read this thread and see a sample of what a joke the majority of people think feminism is.
> 
> (Why can't you be in a relationship with a FEMINIST, aka someone who thinks women should be treated equally the same as men?)


No one's arguing that feminism has not done some great things.

I have not heard anybody say it is a joke. The question is has it gone too far from the ideas and goals set out in the beginning.

And BTW my mother is a complete man hater. But she is NOT a feminist. She believes the roles of men and women are different for a reason and should remain that way. She doesn't let her personal feelings interfere with the values she believes in.


----------



## Gratitude

Women give birth, breastfeed, nurture and raise children.

They are emotionally different from men. We are built and programmed different.

I do not believe women should be allowed to fight in wars. What are they trying to prove? They do not have the upper body stregth of men. Men for years have been fighting in wars to protect the women and children, and now women want to go out there and stand in the firing line to get blown up. 

War (combat) is absolutely no place for a woman. I'm sure there'll be many people ready to shoot me down (no pun intended) but this is my opinion and thanks to the brave *men* of this country who fought for us I am allowed to express it freely today. 

I do not believe the men out there were fighting for their country, children and wives back home so one day their wife would be able to have the rights to go out there and fire a weapon and engage in combat with them. Men protect, women nurture. It has been the same for centuries. It's changing because women seem to think these roles are 'discrimination'. That's the roles we were designed for! Physically, mentally and emotionally.


----------



## Catherine602

OP I am interested in hearing what you think the ideal male friendly society would look like. Is your ideal the 17th, 18th or early 19th century? 

Think of a girl coming of age today. What should this young woman aspire to. How can she honor the male and make him feel good. What should she do with her ambition, intelligence drive and passion for other that sex with men of course. 

You know the answer to these question or you would not ask. 

So why don't you just tell the assemblage. 

If I were so inclined how sould I bring up my daughter? More than that why? What will society gain by this transition. What will society lose. It is obviously worth the sacrifice of women so it must be really important and vital. 

Please enlighten me. 

I'll tell you that I am weary of these feminist post. The notion that feminism is at the root of societies ills is wrong headed and simplistic. Feminism has become the excuse for failure, weakness, laziness and lack of ambition. Women are making wonderful contribution to every area of society. 

Their influence has especially been felt in the domestic violence front - there is prosecution of abusers, rapist and enforcement of child support. They hightened the awareness of society to issues that adversly affected the lives of women and children were pushed through against a great deal of resistence that still exist to this day. Do you think they should have suffered in silence and wait for men to see the light? 

Little girls can go where their ambitions take them. They can dream of being scientist, teachers, doctors, lawyers. They are not kept out of professions because they are women. They compete with men. Which of these would you want to turn back? 

Have you read any of the many autobiographical accounts of intelligent women with a burning desire to use the talents that God gave them but were locked into domestic life? They tell of lives of quiet desperation. What do you think? 


Did you know that in tge economic downturn that it was women working that kept many families afloat. Where were the antifeminist then. They should have been thanking their Maker for keeping thier children fed no matter what the source. Did you know that women added to the workforce has actually made the ecomonomy grow and that men have actually benefited from that growth? I' hope all those men raking in stock profits are not talking out of two sides of their mouths. 


I think the men who use feminism as an excuse for their failures at life are sadly mistaken about the root of their misery. They believe they are victims of women. Any man that would even think that is already behind the eight ball. He would have been successful in a society that keep women out of competition.

Competing against only one half of the American population will of course elevate a man with the most modest of talents. And there is the rub. With women competing, these men are up against more talent and their success or lack thereof is comiserate with their true talents. 

I don't see how any self respecting man would blame someone else for their problems. Aren't men strong, forceful, intelligent and in charge. Who would admit to being a wimp and being bested by a woman?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Gratitude

Catherine602 said:


> Think of a girl coming of age today. What should this young woman aspire to. How can she honor the male and make him feel good. What should she do with her ambition, intelligence drive and passion for other that sex with men of course.
> 
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Feminism has done some wonderful things. I've said it before and it's the last time I'm going to say it. Has it gone too far is the question? And that's the last time I'm going to say that too.

Ok I will think of a girl coming of age today - how about my daughter. This is what I am going to tell her: You can do anything you want. If you want to work, be a stay at home mum, whatever you want you can achieve.

Find a husband who is caring and supportive and looks after you. Protects you. Because that is his role. Makes sure you are safe.

Do not push yourself beyond your physical limits to prove yourself as better than any man. You do not need to. 

Thanks to feminism you now have a voice and more choice than women before you with what you want to do with your passion and ambitions. This is wonderful. Reach for the stars. If a man challenges you, stand your ground. But do not challenge men just for the sake of it. 

Do not enrol in the reserves with the aim of wanting to engage in combat. Do not take on jobs that require brute strength or where you are exposed to violence. Men are built for this physically and emotionally more than women so do not feel you need to prove anything. Let men be men.

You seem to be missing my point. Did I say women should sit at home being submissive and being dominated by their husbands? No. I am saying that men and women have different roles in life. Built for different things. Women do not need to take over everything a man does. Does everything have to be equal? Everything? I do not believe humans were designed for this. I believe men and women were given different qualities to utilise and work together with. 100 years ago too little respect for women? Now is there too little respect for men? Where is the middle.


----------



## DawnD

Gratitude said:


> I do not believe women should be allowed to fight in wars. What are they trying to prove? They do not have the upper body stregth of men. Men for years have been fighting in wars to protect the women and children, and now women want to go out there and stand in the firing line to get blown up.
> 
> War (combat) is absolutely no place for a woman. I'm sure there'll be many people ready to shoot me down (no pun intended) but this is my opinion and thanks to the brave *men* of this country who fought for us I am allowed to express it freely today.
> 
> I do not believe the men out there were fighting for their country, children and wives back home so one day their wife would be able to have the rights to go out there and fire a weapon and engage in combat with them. Men protect, women nurture. It has been the same for centuries. It's changing because women seem to think these roles are 'discrimination'. That's the roles we were designed for! Physically, mentally and emotionally.


 As a female veteran, it isnt' about PROVING anything. Its about feeling a sense of duty and dedication to your country.


----------



## Gratitude

DawnD said:


> As a female veteran, it isnt' about PROVING anything. Its about feeling a sense of duty and dedication to your country.


I understand that. My grandfather however felt that while women were great at many things associated with wars - combat should not be one of them. That is why I specifically said combat.


----------



## DawnD

Gratitude said:


> I understand that. My grandfather however felt that while women were great at many things associated with wars - combat should not be one of them. That is why I specifically said combat.


Then you should be very well informed of the fact that even support MOS's are exposed to combat with the types of war that go on today.


----------



## Catherine602

Do you really think a woman who pushes herself to her physical limits is doing so to prove she is better than a man! 

How did you come up with that notion? I pushed myself because that is what it takes to be successful at what I do. I chose my profession, I love doing it and I love success. That is why I push. I compete as all successful people do. 

I like to compete, if it is a gainst a man or woman. I have successes in a male dominated profession. And it was not because I was given any breaks, I had to work harder and be smarter and more crafty to out compete. 

I competed against and lost to many though talented women BTW. 

You have a problem with the way you are thinking. Are you certain you are not suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Are you siding with men because you want to curry thier favor and avoid their criticism. 

I have been called a feminist and man hater when I write what I think on this very site. I actually survived. Do you know why? I have a strong sense of myself. I think and express and read response and sometimes change my thinking. I engage with men and women who are secure enough to bear the musings of a woman who can think and match them word for word. 

The reactionary men and women are either traumatized or , have had a very hard time with bad men or women in their lives or tgey are chronically angry and frustrated and hate women because they can. I leave them alone. There is really no reason to be fearful of the wrath of men. I have been called ugly, fat, lonely, old i may be all of those but why should ugly fat old women be silent? 

Men with the same pysical traits are probably the first to throw that out. It's called projection. Dont let it bother you. Feel good about yourself no matter what you are. Don't hate but speak your mind with conviction and respect. Listen to other opinions and admit to being wrong if a convincing argument is presented. 

I don't hate men. In fact I'd rather have an exchange with a man who is verbal than talk to a chattering women about nothing. But that's me. I respect the ability of all people who reason and share.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Gratitude

Catherine602 said:


> You have a problem with the way you are thinking. Are you certain you are not suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Are you siding with men because you want to curry thier favor and avoid their criticism.
> 
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Do not tell me I have a problem with the way I am thinking or that I am siding with men to avoid criticism. That's ridiculous. This is my opinion, never once did I attack yours or point out things I don't agree with. 

Don't proceed to tell me how I think. This is a post about opinions and different perspectives, not attacking the ones YOU don't agree with


----------



## shy_guy

Catherine602 said:


> Do you really think a woman who pushes herself to her physical limits is doing so to prove she is better than a man!
> 
> How did you come up with that notion? I pushed myself because that is what it takes to be successful at what I do. I chose my profession, I love doing it and I love success. That is why I push. I compete as all successful people do.
> 
> I like to compete, if it is a gainst a man or woman. I have successes in a male dominated profession. And it was not because I was given any breaks, I had to work harder and be smarter and more crafty to out compete.


Catherine, I'm going to take you to task on this one. I'm also in one of those male dominated fields. Although there are many talented women in this field, there are many who are there because they get breaks, and they get promoted for the same reasons. There is no denying that. There ARE implied quotas that managers (especially male managers) fear, and they make concessions to get a certain number of females on their teams to show they are really "proactive" in promoting diversity.

On these jobs, there are training opportunities given to women that simply are not available to men. Do you have "Women's leadership councils" or "Women's leadership conferences" in your field/company? They are there specifically to build affinity and support groups based around women, and specifically to teach women how to compete successfully against others for promotion. Men are not given these training opportunities, and these are, in fact, things women benefit from. People look at it and pretend to not see it as discrimination because it is not politically expedient to see it as such, but I'm sorry, you cannot say this is not special or advantaged treatment. 

It's pretty much understood among men that when we are competing against a woman for a position in this industry, the man had better outshine that woman to the point that it would be embarassing to not give him the job because it is the woman's position to lose before it is the man's position to gain. There are some sharp women along the way, and it's not always possible to outshine someone that way. 




Catherine602 said:


> I competed against and lost to many though talented women BTW.
> 
> You have a problem with the way you are thinking. Are you certain you are not suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Are you siding with men because you want to curry thier favor and avoid their criticism.


Really? Is this your defense here? If someone disagrees with your position, do they have a syndrome?



Catherine602 said:


> I have been called a feminist and man hater when I write what I think on this very site. I actually survived. Do you know why? I have a strong sense of myself. I think and express and read response and sometimes change my thinking. I engage with men and women who are secure enough to bear the musings of a woman who can think and match them word for word.


And sometimes, it's because we just say "hmm" and move on.



Catherine602 said:


> The reactionary men are either frietened, have had a very hard time with bad women in their lives or tgey are chronically angry and frustrated and hate women because they can. I leave them alone. There is really no reason to be fearful of the wrath of men. I have been called ugly, fat, lonely, old i may be all of those but why should ugly fat old women be silent?


Once again, Catherine, huge generalizations about the men you are talking about. You cannot categorize and lump people together for the sake of an easy answer like that. It's intellectually lazy. I think you're of higher caliber than that.



Catherine602 said:


> Men with the same pysical traits are probably the first to throw that out. It's called projection. Dont let it bother you. Feel good about yourself no matter what you are. Don't hate but speak your mind with conviction and respect. Listen to other opinions and admit to being wrong if a convincing argument is presented.
> 
> I don't hate men. In fact I'd rather have an exchange with a man who is verbal than talk to a chattering women about nothing. But that's me. I respect the ability of all people who reason and share.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I'm going to hold you to your parting shot in this post.


----------



## Catherine602

Btw I am submissive in my marriage. Not because I am a woman but because it is me. Not all women are like me. I love to cook, see people eat and enjoy, I like a strong dominant man, I have a hard time relating to men or women who back down from me.

I transition from work mode to feminine role when I walk into my house. I feel protected by my husband even though I have been as successful as him up until recently. 

So you see it is not so black and white.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## shy_guy

Catherine602 said:


> Btw I am submissive in my marriage. Not because I am a woman but because it is me. Not all women are like me. I love to cook, see people eat and enjoy, I like a strong dominant man, I have a hard time relating to men or women who back down from me.
> 
> I transition from work mode to feminine role when I walk into my house. I feel protected by my husband even though I have been as successful as him up until recently.
> 
> *So you see it is not so black and white.*
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


*This* I agree with 100%. It really isn't always so black and white, and this is why a person cannot categorize and lump together the way you did in your previous post. People are individuals. We tend to categorize - I read that it was a survival instinct - but we tend to do this instead of taking people as individuals and evaluating them as such. It makes for easy answers when we categorize, but easy answers are seldom good answers.

So see, in your description of yourself, we can see many reasons why we should not categorize you with who you think we may categorize you with. It would be nice if you would give us the same consideration.


----------



## Catherine602

Shy I am in a profession that puts the lives of people in my hands. I am considered very talented at what I do. At the risk of sounding arrogant, I am better than most of the people who do what I do. How do I know? It is all in the outcome. My success is judged concretely - how well do the people I care for fare. 

I have met many men like you who question my abilities because I am a woman. They don't question a man ability. He is automatically accepted. I on the other hand must prove it. No matter how many times I show my talent, I am just as good as my last case. 

I'll bet you don't have to deal with that. Some times you see what you want to see. I have had men who actually have treated me as if I was a dunce. And I am smarter and more skillful they they are. They do something strange - they refuse to look and they take any error in speech or deed to prove their point. 

That is very demorilizing. They are not important to me but the stress is. I have succeeded against formidable odds it disturbs me that so many men justify their dislike of women based on biased thinking. 

Think again about your judgements about women and these support groups. Ask yourself why they make you think that it means these women are less than. 

Better yet Shy put your self in these women's shoes. Imagine walking into a workplace with a deficite that men don't have. How would you fare. I'll bet you would need a little extra support. 

Coupled with men prowling for something for nothing and you'd have issues too. If you are reasonably attractive expect some man in authority to try to take liberties. Sexual harrastment is common in the work place.

Do you have a daughter or DIL? I know you have seen the antics of some men in your work place how would a woman you care about do in that environment? Or pretend you are a woman, how would you react? 

The older they are the more sure of themselves and persistent. As a woman you need to be paranoid about what you do or say. A friendly hello how are you can be seen by a desperate man on the make as an invitation to a bj.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Gratitude

DawnD said:


> Then you should be very well informed of the fact that even support MOS's are exposed to combat with the types of war that go on today.


Just to be clear is your viewpoint that women should be allowed to participate in ground combat?


----------



## Gratitude

Catherine602 said:


> I have met many men like you who question my abilities because I am a woman.
> 
> 
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


How did you get that from his post??


----------



## DawnD

Gratitude said:


> Just to be clear is your viewpoint that women should be allowed to participate in ground combat?


It has already happened. They have not been put in as a combat MOS, but Iraq brought a whole new ball game.

If a woman can honestly handle the workload ( I wouldn't be a tanker, there is now way I could replace the track on a tank) then go for it.

Generalizing never wins. Not all men are the same, not all women are the same.


----------



## FirstYearDown

Gratitude said:


> How did you get that from his post??


:iagree: I didn't see that either.


----------



## shy_guy

Catherine602 said:


> Shy I am in a profession that puts the lives of people in my hands. I am considered very talented at what I do. At the risk of sounding arrogant, I am better than most of the people who do what I do. How do I know? It is all in the outcome. My success is judged concretely - how well do the people I care for fare.


Fair enough. I'm not in a position to evaluate this first hand, so I'll take your word for this.



Catherine602 said:


> I have met many men like you who question my abilities because I am a woman. They don't question a man ability. He is automatically accepted. I on the other hand must prove it. No matter how many times I show my talent, I am just as good as my last case.


Catherine, show me where in my post I questioned your abilities because you are a woman, or where I questioned ANYBODY's abilities because they are a woman. Are you reading something in my post that is just not there? If you are, then I have a reason to question something, but it is not because you are a woman, it is because of what I see in front of me right now. If you see me questioning as you said, then please show it. I will not edit the post again before you have a chance.



Catherine602 said:


> I'll bet you don't have to deal with that. Some times you see what you want to see. I have had men who actually have treated me as if I was a dunce. And I am smarter and more skillful they they are. They do something strange - they refuse to look and they take any error in speech or deed to prove their point.


There is also a matter of confirmation bias. Catherine, shall I look at history of how you have reacted to my posts in other threads and in this thread to see if you have a history of seeing someone as coming across adverse when that was not their intent? Is it possible that you do this with other people as well?



Catherine602 said:


> That is very demorilizing. They are not important to me but the stress is. I have succeeded against formidable odds it disturbs me that so many men justify their dislike of women based on biased thinking.


Once again, Catherine, most men do NOT dislike women. Most men do NOT think like you are accusing us of thinking. However; there are people who are so convinced that we do that they continue to read that into us. Is it possible that you are doing some of this, or that a confirmation bias brings you to see this in places where maybe it does not exist?



Catherine602 said:


> Think again about your judgements about women and these support groups. Ask yourself why they make you think that it means these women are less than.


I did not say this. Go back again and read carefully what I said. Unless you are able to first get the meaning I am trying to get across, it is not going to be possible for us to have an intellectual conversation.



Catherine602 said:


> Better yet Shy put your self in these women's shoes. Imagine walking into a workplace with a deficite that men don't have. How would you fare. I'll bet you would need a little extra support.


Catherine, I seem to detect a shift from "we're as good or better than anybody" to "we need a little extra support." Am I reading this correctly. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I think the point is not support, the point is in bringing in women who are less qualified to fill a quota, then offering them training that the men are not given the opportunity to attend, and calling that fair. It's not an equal opportunity, it is giving one group an advantage. They are not treated disrespectfully. The men do not tend to dislike or distrust them (although bringing in less qualified women may tend to make some wonder about their competence at first, but soon enough they will see the difference between the higher caliber and those not quite as high on the scale). 




Catherine602 said:


> Coupled with men prowling for something for nothing and you'd have issues too. If you are reasonably attractive expect some man in authority to try to take liberties. Sexual harrastment is common in the work place.


Catherine, where is this coming from? Men prowling for something? Is this more generalization? Have you had this happen? From what percentage of the men you work with? I don't know what environment you work in, but this is hardly what it is like where I work. If we have women who have the attitude I see displayed in your paragraph here where they expect "men" to be prowling for something and constantly trying to take liberties, then I think I can see an austere work environment developing, though. How do you come to generalize without giving us a chance as individuals like this?



Catherine602 said:


> Do you have a daughter or DIL? I know you have seen the antics of some men in your work place how would a woman you care about do in that environment? Or pretend you are a woman, how would you react?


I have two daughters. Both are adults and both have graduated from college. We have had discussions about workplace environments and discrimination in particular. In my work place, I would be 100% comfortable for my daughters to be working there with the men and women I work with - no worries whatsoever. If they were in my career field and of a level to get into my group, I would be very proud of them. However; I want them to earn their way there, and earn their way after then get there.



Catherine602 said:


> The older they are the more sure of themselves and persistent. As a woman you need to be paranoid about what you do or say. A friendly hello how are you can be seen by a desperate man on the make as an invitation to a bj.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


OMG! Are you serious? Catherine, how do you spot these desperate men? What percentage of the men around you do you think qualify as these desperate men who interpret your hello as an invitation to a bj?


----------



## Catherine602

shy_guy said:


> *. It would be nice if you would give us the same consideration.*


*

us??? I have never read anything of yours that have been in any way reactionary. You are always thoughtful and usually quitter fair and even handed. I see no bias in any of the post I have read. 

My statement was about reactionary men and the fact that their experiences may have made them bitter against women. There are men as biter and hateful towards women as feminazi are against men. 

You know what hell we be for them? To go to the same place in the hereafter for an eternity. 

I think we both men and women are hyper sensitive to even a hint of criticism. We are in the middle of cultural changes in the relationship between men and woman the likes of which have probably rarely been seen in society . 

By it's nature, women may be seen as the the new guys on the block. Historically, most men have not had to deal with so many different women in varied roles in close proximity. I am certain the tools to deal with the invasion are developing for all involved. 

The epidemic of conflict, and marital problems between men and women is, I think, emblematic of the social flux. It will work itself out naturally. This changing period is not so different from the industrial revolution at early part of the last century. There were many problems that had to be worked out. From a shaky start, industry has been a boon to societies around the world. 

I think we will look back and regard this period as the start of needed changes.
Posted via Mobile Device*


----------



## FirstYearDown

Catherine, what do you mean by "quitter fair"? I have never heard that expression unless it is a typo. 

I don't think that Shyguy is hypersensitive. He made some very valid points about your penchant for imagining sexist undertones. 

I can vouch for your statement about men being inappropriate at work. I have had to threaten to go to HR or angrily rebuff nasty requests.


----------



## Catherine602

I too have don't see special treatment of women in my profession. We have standardized test and skills assessment and you either have it or you don't. The stakes are too high to allow for any other measure of competence. 

I do see special treatment of people who know someone who knows someone. The plumb positions can go to the politically connected. Have you ever observed that? Let me ask does it upset you as much as special treatment of women? 

There have been numerous comparison studies on success in the work place. Taller men, good looks, pretty, weight appropriate people are more successful than those without those attributes. They are either more talented or just nice to look at. 

As far as the on the prowl men e, you may not notice because you are not a woman and you are too busy doing your job. These guys probably stay out of your way, they are there. . I don't think I am delusional at lest I hope not.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## shy_guy

FirstYearDown said:


> I can vouch for your statement about men being inappropriate at work. I have had to threaten to go to HR or angrily rebuff nasty requests.


Point taken. If you had to deal with that, then you were right in doing so. Maybe I need to consider that I have a rather specialized workplace.


----------



## Catherine602

FirstYearDown said:


> Catherine, what do you mean by "quitter fair"? I have never heard that expression unless it is a typo.
> 
> I don't think that Shyguy is hypersensitive. He made some very valid points about your penchant for imagining sexist undertones.
> 
> I can vouch for your statement about men being inappropriate at work. I have had to threaten to go to HR or angrily rebuff nasty requests.


First it's this stupid iPad and the fact that I can't spell worth a [email protected] and even when I poof it stupid words get by. I have mild dyslexia that my excuse. I meant that Shy is quite fair in his post. 

I think he is bothered by the set asides I imagine it is difficult for a manager I don't really think he is hypersensitive. I am though, I'll admit that. I may be reading too many post that are negative towards women and may see it everywhere I look. There is a thread entitled I see cheating everywhere. Time to stop reading ! 

I can't judge because the structure in my profession is so totally different. The focus is on health care and service.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## shy_guy

Catherine602 said:


> I too have don't see special treatment of women in my profession. We have standardized test and skills assessment and you either have it or you don't. The stakes are too high to allow for any other measure of competence.


This is a big area of debate in our company. For the most part, standardized tests are not considered a good measure for what we do because we don't really want the people who know right answers. We want people who think their way through complex situations, put together complex solutions, research areas that have not been developed before and such like. Quite literally, I had 10 hours of interviews to get the position I currently have. My previous position was with the same company, but not in R&D (where I currently work). I had 6 hours of interviews to get that job. I didn't get the first job I interviewed with this company because I was totally blown away by the interview process.

Standardized tests would be hard to skew I would think. But it's not appropriate for all disciplines.

*EDIT:* I probably should add, I've been upset listening to a couple of female colleagues after giving technical interviews when they said something that started like "I really wanted to hire her, I mean it would be another woman in the group ... " It doesn't matter what follows that, it betrays an attitude in them that I don't agree with. I let them know I didn't agree with it, too. I want to make considerations as if it was my son vs. my daughter and be that fair about it.



Catherine602 said:


> I do see special treatment of people who know someone who knows someone. The plumb positions can go to the politically connected. Have you ever observed that? Let me ask does it upset you as much as special treatment of women?


Short answer: Yes, for positions that should be based on competence, it would upset me just as much.



Catherine602 said:


> There have been numerous comparison studies on success in the work place. Taller men, good looks, pretty, weight appropriate people are more successful than those without those attributes. They are either more talented or just nice to look at.


They haven't looked at where I work I don't think. We're a pretty homely bunch . 



Catherine602 said:


> As far as the on the prowl me, you may not notice because you are not a woman. I don't think I am delusional at lest I hope not.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I'm sure there are men like that. I would think I would notice them, or hear from them when they had their guard down. I don't see it so much where I work now ... I can probably think of examples if I think back to earlier years in the work force. I'll concede this point, but also tell you that I would find a woman who expects this from all men to be someone I would have difficulty working with. I would hope I could be considered as an individual instead of just as a "man" and all the stereotypes that person may bring to that professional relationship.


----------



## Catherine602

That's why skills are assessed to simulate complex situations. Test measure baseline first order knowledge. There are ways of assessing higher order applied skills. That is easy to do in my profession. Each person is required to perform complex task on the job so to speak and a standard rubric is used by two examiners to grade the testee. There are board exams that require a demonstration of a complex and relevant skills. 

As I said the stakes are high and the margin of error is narrow.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Catherine602

I had 2 day long interviews to get every position I have ever held. I have had to meet with students as a group, all of my potential colleagues in my division, the administrators and a hiring committee. In addition, dinner in the evening a social interview of sorts. 

The decision is made by the committee which, is composed of at lest 10 individual appointed by the administration with only one member of the department in question.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Catherine602

Hmm sounds like the women that work in your place are pretty insecure, incompetent and under-qualified from the bulk of what you describe? Is this a successful company. Must be difficult for the men carrying all of the load for these women plus their own load. Do you have problems with retention of men? 

It'd be something if all the men left to get better position and you were stuck with a department full of entitled, incompetent dumb women. 

The men sound like saints, competent, never say stupid things like women? Great.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## shy_guy

I think the difference is that you are dealing primarily with known situations and trying to minimize risk. In an R&D environment, we are working specifically in areas that nobody has ever done before (or so we hope). Failure is expected in many project, lessons learned, product improvement, and continuing on to the next one. In interviewing for positions like this, my thought is that open ended questions on scenarios and allowing that person to interactively build a solution to fit the scenario is more useful. Margin of error is not considered - errors and "fail fast" are expected.

In our interviews, the whole point is in seeing how the person thinks, and the individualism of thought is what contributes to the R&D team. Very different from what I would expect in a medical situation.


----------



## shy_guy

Catherine602 said:


> Hmm sounds like the women that work in your place are pretty insecure, incompetent and under-qualified from the bulk of what you describe? Is this a successful company.


:rofl:

OH HOW I WISH I could tell you what company I work for right now. Let me put it this way, there is nobody on this site who would not recognize the name, and most of you are using what we develop almost every day.



Catherine602 said:


> Must be difficult for the men carrying all of the load for these women plus their own load. Do you have problems with retention of men?


Careful about generalizing again. We have some very sharp women. Remember I said that at the beginning. Please remember those things when you are drawing conclusions about what I'm saying, too. A few get into some positions who are not quite up to the standards, but make no mistake: we have some very sharp women.



Catherine602 said:


> It'd be something if they all left to get better position and you were stuck with a department full of entitled, incompetent dumb women.
> 
> The men sound like saints, competent, never say stupid things like women? Great.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I'm not quite sure what to do with this ... I'm not quite sure the voice intonation that was written with.


----------



## Catherine602

Apple? Microsoft? Communications? AT&T, Verizon, 

Not generalizing - I use a lot of sarcasm. Not very good I am trying to improve. Good natured Humor would be far more attractive and not as distancing. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ComicBookLady

Gratitude said:


> Have women lost respect for men in the last 50 years?
> 
> Have women gone overboard in the notion of feminism?
> 
> Men, do you feel your wife respects you as the man of the house? Do you believe you are the man of the house? Or do you feel she is overbearing and talks down to you?
> 
> Women, do you treat your man like the man of the house? Do you believe he is the leader of your household? If he says yes and you say no, will you do whatever you want anyway, regardless of his word? If he says 'I'm the leader of this household and I'm putting my foot down', would you let him?



I think it's important a man & woman are of equal partners in a relationship, however I feel both genders still have their own specific attributes they lend to relationships. For men, I believe they lend support, confidence, strength and dependability, things that are generally sought after by women. I believe men have to put less emphasis on who has the power in the relationship, and work on how to be the best fit for each other, how to correctly support each other in your own unique ways so your family can flourish and be happy.

And no, personally if my husband was the type to put his foot down on things in our life instead of working with me on them, I would probably not be with him. I believe that is an old, outdated way of thinking. Just my opinion


----------



## Catherine602

Any men reach their level of incompetence ? Gotta ask.

You seem to be looking at women only. Are their no men who are equally as incompetent? If you scrutinize one group with an eye towards comparison and evaluating you have to supply the same measure to both. 

If you look at one group, you see their mistakes but you can't make any comparisons because you do not use equal scales. That is part and parcel of the scientific method. And for that matter fair and equatable evaluation of employees. You have to remove as much personal bias as possible. 

People are biased we all are. We tend to see what we want to see by looking only in one direction and forgetting to apply the same standards to measure each performence it is human nature. I am human and so are you. 

Nice discussion my husband is about to strangle me so I better go. 

I am not generalizing I think you are. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ComicBookLady

Catherine602 said:


> Shy I am in a profession that puts the lives of people in my hands. I am considered very talented at what I do. At the risk of sounding arrogant, I am better than most of the people who do what I do. How do I know? It is all in the outcome. My success is judged concretely - how well do the people I care for fare.


Just wanted to say I am in much the same position.  I'm succeeding in a male dominated industry (comic books), but I am constantly pushed to the side when it comes to jobs because they don't think I can do it (even if I have new york times bestsellers under my belt) or think I'm not interested in the titles (even though I tell them I am) because of my gender. It's so difficult sometimes!  But at the same time I am not mad at them, it drives me to find methods to change those ways of thinking.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## shy_guy

Catherine602 said:


> Any men reach their level of incompetence ? Gotta ask.
> 
> You seem to be looking at women only. Are their no men who are equally as incompetent? I am not generalizing I think you are.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


We were talking about women I thought, so that was my main focus. 

Absolutely. It is very competitive, so people, even some pretty smart ones, sometimes get pressure to leave. I've been surprised a few times at who has announced they are leaving.

I've never called anyone "Incompetent" in this thread. I'm talking about very sharp people - some sharper than others. 

Catherine, something you do with my words really bothers me. I try to set degrees, and you take those to extremes. If I say "some women," that is not saying "all women" and is not meant to imply anything about the men. It means exactly "some women," and does not imply anything more. The same would apply if I said "some men."

As far as naming who I work for, may I please be allowed to not answer that? I'm in an impossible position with that because if I don't answer it sounds like I'm lying, but I'm trying to maintain anonymity here so I can continue to post the way I do - especially in the "Sex in Marriage" forum. My wife is aware of what I post, and anonymity is very important to her as well. So since it is an impossible position I'm in, I'll just have to leave it up to you whether you want to believe that or not.


----------



## EleGirl

CandieGirl said:


> Bleah. I always get sh!t for my opinions on the subject, but yes, it's gone too far, IMO. We wanted equality, and we've got it, thanks to all those bra-burners in the 1960's. Are we really any better off?


In a lot of ways, yes we are better off. The laws before put women in the position of being on the same level as children.

When a woman married all of her property was taken from her and put in her husband's name. If he wanted to divorce her he kept all of her property and custody of the chidren. She was put out with nothing unless she could fight and win in court. It's very hard to fight and win in court if you don't have access to your own money.

It was very hard for a woman to find a job that paid her enough to live on, much less to support her children if her husband died or left her with the kids. So single women or abandoned married women almost always lived in abject poverty. Very often the only work available to a woman was housekeeping, nanny or prostitute.

Since just about the only career choice a woman had was to get married she had to put up with any abuse her husband gave her. Generally women had to look the other way when their husband cheated on them. After all, unlike today, a betrayed wife did not have the financial means to kick her cheating, adulterous husband out. She had to live in humility and put up with whatever he dished out.

One that I experienced myself is that a woman could not start a business without a written letter from her husband giving her permission to start the business. I know this one for a fact because I was told I needed such a letter in the mid 1970’s when I wanted to start a business. I refused to get the letter to get a business license. So I just ran my business illegally. No way I was going to ask permission like I was a child. 

Women could not open checking/savings accounts without permission from their husbands. They could not get credit. I remember these two as well.

A husband had the right to not allow his wife any money at all. It was up to him what she could and could not spend on. Are you familiar with the old savings stamps? It was a way for women to get something of value so that they could buy things without asking their husband’s permission. How pathetic that those women had to get stamps and save them up for weeks and months to trade them in for a few nice things.

Before the women’s movement, a woman did well if she picked the right husband. Otherwise her life was pretty harsh.
Yea we are a lot better off.


----------



## shy_guy

Catherine602 said:


> If you look at one group, you see their mistakes but you can't make any comparisons because you do not use equal scales. That is part and parcel of the scientific method. And for that matter fair and equatable evaluation of employees. You have to remove as much personal bias as possible.


Absolutely. I understand this very well. However, the discussion is whether or not there is fair treatment on the job, or if women are given an advantage. Going back to training provided to one group but not the other, I don't need to look at one group's mistakes and compare it to another to decide whether or implied quotas or inequality in training is giving one group an advantage, right?



Catherine602 said:


> People are biased we all are. We tend to see what we want to see by looking only in one direction and forgetting to apply the same standards to measure each performence it is human nature. I am human and so are you.


Yes, but going back again to what I was saying, I am talking about training opportunities and implied quotas.



Catherine602 said:


> Nice discussion my husband is about to strangle me so I better go.
> 
> I am not generalizing I think you are.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


See my previous reply.


----------



## EleGirl

CandieGirl said:


> Feminists have created men like my youngest son's father. He is second generation 'sit-on-my-ass-and-let-the-woman-earn-a-living'. His father was the same way - he let his wife support the family, and she is still doing it, long after his death, supporting her lazy arsed son. There was a time when a man would feel shame for lazing around letting a woman earn the money; not anymore.
> 
> Blast away if you like, I don't care, this is after all only my opinion; women shouldn't be cops, firefighters or priests either!
> 
> Rrraaaa ha ha ha haaaa haaa (evil laugh)


So did feminism creat your youngest son's grandfather who sits around all day and let's his wife support him?

Maybe is was the grandfather who created you son's father.. not feminism.

There have always been a percentage of men who were lazy and did not support their family.


----------



## EleGirl

shy_guy said:


> At work, there is discrimination against men in a number of areas from providing training to women with no equivalent to men to implied quotas that managers really do fear that bring less qualified women on the job, then give them the extra training that is not available to men.


What career field are you in that women get extra training? Just curious because I’ve never seen this in my 40 some years of work experience. 
For the last 30 some years I’ve been an engineer. There is no difference in the training women and men get. There has always been a huge difference in hiring and promotions. Men are always more likely to get promotions then women are. My company (a fortune 100 company) has a ‘special talent list’. These are the people who are being groomed to be promoted into the higher management. Until 4 years ago there was not one woman on the list. It was not until a woman in HR made the list known companywide that they changed their policy. 
In the last 5 years we have seen a lot more female engineers hired. It’s almost 50/50 now. For a very long time I was very often the only woman working on teams. I’ve had to put up with some jackass men telling me that I should be home cleaning house and having babies. That women cannot do the work that is required. That women are inferior. I’ve had men sit in meetings and say these things to me in front of other men. … who sit there like lumps. My reaction has always been to either ignore them or to comment on how charming they are and get down to the engineering business at hand. Somehow I survived the decades when women were not supposed to be engineers. The younger female engineers have benefiting from it. They have no idea what we older gals when through to pave the way for them. But good for them. I love to see them doing well. 





shy_guy said:


> The irony of the OTJ situation is that many of the men there have women at home who depend on them as primary or sole breadwinners for the family. It doesn't seem to matter, though.


And many of those women are either supporting children on their own or are the sole supporters of families with child and a husband. The fact that a man is supporting a SAHM should not influence whether or not he gets a promotion any more than a single mom should get a promotion because she is supporting children on her own.


shy_guy said:


> So someone can throw out that "Feminism means equality" and I will agree that is what it should mean, but that's not the practical implementation these days


I think it depends on your industry. In my industry, it’s still leaning towards the men. Women still have to fight harder to get ahead.


shy_guy said:


> But OP, at home, my wife is an equal partner, and in fact, I tend to put her on the pedestal to take care of her first.


That works in your marriage, you and your wife are lucky. Not all women have a husband who does this. Those of us who don’t appreciate the fact that we can have a career and not have to work at low paid jobs the way previous generations of women had to.


----------



## shy_guy

EleGirl said:


> What career field are you in that women get extra training? Just curious because I’ve never seen this in my 40 some years of work experience. For the last 30 some years I’ve been an engineer. There is no difference in the training women and men get.


My understanding is that these programs are required by EEOC - that's my understanding from our current HR department anyway. These programs have been in place in the last 3 jobs I have had, and one of those was in an industry that is most definitely NOT dominated by men. Do you not see things such as the "Women's Leadership Training" or conferences in the companies where you work? If not, how do they comply with EEOC requirements?



EleGirl said:


> It’s almost 50/50 now.


I don't know what type of engineer you are, but from another exchange, I think maybe you are a software engineer. Am I correct? If so, isn't the ratio of men:women in CS programs about 9:1? I'm not sure, but I know it isn't anywhere near 1:1. If so, that would say something about the distribution of the talent pool. If you are 50/50 from a talent pool that is about 90/10, would that not say something about the hiring practices?



EleGirl said:


> For a very long time I was very often the only woman working on teams. I’ve had to put up with some jackass men telling me that I should be home cleaning house and having babies. That women cannot do the work that is required. That women are inferior. I’ve had men sit in meetings and say these things to me in front of other men.


Then he was a jackass just as you said.



EleGirl said:


> And many of those women are either supporting children on their own or are the sole supporters of families with child and a husband. The fact that a man is supporting a SAHM should not influence whether or not he gets a promotion any more than a single mom should get a promotion because she is supporting children on her own.


That's pretty much my point. It should make NO difference, but the modern implementation puts the preference on the woman in the workplace, often at the expense of a woman who may have chosen a different career path that doesn't make as much as her husband, or the woman who has chosen to be the SAHM. I think the SAHM is just as important as the woman in the workplace.




EleGirl said:


> I think it depends on your industry. In my industry, it’s still leaning towards the men. Women still have to fight harder to get ahead.


If you're in the industry that I'm in, I would have to disagree.



EleGirl said:


> That works in your marriage, you and your wife are lucky. Not all women have a husband who does this. Those of us who don’t appreciate the fact that we can have a career and not have to work at low paid jobs the way previous generations of women had to.


I'm not advocating working a low-paying job. My point is that there really are programs that favor women. If you are an engineer and the distribution in your department is really 50/50, or even close to that, and the talent pool is anywhere close to 90/10, then how does a company get to near 50/50 from a talent pool of 90/10 without it? What would you call the women's leadership programs, or other women's affinity groups that are established in companies?


----------



## EleGirl

shy_guy said:


> In colleges, 60% of all degrees are now earned by women, and nobody seems to think it that's a problem, but it was a huge problem when the numbers were reversed. In areas such as computer science and engineering, men still outnumber women by a large number, but by selection - women outnumber men in all other fields by a large number and there simply aren't enough women left who are interested in these fields. Instead of respecting the selection of preferences, efforts are put in place to recruit more women into these fields (I would HATE to be recruited into a career path that I didn't truly enjoy, BTW).


This is a topic that was discussed a lot a few years ago when my kids were in high school and getting ready for college or whatever they chose to do after high school.

If things were equal we would expect that 50% of those getting degrees would be male and 50% would be female. So, 60% female is not all that off. There are several factors that lead to this 10% difference. 

Women tend to not get into the trades. They are typically male oriented and often take more physical strength. So while a good percentage of men do go into the trades, women who want to make a good living will instead to go college. If it were more acceptable for women to get into the trades, the number of women in college might very well drop. Men can make more money working in the trades that a lot of women who get college degrees will ever make. 
For example I know a woman who just got a Master’s degee in Library and Information Science. The starting salary is about $40K. She paid $30K for the Masters. I’m still trying to figure out why she got the degree. It certainly was not a good investment.

More males seem to be deciding to not go to college. It’s a form of them self-selecting out of going to college. That is on the guys who make this choice, not on the gals who decide to go to college. 

The reason that women are recruited into fields like computer science and engineering is not because they are not interested or could not be interested. It’s because women have been told for a very long time that they cannot do those fields. There are many studies that show that female students in high school are discouraged from doing well in classes like math, science, physics… etc.

When I was looking at what to major in in college I was told that science, engineering, math etc were not good fields for women. I was discouraged from doing that and thus went into business and accounting But somewhere along the line I can to take a Basic programming class. And I found out something that I did not know… I LOVE math, science, engineering etc. I am very upset that I was never encouraged to do these things. I was go good at math in high school I have A’s in every math class. Never had to study.. it just comes naturally. But I was never encourage, not my by family and not by my teachers. 

While getting my degree I was told by professors that I did not belong there because I was a woman. Some put obstacles in my way to try to keep me from finishing. It did not work thank goodness.

Things might not be 100% fair in every industry. Perhaps in some industries like the one you are in women might get a bit more advantage than men… I’ll take your word for it. In many industries today woman still have a very hard time being accepted, treated fairly and getting ahead. It takes a very long time to change things in a society. We are doing well I think.

Look at much of the world today. In most of the world today women still have, for the most part the same old 3 career choices… house keeper, nanny or prostitute. Paving the way with social reform is a long process with bumps in the road. 

We are doing pretty well … even if there are some extreme nuts who have tried to take over the feminist movement. They have mostly marginalized themselves because most women still want to be married and raise a family. We see our careers as part of that equation.. not the end all.

Any man in his right mind wants to see women have equality because he has a mother, sisters, wife and daughter. Every woman in her right mind wants to see men do well because they are a father, brothers, husbands and sons. This is not us against them.. .it’s everyone working for the betterment of us all.


----------



## EleGirl

shy_guy said:


> My understanding is that these programs are required by EEOC - that's my understanding from our current HR department anyway. These programs have been in place in the last 3 jobs I have had, and one of those was in an industry that is most definitely NOT dominated by men.


Since the firm I work for has a lot of government contracts, they might have some requirements. But they will them without pandering with things like Women’s this and Women’s that .. or ethic/race this or that.



shy_guy said:


> Do you not see things such as the "Women's Leadership Training" or conferences in the companies where you work? If not, how do they comply with EEOC requirements?


Nope, I have not seen anything like that since the 1980’s. We have training classes. We are all required to take the same training regarless of if we are male or female. None of the classes have anything to do with male/female anything. I have worked at 3 of the largest engeering firms in the country/world since the early 1980’s. I do not see those types of things brought in house. I don’t know any woman who participates in that kinds of thing either.

In the early 1980’s I did join a local chapter of a national woman’s engineering group. Almost all of the women in it graduated with me in college. I really liked it.. it was more social than professional. We all dropped it and just socialized. We then joined the same professional groups the men joined.. like IEEE.




shy_guy said:


> I don't know what type of engineer you are, but from another exchange, I think maybe you are a software engineer. Am I correct? If so, isn't the ratio of men:women in CS programs about 9:1? I'm not sure, but I know it isn't anywhere near 1:1. If so, that would say something about the distribution of the talent pool. If you are 50/50 from a talent pool that is about 90/10, would that not say something about the hiring practices?


Today the percentage of women in software engineering programs is 50/50 male/female. Computer science has been a very easy field for women to get into because it is a relatively new field. The gender bias was not as hard set. 
In areas like electrical, mechanical and hardware engineering there the ratio is not 50/50. Now that I think of it the ratio in those areas is very much closer to 70/30 male/female.
Here is a link that show that male/female ration in the different disciplines in 1993. From looking around on google women might not have gained much in this ratio in the last couple of decades.
Male/Female enrollment patterns in EECS




shy_guy said:


> That's pretty much my point. It should make NO difference, but the modern implementation puts the preference on the woman in the workplace, often at the expense of a woman who may have chosen a different career path that doesn't make as much as her husband, or the woman who has chosen to be the SAHM. I think the SAHM is just as important as the woman in the workplace.


The modern implementation pays the women in the workplace for the work she does. I have no idea why you are trying to put the SAHM on the same plane (in the company’s eyes) as the female employee. 
Then the SAHM is just as important as any man working at our firm as well, right? 
I just do not understand at all why you think that a company would value an employee’s spouse as much or more than an actual employee. The company has no legal obligation to the wife. It does have an obligation to the employee be the employee a male or a female.





shy_guy said:


> If you're in the industry that I'm in, I would have to disagree.


I don’t know what industry you are in. I’m sure that different industries are different.



shy_guy said:


> I'm not advocating working a low-paying job. My point is that there really are programs that favor women. If you are an engineer and the distribution in your department is really 50/50, or even close to that, and the talent pool is anywhere close to 90/10, then how does a company get to near 50/50 from a talent pool of 90/10 without it? What would you call the women's leadership programs, or other women's affinity groups that are established in companies?


Because I work with a lot of software engineers. Software engineering is 50/50 male/female industry wide. 
Now that you mentioned it I realize that most of the other engineers in the other disciplines are male. I just don’t think about male/female distribution much. We are just focused on getting the work done.
My company has tens of thousands of employees worldwide. We do not have a woman’s leadership program or woman’s affinity group. So I don’t know. I doubt any of us would put up with it. There are a lot of younger women software engineers (and some hardware, etc) and they could care less about stuff like that. They have moved past such nonsense. 

I’m sorry to hear that you work in a company that still does all that nonsense. I understand why it was needed at one time. But it’s sort of counter productive today. Gender should have nothing to do with what goes on at work.


----------



## Acorn

I don't want to wade too deeply in this discussion but I would like to add that my workplace has approximately 6 of those Women's Leadership training sessions a year. There are also 2 women-only events (dinner type things) and 2 women-only self defense classes taught per year.

I do not work in a straight-up government job but we are closely aligned to the government and it has always puzzled me why these inequities exist and are permitted.


----------



## Gratitude

I worked for many years in a government agency (justice) and it was pretty level there. However there were come to think of it a womens 'group' that discussed womens rights in the workplace and they had their own newsletter and met up every month or so from different offices around the state. I'm not sure exactly what they did but I know it was all women, and had to do with the work environment. I remember because the lady who used to run it wasn't the loveliest flower on the tree.

I just thought about that now. I never even noticed much or thought about it when I worked there. Interesting.


----------



## shy_guy

EleGirl said:


> Since the firm I work for has a lot of government contracts, they might have some requirements. But they will them without pandering with things like Women’s this and Women’s that .. or ethic/race this or that.
> 
> 
> Nope, I have not seen anything like that since the 1980’s. We have training classes. We are all required to take the same training regarless of if we are male or female. None of the classes have anything to do with male/female anything. I have worked at 3 of the largest engeering firms in the country/world since the early 1980’s. I do not see those types of things brought in house. I don’t know any woman who participates in that kinds of thing either.


You should ask your HR department directly. This is not optional on the part of the companies. This is required by EEOC. The reason that companies are so open about it when they have government contracts is because they are required to show evidence of it as a condition of getting a contract for government work. 



EleGirl said:


> Today the percentage of women in software engineering programs is 50/50 male/female. Computer science has been a very easy field for women to get into because it is a relatively new field. The gender bias was not as hard set.


From your link later in the post: Male/Female enrollment patterns in EECS



> The formation of this committee was prompted by some disconcerting statistics. Figure 1 shows the percentage of S.B. degrees awarded to women during the 1992-93 academic year for an array of MIT departments in science and engineering. It's striking that women accounted for a relatively low fraction of the degrees awarded both in Electrical Engineering (Course 6-1) and Computer Science (Course 6-3). While women comprised 32% of all 1993 S.B. degree recipients, and also 32% of S.B. degree recipients in the School of Engineering overall, they accounted for only 22% of the degrees in Electrical Engineering. *In Computer Science, women accounted for only 15% of the degrees awarded--the lowest ratio of any MIT undergraduate program with more than a few majors.*


I see no way it is anywhere close to 50%. The quote from MIT is pretty close to what I have observed personally. So if we take MIT's number, about 15% of the talent pool in software engineering is female. If, then, a company finds itself with close to 50% of its software engineering staff as female, or finds that about 50% of the people receiving promotions among their software engineering staff is female, then statistically speaking, I think there is cause for concern/questioning. I dont' think it is going to be possible to get such a distribution from the available talent pool if merit alone is what is considered.

FWIW, I'm looking for more up-to-date information. I find a CNET article in 2002 that put the number of women CS majors at 15 - 20% and shrinking. It will probably take more time than I have to find something more up to date than that, but my observation is that it is still probably in that range (The 9:1 that I used in the earlier post was strictly my perception - not based on any statistical research)



EleGirl said:


> In areas like electrical, mechanical and hardware engineering there the ratio is not 50/50. Now that I think of it the ratio in those areas is very much closer to 70/30 male/female.
> Here is a link that show that male/female ration in the different disciplines in 1993. From looking around on google women might not have gained much in this ratio in the last couple of decades.
> Male/Female enrollment patterns in EECS


See above.



EleGirl said:


> The modern implementation pays the women in the workplace for the work she does. I have no idea why you are trying to put the SAHM on the same plane (in the company’s eyes) as the female employee.
> Then the SAHM is just as important as any man working at our firm as well, right?
> I just do not understand at all why you think that a company would value an employee’s spouse as much or more than an actual employee. The company has no legal obligation to the wife. It does have an obligation to the employee be the employee a male or a female.


I thought I had clarified what I meant here, but you've missed it again, so let me try again to clarify what I'm saying.

I was responding to someone who said "feminism is ... " I was not talking about a firm at any point. The implementation is focused strictly on promoting women in the workplace. I am not talking about firms. I think firms should promote based on merit PERIOD. The "feminism" we are talking about says it is for equality for "women," and doesn't really say "in the workplace." By giving women an advantage in the workplace with programs such as I have been talking about, they create a disadvantage for the women who are not in that particular workplace and who may be depending on the men in those jobs. It is unfair to those women to focus strictly on the promotion on the job to the point that you give women the advantage on the job.

You mention SAHM, and that is part of the group I am saying it is unfair to, but it is not the whole group. In my case, I went back to college later in life both for my BS and for my MS. My wife worked and ran her own business, but my income was still our primary source of income. We had two daughters who would need to go to college, and this fit into our plans. I returned to college with the help of the wonderful teammate/partner I hadt at home. She provided not only the motivation and encouragement, but also took on more of the work I would normally have done around our place so I could focus on studying. In short, I could not have done it without her.

When I then go to work and compete for a promotion/position, my wife and those two daughters benefitted from me getting the promotion/position. My wife had earned it just as much as I had. On the job, my face is the only one that is seen, but putting up programs to give women an advantage over me in the workplace disadvantages my wife (who worked for it) and my two daughters. The three women it hurts are never considered in the goals of "feminism" as we have been discussing it.

Is it clearer now? I am talking about "feminism" and not a firm.



EleGirl said:


> Because I work with a lot of software engineers. Software engineering is 50/50 male/female industry wide.
> Now that you mentioned it I realize that most of the other engineers in the other disciplines are male. I just don’t think about male/female distribution much. We are just focused on getting the work done.


This simply is not true. From my years in the field, I know for certain this is not just in my company. Please provide me any source that shows the distribution of men to women to be anywhere even approaching 50/50 in software engineering.



EleGirl said:


> My company has tens of thousands of employees worldwide. We do not have a woman’s leadership program or woman’s affinity group. So I don’t know. I doubt any of us would put up with it. There are a lot of younger women software engineers (and some hardware, etc) and they could care less about stuff like that. They have moved past such nonsense.


I would encourage you to ask your HR department about it. See my earlier post about EEOC requirements. Believe me, I've enquired.



EleGirl said:


> I’m sorry to hear that you work in a company that still does all that nonsense. I understand why it was needed at one time. But it’s sort of counter productive today. Gender should have nothing to do with what goes on at work.


It is not specific to my company. I'll share offline a couple of companies I have first hand experience with where you can find this in the US. One of these is not actually US based, and the industry distribution is higher female than male, but still this is required of them. I think it would be particularly interesting if a female enquires of the HR department about this.


----------



## Gratitude

Hey shy_guy welcome back to the thread! Lol. Interesting isn't it


----------



## EleGirl

shy_guy said:


> This simply is not true. From my years in the field, I know for certain this is not just in my company. Please provide me any source that shows the distribution of men to women to be anywhere even approaching 50/50 in software engineering.
> 
> 
> .


I will make a point today to count the male, female engineers by discipline where I work. Maybe I’m off. It just ‘feels’ 50/50 to me because the group I work with right now. 
I’ll let you know tonight. I could be off.


----------



## Ten_year_hubby

Gratitude said:


> Have women lost respect for men in the last 50 years?
> 
> Have women gone overboard in the notion of feminism?
> 
> Men, do you feel your wife respects you as the man of the house? Do you believe you are the man of the house? Or do you feel she is overbearing and talks down to you?
> 
> Women, do you treat your man like the man of the house? Do you believe he is the leader of your household? If he says yes and you say no, will you do whatever you want anyway, regardless of his word? If he says 'I'm the leader of this household and I'm putting my foot down', would you let him?


For sure, women who don't respect men in the first place have found more external validation in modern times. There are many choices fathers can make (alcoholism, addiction, desertion, divorce, infidelity ...) that will result in their adult daughter not respecting men. Today it is much easier for a woman who was raised in this kind of family situation to embrace an ideology that promotes the legacy of disrespect her father (and to a lesser extent her mother) created in her.


----------



## shy_guy

EleGirl said:


> This is a topic that was discussed a lot a few years ago when my kids were in high school and getting ready for college or whatever they chose to do after high school.
> 
> If things were equal we would expect that 50% of those getting degrees would be male and 50% would be female. So, 60% female is not all that off. There are several factors that lead to this 10% difference.


It's 20% and not 10%, but okay. 



EleGirl said:


> Women tend to not get into the trades. They are typically male oriented and often take more physical strength. So while a good percentage of men do go into the trades, women who want to make a good living will instead to go college. If it were more acceptable for women to get into the trades, the number of women in college might very well drop. Men can make more money working in the trades that a lot of women who get college degrees will ever make.


Let's change the shoe to the other foot for a moment. This is the type of argument that was offered to women in the 60's and 70's where men got most of the college degrees. There were many pat answers for why women didn't get into college. Were you accepting of those types of answers at that time? Should men be accepting of these types of pat answers today? Or should more effort be put into finding what the real reasons are? There are male explanations for this disparity that sound very different from the answer you are giving. They are also pat answers, but the difference in sound is somewhat surprising. A lot of the male versions have to do with feminizing the colleges to the point that they are not as interesting. 

A man's pat answer ... a woman's pat answer ... should we accept either of them?



EleGirl said:


> For example I know a woman who just got a Master’s degee in Library and Information Science. The starting salary is about $40K. She paid $30K for the Masters. I’m still trying to figure out why she got the degree. It certainly was not a good investment.


Some friends of ours just refused to pay for their daughter's plans to go to Stanford and study art history. They were happy to pay for a degree with a good ROI from Stanford, but said if she wanted to study art history, she could go to a cheaper school since there was no ROI on her plans. I would have felt much like they do. There are some degrees that just have no ROI.

That said, I don't think those non-ROI degrees should be eliminated. If I were to return to grad school, I would want to pursue a degree in Asian Studies. I don't plan to ever get a job where that will be a major point in my resume, but I would like to study it just for me ... I doubt I'll return to grad school, but that would be what I would do.



EleGirl said:


> More males seem to be deciding to not go to college. It’s a form of them self-selecting out of going to college. That is on the guys who make this choice, not on the gals who decide to go to college.


Again, I'm reminded of the pat answers above. Should we just accept this answer?



EleGirl said:


> The reason that women are recruited into fields like computer science and engineering is not because they are not interested or could not be interested. It’s because women have been told for a very long time that they cannot do those fields. There are many studies that show that female students in high school are discouraged from doing well in classes like math, science, physics… etc.


I'm reading right now a little different angle on it. I don't have an opinion fully formed right now, but it's something I think we need to look at more fully, and definitely should steer away from the pat answers we often hear from people on the subject. I think the "Women have been conditioned ... " and the "Men think ... " answers I normally hear in this area tend to be pat answers.



EleGirl said:


> When I was looking at what to major in in college I was told that science, engineering, math etc were not good fields for women. I was discouraged from doing that and thus went into business and accounting But somewhere along the line I can to take a Basic programming class. And I found out something that I did not know… I LOVE math, science, engineering etc. I am very upset that I was never encouraged to do these things. I was go good at math in high school I have A’s in every math class. Never had to study.. it just comes naturally. But I was never encourage, not my by family and not by my teachers.


Very good. I'm glad to hear this. I'll say that my first attempt at college, I did not do well in math. I was a much better student when I went back to college. I'm glad to hear you found something you liked. Like you, I found later that what I thought I was interested in was not what really captured my passion.



EleGirl said:


> While getting my degree I was told by professors that I did not belong there because I was a woman. Some put obstacles in my way to try to keep me from finishing. It did not work thank goodness.
> 
> Things might not be 100% fair in every industry. Perhaps in some industries like the one you are in women might get a bit more advantage than men… I’ll take your word for it. In many industries today woman still have a very hard time being accepted, treated fairly and getting ahead. It takes a very long time to change things in a society. We are doing well I think.


I actually think we're in the same industry. I don't think we're doing quite so well ... you may guess why by this point. I think it is better than it was before, but as usually happens, the pendulum did not swing to the middle and come to a rest. It has swung too far, and that needs to be addressed in some areas.



EleGirl said:


> Look at much of the world today. In most of the world today women still have, for the most part the same old 3 career choices… house keeper, nanny or prostitute. Paving the way with social reform is a long process with bumps in the road.


... I'm not even sure what to say to that. That hasn't been the case for so long I can't honestly even remember it ... 



EleGirl said:


> We are doing pretty well … even if there are some extreme nuts who have tried to take over the feminist movement. They have mostly marginalized themselves because most women still want to be married and raise a family. We see our careers as part of that equation.. not the end all.
> 
> Any man in his right mind wants to see women have equality because he has a mother, sisters, wife and daughter. Every woman in her right mind wants to see men do well because they are a father, brothers, husbands and sons. This is not us against them.. .it’s everyone working for the betterment of us all.


I think the last paragraph pretty much summarizes my feelings on the matter. It's in the details in how we get there that we are disagreeing. I would expect that. So long as we have the same goals, we can work to a workable solution, but women have to listen to men just as much as they want us to listen to them. Our viewpoints are still just as valid as theirs.


----------



## CandieGirl

Is this debate still going on? All women should be in the kitchen by now, preparing tonight's dinner. A-bye!


----------



## okeydokie

with a french maid outfit on


----------



## Enchantment

Ai-Ai-Ai... another feminism thread. 

Here's another one from not long ago - if you can bother to read through 50+ pages of comments.

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/politics-religion/32870-feminism.html

I put a quote in that thread of the following which is what feminism means to me:

"_I do not wish them (women) to have power over men, but over themselves_." ~Mary Wollstonecraft

To me that is the ESSENCE of what feminism is. And we should feel blessed that we can argue about quotas and women reporters in men's locker rooms and who/what creates feminized men, because there are a LOT of women all around the world who STILL do NOT have the rights to control their own lives and their own persons. Looking at it from that perspective, no, feminism has not gone too far - it hasn't gone nearly far enough.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

Depends on the type of feminism (and let’s be honest, people have defined it in so many ways that the term means almost anything and nothing at the same time).

If it is the feminism that seeks to build women up deserving of equal treatment and opportunity, then I am on board.

If it is the feminism that seeks to put women over men, tear men down and promote the superiority of women over men, then not so much.

My 6th grade teacher was at best a misguided feminist and at worst a closet man hater. Her approach was to praise the girls at the expense of the boys. To give one example, if after grading a test there were more girls with As then boys, she would make those who got As stand up and then note how smart the girls were and how well they had done. No mention was made of the boys who stood up. If more boys got As, no one was asked to stand up. To this day I think her ideas backfired, as at least a couple of the boys wondered about her grading fairness.


----------



## okeydokie

why would a straight woman "hate" men? whats to be gained?


----------



## CandieGirl

TAG - as the mother of 3 boys, I have to say that I too, have questioned grading fairness over the years. But that's another story.


----------



## Enchantment

Tall Average Guy said:


> Depends on the type of feminism (and let’s be honest, people have defined it in so many ways that the term means almost anything and nothing at the same time).
> 
> If it is the feminism that seeks to build women up deserving of equal treatment and opportunity, then I am on board.
> 
> If it is the feminism that seeks to put women over men, tear men down and promote the superiority of women over men, then not so much.
> 
> My 6th grade teacher was at best a misguided feminist and at worst a closet main hater. Her approach was to praise the girls at the expense of the boys. To give one example, if after grading a test there were more girls with As then boys, she would make those who got As stand up and then note how smart the girls were and how well they had done. No mention was made of the boys who stood up. If more boys got As, no one was asked to stand up. To this day I think her ideas backfired, as at least a couple of the boys wondered about her grading fairness.


This teacher was not a feminist. She was a sexist.


----------



## chillymorn

Enchantment said:


> Ai-Ai-Ai... another feminism thread.
> 
> Here's another one from not long ago - if you can bother to read through 50+ pages of comments.
> 
> http://talkaboutmarriage.com/politics-religion/32870-feminism.html
> 
> I put a quote in that thread of the following which is what feminism means to me:
> 
> "_I do not wish them (women) to have power over men, but over themselves_." ~Mary Wollstonecraft
> 
> To me that is the ESSENCE of what feminism is. And we should feel blessed that we can argue about quotas and women reporters in men's locker rooms and who/what creates feminized men, because there are a LOT of women all around the world who STILL do NOT have the rights to control their own lives and their own persons. Looking at it from that perspective, no, feminism has not gone too far - it hasn't gone nearly far enough.


so I guess we need to diffirenciate between american feminism and world feminism or be more place spacific.

and then it begs the question as to what roll we play in rectifiying it.


kinda of like invading other countries and helping them be democratic when we ourselves are a republic.

who are we to say our way is better? maybe our way is flawed and we are just now seeing that the demasculation of men throught feminisim has some ulgy side effects.


do you think the tribes in the congo care about feminism?


we better get over there and stop this horrible situation.
as I stated before.


----------



## Tall Average Guy

CandieGirl said:


> TAG - as the mother of 3 boys, I have to say that I too, have questioned grading fairness over the years. But that's another story.


Having a son, I have not seen any real unfairness for him(though I have seen some weird grading set-ups where a 20 question homework assignment is equal to a 20 question test).

I do see classrooms and teaching methods that are designed with your girls in mind, rather than boys. I don't think this is intentional, but rather the product of 85% of the teachers being women, at least at the grade school level. It is not an excuse when my son struggles at times and I never mention it when he is around, but it does frustrate me from time to time.


----------



## that_girl

I just see my kids as the kids they are. (students)

And right now they ALL are driving me crazy....boys and girls alike.


----------



## Hicks

When the measure of feminine success is to equate women's equality to men, then it has not gone far enough.

When the measure of feminine success is women being free to choose their path in life then it will have gone far enough.


----------



## Ten_year_hubby

okeydokie said:


> why would a straight woman "hate" men? whats to be gained?


Because she grew up with an abusive alcoholic father is one reason that comes to mind


----------



## Almostrecovered




----------



## Gratitude

Almostrecovered said:


>


HAHAHAHA .... 
If he handed it to me with that on I'd stick it in the machine with all my new pink clothes


----------



## CrazyGuy

Just wanted to post this news article. Why do you suppose it was written with such humorous overtones? Had this been a woman that was mutilated would the article been written the same way? Any feminist for "equal rights" speaking up about this? 

Angry ex-girlfriend goes ballistic, rips off man

This is who wrote the article http://www.linkedin.com/pub/taylor-bigler/15/A00/929


----------



## kittykat09

CrazyGuy said:


> Just wanted to post this news article. Why do you suppose it was written with such humorous overtones? Had this been a woman that was mutilated would the article been written the same way? Any feminist for "equal rights" speaking up about this?
> 
> Angry ex-girlfriend goes ballistic, rips off man
> 
> This is who wrote the article Taylor Bigler | LinkedIn


That article was offensive and terribly written, and I agree that it is absolutely horrific that someone would do something like that. However, it has nothing to do with feminism or equal rights. Feminism =/= Misandry. 

That said, if it had been a guy who wrote the article, would you even think twice about the immaturity of how the content was addressed? 

Yeah, didn't think so.


----------



## CrazyGuy

kittykat09 said:


> That article was offensive and terribly written, and I agree that it is absolutely horrific that someone would do something like that. However, it has nothing to do with feminism or equal rights. Feminism =/= Misandry.
> 
> That said, if it had been a guy who wrote the article, would you even think twice about the immaturity of how the content was addressed?
> 
> Yeah, didn't think so.


Actually I thought "Taylor" would be a dude. That is why I looked the person up. To see what kind of idiot would make an entertainment article about this. 

Then the fine folks at Yahoo also passed this on thinking somehow it was worthy to come up on my home page. Just shows the mentality of more then one person. 

Like it or not a lot of man haters are the ones that get the attention in the feminist movement. It is a shame because there are places where women are mutilated and nothing is being done about it.

This is why I dislike the word Feminist. Equal rights for all...if you put a Fem in front of it then you are just worried about one group.


----------



## kittykat09

CrazyGuy said:


> Actually I thought "Taylor" would be a dude. That is why I looked the person up. To see what kind of idiot would make an entertainment article about this.
> 
> Then the fine folks at Yahoo also passed this on thinking somehow it was worthy to come up on my home page. Just shows the mentality of more then one person.
> 
> Like it or not a lot of man haters are the ones that get the attention in the feminist movement. It is a shame because there are places where women are mutilated and nothing is being done about it.
> 
> This is why I dis like the word Feminist. Equal rights for all...if you put a Fem in front of it then you are just worried about one group.


My apologies for being a butt in my last post, I thought you were trolling.

I completely agree that the article was idiotic, and not at all written in a way that showed an ounce of compassion for a man who was mutilated. "Hahaha guys, BALLS! Get it?!?!! Harharhar." 

It is too bad that some feminists *are* misandrists and that they get focused on a lot. I don't believe misandry OR misogyny should be tolerated, and it is a shame that the people actively involved in feminism do not always have the same standpoint. 

I'm not worried about feminism being about the rights of women. though. Why is it problematic for a group to work towards a specific cause? If people want to focus on women's rights it doesn't necessarily mean that they think genocide or racism isn't important too- it just means that they are working for one cause at the moment. Nothing is stopping other people from making groups that advocate equal rights for <X> group.


----------



## warlock07

Some Feminists seem to think misogyny means disagreeing with or criticizing a woman....I disagree with these kind. They only want equal rights when it is advantageous to women.


----------



## keko

I don't think it has gone enough. Just to be equal Im looking for a women to pump my cesspool but I can't seem to find one.



















JK


----------



## kittykat09

keko said:


> Im looking for a women to pump my cesspool


Is that what the kids are calling it these days?


----------



## Runs like Dog

No, they still live among us.


----------



## moxy

I don't think this has anything to do with feminism. The tone and attitude of the "reporter" (read: snarky gossip-monger) is tacky, unprofessional, inconsiderate, and immature. It's more fit for tabloid reporting or locker room discussion than any respectable publication.

At the end of the day, the woman was charged with TWO felonies and the guy must be in some amount of pain. It's a shame that this article couldn't have been a little more grown up. The jokes should come after the article, not take the place of it.


----------



## moxy

warlock07 said:


> Some Feminists seem to think misogyny means disagreeing with or criticizing a woman....I disagree with these kind. They only want equal rights when it is advantageous to women.


Ignorance is annoying and such facile folks are not deserving of real credibility. Criticism is not the same as subjugation.

Feminism should not be about replacing the patriarchy with a matriarchy while switching out who has the privilege, but about removing the biases in the system that privileges men at the expense of women.


----------



## costa200

In response to the OP, it really depends on how you define feminism. If you define it by the search of equal rights for women in all sorts of situations in society, then i'm all for it.

But if you are talking about that version of feminism usually propagated by butch lesbians that are angry at men because they ended up in the wrong gender somehow and think that just because you have a vagina you're entitled to all sorts of "special" rights and treatments because God help women if they have to compete fairly with men... 

Then it isn't a matter of going to far. It's a mater of sexism of the worse kind. One that is shining poorly on all women.


----------



## Juicer

I remember a female coworker complained this week about how she and I have the same job, same position, mostly similar education, but she says I make more than her. And then she went on about how I had missed a bunch of work (my situation wasn't known to her, so can't knock her for that)
Well, I wanted to drop the issue, but she continued it, and we did find out I make more. And yes, it was extremely awkward discussing this at lunch. 
And I felt bad, because she is supporting a family, so I asked some questions, and got some interesting answers. 
She leaves before I do, to pick up her kids at school. So just by doing that, I pick up around 5 hours a week on her. Then she won't do client dinners, so I pick up that. 
Then we got to travel and sick days. I asked how many sick days she has accumulated. Less than 15. I think I have used maybe 3. 
When I brought this up, she said that shouldn't matter. She and I should make the same money for the same work, and because I make more it is a clear example of sexism. 
And while I could've pressed the issue and say "Well I put in 5+ more work hours than you do, then picking up after work stuff is another 10+ hours a week..." but my lunch was 'conviently' over, so I just left it at that. 

Also, for the women in the US:
1 in every 3 of you will get cancer. You got government health agencies for you. And you got a longer life expectancy than males do.
1 in every 2 men get cancer, and they have no government agency setup to look after men's health. 
(Guy power?)

And paternity fraud. The (legal) act of tricking a man, unknowingly or knowingly, into raising the child that is from another man. 
100% legal in most states. Women do not face jail time, fines, are not expected to pay back child support, can not pay fines for it, or anything. 
The only type of fraud that is legal. And sometimes, encouraged!

Then I remember another little story that came up. 
A high school teacher near where I lived, had sex with not 1, but 3 students. Now it is not statutory rape because my stupid state changed the laws around. But that doesn't change the fact she still had sex with 3 different students. 
Now, I am curious. It is an attractive, female teacher, that had sex with 3 male students, all 16+ years. 
Now, she is facing 30 years. I wonder what she will actually get. 
Because whenever men do something like sleep with a student, they are hung out to dry. 
Whenever a female teacher does this, they get counseling, and maybe 5 years, and people say that they were in love...

And women get less jail time than men do for the same crimes!
Don't believe me? Tell Casey Anthony. 
Or the wife that cut off her husband's manhood, then threw it down a garbage disposal and turned it on. (he had cheated on her, and asked for divorce, but...ouch!) 
Wonder what would happen if a male did that...

Oh, and that was talked about on that show The Talk. Well, more like laughed about, and poked fun at. When one of the host talked about "Well, if it was a male that did this to a female, we wouldn't be laughing."
And they just shrug off the comment, saying it is different...

Doubt if the opposite ever happened, it would even be legal! Imagine a bunch of guys sitting around joking about the mutiliation of a female's body. Would that show air? More likely it would be sued.


----------



## RandomDude

I believe in equality, unfortunately there are a lot of women out there who give feminism a horrid name. Selfish, self-centered, "entitled" women, and those who enjoy the power but reject the responsibility. So yes it has gone too far in many cases.

Guess there are the feminists and then there are the "feminists". All groups have the same good/bad within them.


----------



## credamdóchasgra

iBolt said:


> The fact is that men and are women are different creatures but should yet have equal access to the best opportunities this world has to offer in fulfilling their dreams and ambitions.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


:iagree:

And a man and woman who have married each other should treat each other with respect. 

I like knowing that my husband is different from me, and that we can expect different things from each other. I like the idea that we each have different "domains," each of which is OURS and if we each stay in our own lane, things are smooth.


----------



## mr.rightaway




----------



## Viseral

Men and women are not "equal". They are "equal but different". A good analogy would be like a crankshaft and camshaft inside an engine. They do completely different things but are both needed to make the engine run. They perform "equal but different" functions.


----------



## Stonewall

yes! all ism's go to far. thats why they are ism's!


----------



## jaquen

Gratitude said:


> Have women lost respect for men in the last 50 years?


In the United States, overall? Yes.

When there is a movement for equality it's not uncommon for the oppressed party to lose respect, or the appearance of respect, for the oppressor during the fight for better treatment. 



Gratitude said:


> Have women gone overboard in the notion of feminism?


I think women, and men actually, have gone overboard in some _aspects_ of feminism, but not far enough in others.



Gratitude said:


> Men, do you feel your wife respects you as the man of the house?


Absolutely.



Gratitude said:


> Do you believe you are the man of the house?


Yes, though I could stand to do a better job.



Gratitude said:


> Or do you feel she is overbearing and talks down to you?


Never. I wouldn't have married an overbearing person who enjoys talking down to me. I am often baffled by my time here at TAM because it's very hard for me to process that there are men who actually allow their wives to treat them like this.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Stonewall said:


> *yes! all ism's go to far. thats why they are ism's!*


"....Always go too far, because that's where you'll find the truth..."
*Albert Camus*.

"....All movements go too far....."
*Bertrand Russell*


----------



## La Rose Noire

I do see my SO as man of the house. I am fairly traditional and embrace his dominant qualities. I feel very safe and protected with him. I do not consider myself a feminist, more like an "equalist" and I have to say I believe men are getting the short end of the stick in society right now and I find that incredibly sad.


----------



## Goldmember357

dont go for those women.

I will say this do not look at the majority and aspire to be like them or think they have it so good. Good virtues is a rate thing to find in a person.


----------



## in my tree

Wow - I think feminism has gotten a bum rap on this website. I am a feminist, I am a proud feminist. A lot of the issues that I see discussed here seem superficial to me. (i.e.Opening a car door?) What I and a lot of the feminists that I know are fighting towards is having 50% of the people in Congress to represent the 51% majority (women), equal pay (women still make .80 to a man's dollar), and control over our own bodies. Also fighting for women in other countries who are being jailed, stoned, burned, etc. for daring to speak up. This is my idea of feminism. And yes, I do think that if men are to be drafted, so should women.

Now as far as the home life is concerned, that is between the couple. If they want a more traditional set up, good for them. If something else works for them, so be it. I really think that is an individualized (by that I mean couple) thing and there is no set standard. There is nothing wrong with a man being "king of the castle" IF both partners agree to it. On the other hand, if a couple prefers to make decisions jointly, I see nothing wrong with that either.


----------



## 827Aug

Please limit discussions to those pertaining to the topic, Feminism: Has it gone too far? There's no need to bring racism into the discussion.


----------



## Stonewall

Some of the latest studies show women making more money than men nowadays.


----------



## jaquen

827Aug said:


> Please limit discussions to those pertaining to the topic, Feminism: Has it gone too far? There's no need to bring racism into the discussion.


That was a very ugly, and unfortunate detour. I agree. I also have edited my post and taken out the "controversial" segment as to not derail the thread further.

Thank you for cleaning up our mess.


----------



## jaquen

in my tree said:


> Wow - I think feminism has gotten a bum rap on this website. I am a feminist, I am a proud feminist. A lot of the issues that I see discussed here seem superficial to me. (i.e.Opening a car door?) What I and a lot of the feminists that I know are fighting towards is having 50% of the people in Congress to represent the 51% majority (women), equal pay (women still make .80 to a man's dollar), and control over our own bodies. Also fighting for women in other countries who are being jailed, stoned, burned, etc. for daring to speak up. This is my idea of feminism. And yes, I do think that if men are to be drafted, so should women.


This is an excellent point. I think a lot of people, myself included, sometimes lose sight of the original intent of feminism, and lump together the faux feminist crap right along with true feminism. 

Original recipe feminism was not a fight for men and women to be exactly the same. It was a fight for equality. It didn't have anything to do with opening car doors, hating men, or denouncing traditions. It was all about providing women _choices_ and freedom.

Through the years a lot newer ways of thinking, and more radical ideals, became lumped into the greater cause that don't necessarily reflect the original intent.


----------



## in my tree

jacquen - I agree. There is nothing wrong with the gender differences and most of the women AND men that I know that fight for gender equality celebrate the differences too. When I see the "faux feminist crap" in the media it makes me angry too. Stupid advertisements that portray men as bumbling, helpless people who can't do anything right without the help of their wives do NOT help the feminist cause and actually hurts true feminism. Most of the women I know that are fighting for equality LOVE men! We don't think that men need to be shot down in order to lift ourselves up.


----------



## in my tree

Stonewall said:


> Some of the latest studies show women making more money than men nowadays.


Do you have a link to any of those studies? I'd be curious to read them. I do know that there are now more women in college than men and that they are graduating with higher degrees than men. This means that more women will be entering the white collar work force and probably getting the higher earning jobs. However once in those positions, it still shows that their male counterparts will advance quicker and earn more than women will. 

The economy has taken quite a toll on people and I have read that it has dispropotionately affected men mainly due to the big hit that the blue collar workforce has taken. Not good at all.


----------



## jaquen

Stonewall said:


> Some of the latest studies show women making more money than men nowadays.


The latest studies are projecting that in the next generation women _might_ outearn men overall.

What they are also showing is that the income gap is closing right now at the _beginning_ of the career. However the higher up the latter that both men and women go, the income gaps begins to widen again, and men are making a lot more money then women beyond the initial stages of a career.

Currently? Men, on the whole, still make more money for than women, for work in the exact same jobs.

The gap is closing, but it's far from closed.


----------



## Stonewall

Young, single, childless women out-earn male counterparts - USATODAY.com

Study: Young, Single, Childless Women Earn More Than Men - TIME


----------



## in my tree

Stonewall said:


> Young, single, childless women out-earn male counterparts - USATODAY.com
> 
> Study: Young, Single, Childless Women Earn More Than Men - TIME


thanks! I will take a look.


----------



## in my tree

Stonewall said:


> Young, single, childless women out-earn male counterparts - USATODAY.com
> 
> Study: Young, Single, Childless Women Earn More Than Men - TIME


hmmm.... after going over the first article and then glancing over the second article I find some disturbing things here. It says that :""Young women are going to college in droves," Reach Advisors reports. "Nearly three-quarters of girls who graduate from high school head to college, vs. two-thirds of the boys. But they don't stop there. *Women are now 1.5 times more likely than men to graduate from college or earn advanced degrees." *Armed with degrees, young women command higher salaries." Kind of what I pointed out previously. But why are so many men NOT going to college? Or is it that they go to trade schools more often (which is not taken into account here)? As a personal reference, I have seen through my daugter's friends and relationships (she is 22) that a lot of her male friends are kind of aimless. They live at home or work some service job and have no real goals. They are putting off college and don't have real aspirations. Most of her female friends are in college, working on degrees or are focusing on their careers. This is disturbing to me - the imbalance.

The other part of the article says: "The shift in earnings power started showing up in a few big cities a few years ago and has become widespread. It isn't true for all women in their 20s working full time — overall, they earn 90% of what all men in their 20s make — just for those who don't marry or have kids."
So even though some sinlge, childless women in their 20s earn more than men, women in that age group still only earn 90% of what men in that age group do. It is getting better (you are right about the shift, stonewall) but we're not there YET.


----------



## jaquen

I think the Huffington Post does a good job at look past some of the gloss, and showing that the gap isn't as closed as we might think:

Income Gap Closing: Women On Pace To Outearn Men


----------



## Stonewall

in my tree said:


> hmmm.... after going over the first article and then glancing over the second article I find some disturbing things here. It says that :""Young women are going to college in droves," Reach Advisors reports. "Nearly three-quarters of girls who graduate from high school head to college, vs. two-thirds of the boys. But they don't stop there. *Women are now 1.5 times more likely than men to graduate from college or earn advanced degrees." *Armed with degrees, young women command higher salaries." Kind of what I pointed out previously. But why are so many men NOT going to college? Or is it that they go to trade schools more often (which is not taken into account here)? As a personal reference, I have seen through my daugter's friends and relationships (she is 22) that a lot of her male friends are kind of aimless. They live at home or work some service job and have no real goals. They are putting off college and don't have real aspirations. Most of her female friends are in college, working on degrees or are focusing on their careers. This is disturbing to me - the imbalance.
> 
> The other part of the article says: "The shift in earnings power started showing up in a few big cities a few years ago and has become widespread. It isn't true for all women in their 20s working full time — overall, they earn 90% of what all men in their 20s make — just for those who don't marry or have kids."
> So even though some sinlge, childless women in their 20s earn more than men, women in that age group still only earn 90% of what men in that age group do. It is getting better (you are right about the shift, stonewall) but we're not there YET.


The shift was the totality of my point. Nothing changes totally or suddenly.It always comes in degrees.

In my Job it is exactly the same. Why? Because there is no provision for perfomance based raises. All salarys are set at a base line and when raises are given (rarely these days) everyone gets the same thiing. Welcome to central planning!!!


----------



## in my tree

Are you in a union? When I was in a union, that's how ours worked too. After that I was in a white collar job and we had both base line raises and merit raises. Unfortunately with the economy, the base line raises were put aside and the managers always figured out a way NOT to give merit raises. :/ Ah well.... I got sidetracked here.

Back to the OP - I do not think that true feminism has gone too far but the media's perception or rather twisting of feminism has gone WAY too far.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Stonewall said:


> Some of the latest studies show women making more money than men nowadays.


:iagree:

In our country women outstrip men demographically 7:1
Women also earn more money than men because they are higher qualified. Tertiary education is free , and the government allows for study leave with full pay.

At the judicial level , about half of the judges are women.
Even at the elementary and high school level, more than 70% of the teachers are women.
Most of the top scholarship winners are also women.
In national exams the girls always come out on top.
Need I say more?

We operate under a bicameral parliamentary system , the head of which,
Is also a woman.


----------



## Stonewall

in my tree said:


> Are you in a union? When I was in a union, that's how ours worked too. After that I was in a white collar job and we had both base line raises and merit raises. Unfortunately with the economy, the base line raises were put aside and the managers always figured out a way NOT to give merit raises. :/ Ah well.... I got sidetracked here.
> 
> Back to the OP - I do not think that true feminism has gone too far but the media's perception or rather twisting of feminism has gone WAY too far.


Nope no union. Its actually against state law in this state for a governmental body to even recognize much less negotiate with a union. 

Here they can not circumvent the rules regardless of what the managers would like to do (I am a manager within my dept). Each dept can make recomendations but money would have to be appropriated through county council. The only people who have gotten raises in the last 5 years is 5 or 6 very high level mangers whose heads are buried so far up councils southernmost regions that council hasnt taken a dump in 5 years!


----------



## iBolt

will a "true" feminist fight for and defend the right of a father to equal access to his children where the parents are separated ? Will a true.feminist push to oppose the blatantly unequal family law system that still perceives women as more important or needed for child'sdevelopment? Does feminism advocate equality for both men AND women or is it SOLELY concerned with women's equality only?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## FirstYearDown

I used to be labelled a "feminist man hater" in my family of origin. 
This was because I spoke out against being given far more chores and no freedom, while my brothers had more rights. 

I was tired of being told that I had to learn to take care of a family, while my brothers were told that their wives would do the housework and cooking. If a wife works, there is no reason why she should have to do everything. 

What made this even weirder is my mom hates that my father treats her like a slave. He has never done much housework, cooking or childrearing, yet my mother does all that for him and complains about it. How on earth could she want the same for her daughter?

I posted this to show how people have lost sight of what feminism really is. Not wanting to be a maid because I am female does not mean that I hate men.


----------



## Viseral

in my tree said:


> Wow - I think feminism has gotten a bum rap on this website. I am a feminist, I am a proud feminist. A lot of the issues that I see discussed here seem superficial to me. (i.e.Opening a car door?) What I and a lot of the feminists that I know are fighting towards is having 50% of the people in Congress to represent the 51% majority (women), equal pay (women still make .80 to a man's dollar), and control over our own bodies. Also fighting for women in other countries who are being jailed, stoned, burned, etc. for daring to speak up. This is my idea of feminism. And yes, I do think that if men are to be drafted, so should women.
> 
> Now as far as the home life is concerned, that is between the couple. If they want a more traditional set up, good for them. If something else works for them, so be it. I really think that is an individualized (by that I mean couple) thing and there is no set standard. There is nothing wrong with a man being "king of the castle" IF both partners agree to it. On the other hand, if a couple prefers to make decisions jointly, I see nothing wrong with that either.


This is a prime example of how perverted and widespread modern feminism has become. This feminist poster believes not only in equal opportunity but also in equal outcome. The truth is that men and women are biologically different and they therefore make different choices in life. In free societies men and women naturally self-segregate. There's a reason why more women work in maternity wards and more men work in construction. It's because we are different and there's nothing wrong with that. That's why there are more men in congress, because most women choose not to be politicians. Its not because of some white male patriarchy plotting to keep women down.

Same goes for the gender pay gap. Its a myth. Women mostly choose careers that dont have as much earning power and they choose to stay home with their families. Statistics show that when women make the same career choices and work as many hours as men they earn just as much or more.

Feminism is a widespread victim mentality that pits men and women against each other and ruins our relationships and families. Men and women should have symbiotic relationships which respect each others strengths and differences. We're not the same and we shouldn't be competing with one another.


----------



## Gaia

I agree with viseral.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Caribbean Man

Viseral said:


> This is a prime example of how perverted and widespread modern feminism has become. This feminist poster believes not only in equal opportunity but also in equal outcome. *The truth is that men and women are biologically different and they therefore make different choices in life. In free societies men and women naturally self-segregate. There's a reason why more women work in maternity wards and more men work in construction. It's because we are different and there's nothing wrong with that.* That's why there are more men in congress, because most women choose not to be politicians. Its not because of some white male patriarchy plotting to keep women down.
> 
> Same goes for the gender pay gap. Its a myth. Women mostly choose careers that dont have as much earning power and they choose to stay home with their families. Statistics show that when women make the same career choices and work as many hours as men they earn just as much or more.
> 
> Feminism is a widespread victim mentality that pits men and women against each other and ruins our relationships and families. Men and women should have symbiotic relationships which respect each others strengths and differences. We're not the same and we shouldn't be competing with one another.


I put a " like " to your post because I agree with the part highlighted.
What is now happening in our society[ where I live in the Caribbean ] with respect to the feminist movement is that the pendulum swing has reached its top , and men are beginning to take notice.
So that some husbands are now fighting custody for their children when divorce comes up. There are lawyers who specialize in that.
Others are taking advantage of educational opportunities and going into areas like finance ,IT, and Management, all female dominated. 
Men are now moving out of the security services , construction etc .and going higher.
Its and interesting phenomena.
But given the birth rate ratios being what it is,
The cards are heavily stacked against men.


----------



## in my tree

Viseral said:


> This is a prime example of how perverted and widespread modern feminism has become. This feminist poster believes not only in equal opportunity but also in equal outcome. The truth is that men and women are biologically different and they therefore make different choices in life. In free societies men and women naturally self-segregate. There's a reason why more women work in maternity wards and more men work in construction. It's because we are different and there's nothing wrong with that. That's why there are more men in congress, because most women choose not to be politicians. Its not because of some white male patriarchy plotting to keep women down.
> 
> Same goes for the gender pay gap. Its a myth. Women mostly choose careers that dont have as much earning power and they choose to stay home with their families. Statistics show that when women make the same career choices and work as many hours as men they earn just as much or more.
> 
> Feminism is a widespread victim mentality that pits men and women against each other and ruins our relationships and families. Men and women should have symbiotic relationships which respect each others strengths and differences. We're not the same and we shouldn't be competing with one another.


Feminism is now perverted and believing in equality in both opportunities and outcomes is now wrong? Wow - what century are we in? Of course we are different - biologically we are different - however if you stack a female engineer or politician or doctor or whatever the career there is absolutely NO reason that she should not be given equal opportunities and outcomes as her male counterpart. To believe otherwise, in my mind, is backwards and I refuse to tell my 22 year old daughter that she should not be as successful and rewarded as her male counterparts in which ever field she chooses to pursue a career in. 

Gender pay gap is NOT a myth. Please educate yourself:
The Gender Pay Gap by Industry - NYTimes.com

Men working in maternity wards - well you go me there BUT let's be honest - if you were a woman giving birth, would you want a male or female nurse attending to you? Now if you are talking about nursing in general (traditionally a female career), things are changing: Number of Men in Nursing on the Rise | California Nursing News


A victim mentality? Most feminists do not see them selves as victims, I know that I don't. They just want true equality, not handouts, and they have earned what they have achieved. They've been working hard since the late 1800s. "Men and women should have symbiotic relationships which respect each others strengths and differences." - this part I actually agree with you in regards to relationships however as far as working circumstances are concerned there is always going to be competition, no matter the gender of the job candidate. If my daughter chooses to be an engineer or a truck driver there is no way that she is going to step back or refuse a job offer because it's a "man's job". That's just silly.


----------



## Gaia

Viseral said:


> Men and women should have symbiotic relationships which respect each others strengths and differences. We're not the same and we shouldn't be competing with one another.


Ok this is the part I was agreeing with as its exactly how I feel.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Viseral

As I stated before, men and women should have equal opportunity. However, the feminist goal of equal outcome for men and women in all facets of life is perversion. And by that I mean that no one should be hired strictly for their gender or race. They should be hired strictly for their qualifications. Feminism seeks to force equal outcomes on men and women under the guise of "equality". To do this they must convince the populace that men and women are the same. When there are more men in a particular profession than women, they claim discrimination, which simply isn't true. Men and women are different. We make different choices.

The gender pay gap is a myth. Watch the video series on youtube of Dr Warren Farrel, former director of the national organization for women explaining his book "Why men earn more".

No one is saying your daughter shouldn't have the same opportunities as men, if she is qualified. But to expect men to be women and women to be men is perversion. There's a beautiful dance between masculinity and femininity. Let's keep it that way.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

I don't think people understand feminism if they think it's gone too far. It's about access and equity and opportunity. 

Men and women are not equal and they never will be and that's ok, being equal means being the same as. But women and men are different (not in all ways or ) it's just that the feminine or womanly isn't valued. Start valuing that just as much as masculinity and traditional male roles and many women may choose the feminine. 

It's quite clear from reading this site that women and traditional women's roles or feminine ways and majority female careers and jobs are not valued as they should. It's such a shame. 
Men and women would live together so much better if they respected each other,the right to choose and really valued equity.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## iBolt

in my tree said:


> Feminism is now perverted and believing in equality in both opportunities and outcomes is now wrong? Wow - what century are we in? Of course we are different - biologically we are different - however if you stack a female engineer or politician or doctor or whatever the career there is absolutely NO reason that she should not be given equal opportunities and outcomes as her male counterpart. To believe otherwise, in my mind, is backwards and I refuse to tell my 22 year old daughter that she should not be as successful and rewarded as her male counterparts in which ever field she chooses to pursue a career in.
> 
> Gender pay gap is NOT a myth. Please educate yourself:
> The Gender Pay Gap by Industry - NYTimes.com
> 
> Men working in maternity wards - well you go me there BUT let's be honest - if you were a woman giving birth, would you want a male or female nurse attending to you? Now if you are talking about nursing in general (traditionally a female career), things are changing: Number of Men in Nursing on the Rise | California Nursing News
> 
> 
> A victim mentality? Most feminists do not see them selves as victims, I know that I don't. They just want true equality, not handouts, and they have earned what they have achieved. They've been working hard since the late 1800s. "Men and women should have symbiotic relationships which respect each others strengths and differences." - this part I actually agree with you in regards to relationships however as far as working circumstances are concerned there is always going to be competition, no matter the gender of the job candidate. If my daughter chooses to be an engineer or a truck driver there is no way that she is going to step back or refuse a job offer because it's a "man's job". That's just silly.


In my tree and other feminists on here: 

1. As a feminist, would you be prepared to fight for the right of a father to have 'equal access' to his children where the parents are separated'?

2. What are your views on the preponderance of 'mother is best' culture within the family law system? Let me know if you need me to explain further.

3. Do you not consider that the feminist cause is being undermined by a legal system that essentially causes children to spend the bulk of their time with mums thus essentially perpetuating the idea that it's okay for men to play less of a role in childcare as this is the domain of women?

I still maintain that feminism, like other isms have lost its way in that its core message is bereft of balance and it TOTALLY shuts its eyes to the gross injustices and inequity being meted out to men. Also, it fails to acknowledge in its discourse that women actually DO make some choices generally which affects the outcomes of equality and men aren't entirely responsible for women's lot in life any more than women are for men.


----------



## Stonewall

Not that I condone fascism, or any -ism for that matter. -Ism's in my opinion are not good. A person should not believe in an -ism, he should believe in himself. I quote John Lennon, "I don't believe in The Beatles, I just believe in me." Good point there. After all, he was the walrus. I could be the walrus but it still wouldn't change the fact that I don't own a car!


----------



## chillymorn

the kitchens that way now go make me a sandwich....and bring me a beer.


LOL


----------



## that_girl

Stonewall said:


> Not that I condone fascism, or any -ism for that matter. -Ism's in my opinion are not good. A person should not believe in an -ism, he should believe in himself. I quote John Lennon, "I don't believe in The Beatles, I just believe in me." Good point there. After all, he was the walrus. I could be the walrus but it still wouldn't change the fact that I don't own a car!


:rofl: Love that movie!


----------



## in my tree

FrenchFry said:


> 1.
> *Absolutely. Most modern schools of feminist thought do not want to see a child separated from his father and believe that co-parenting is a much more effective strategy.*
> 
> 2.
> *Believe it or not, this is feminist issue.
> 
> Fathers either don't believe they will win joint/sole custody in court so they don't fight or they don't feel they will be the better "caregiver" so they don't fight.
> 
> As soon as men fight for custody in court, they receive it more often than not.
> 
> "Despite the powerful stereotypes working against fathers, they are significantly more successful than is commonly believed. The Massachusetts [gender bias] task force, for example, reported that fathers receive primary or joint custody in more than 70 percent of contested cases."
> 
> Schafran, Lynn Hecht, "Gender Bias in Family Courts," American Bar Association Family Advocate, Vol. 17, No. 1, p. 26
> 
> Ruth I. Abrams & John M. Greaney, Report of the Gender Bias Study of the Supreme Judicial Court [of Massachusetts] 62-63 (1983), also citing similar finding from California and other parts of the nation.
> 
> From my personal feminist perspective, the reason we still see such lopsidedness in custody and court cases is because we still haven't completely shaken off the notion that women are "nature's caregivers" and that men are "nature's providers." As soon as both genders (there is that feminist part!) accept that both genders can be put into both roles with success, we will see way more equality in custody cases. This also involves men jumping in as well and saying "hey, we men can be excellent caregivers as well, I don't just provide," and then show it. Fight in court guys and prove gender essentialism wrong. *
> 
> 3.* See above. Men don't fight as hard for joint or sole custody and when they do, they get it. To add though, part of some schools of feminism is fighting against the notion that mothers are automatically the best caregivers because it's based in things like "biology" and "common sense" and breaking down those notions that may not be as applicable in modern society. (some) Feminists are serious about breaking down biotruths and examining what cultural biases are behind them for equality and that includes things like "mothers are more nuturing," when we may only be basing such common sense truths on little more than centuries of being told that this is true.
> *
> 
> I'm just going to leave this link here where the following quote came from: Feminism: It’s Good For Men, Too ‹ Feminspire


Brava! Excellent post, FF! There really isn't much more to add but ibolt it sounds like you haven't heard from feminists who are in favor of children being raised by both parents and that is a shame. I truly believe that children need both parents and both have the capabilities to raise them in a nurturing environment. Unfortunately, as FF has pointed out, theses abilities of boys and men aren't always brought forth due to cultural stereotypes. That does a dis-service to all involved, imo. As far as the justice system is concerned well, you got me on how to change it. If some feminists are "fighting against the notion that mothers are automatically the best caregivers because it's based in things like "biology" and "common sense" and breaking down those notions that may not be as applicable in modern society" as FF has stated, that can only be a good thing, no?


----------



## iBolt

in my tree said:


> Brava! Excellent post, FF! There really isn't much more to add but ibolt it sounds like you haven't heard from feminists who are in favor of children being raised by both parents and that is a shame. I truly believe that children need both parents and both have the capabilities to raise them in a nurturing environment. Unfortunately, as FF has pointed out, theses abilities of boys and men aren't always brought forth due to cultural stereotypes. That does a dis-service to all involved, imo. As far as the justice system is concerned well, you got me on how to change it. If some feminists are "fighting against the notion that mothers are automatically the best caregivers because it's based in things like "biology" and "common sense" and breaking down those notions that may not be as applicable in modern society" as FF has stated, that can only be a good thing, no?





FrenchFry said:


> 1.
> *Absolutely. Most modern schools of feminist thought do not want to see a child separated from his father and believe that co-parenting is a much more effective strategy.*
> 
> 2.
> *Believe it or not, this is feminist issue.
> 
> Fathers either don't believe they will win joint/sole custody in court so they don't fight or they don't feel they will be the better "caregiver" so they don't fight.
> 
> As soon as men fight for custody in court, they receive it more often than not.
> 
> "Despite the powerful stereotypes working against fathers, they are significantly more successful than is commonly believed. The Massachusetts [gender bias] task force, for example, reported that fathers receive primary or joint custody in more than 70 percent of contested cases."
> 
> Schafran, Lynn Hecht, "Gender Bias in Family Courts," American Bar Association Family Advocate, Vol. 17, No. 1, p. 26
> 
> Ruth I. Abrams & John M. Greaney, Report of the Gender Bias Study of the Supreme Judicial Court [of Massachusetts] 62-63 (1983), also citing similar finding from California and other parts of the nation.
> 
> From my personal feminist perspective, the reason we still see such lopsidedness in custody and court cases is because we still haven't completely shaken off the notion that women are "nature's caregivers" and that men are "nature's providers." As soon as both genders (there is that feminist part!) accept that both genders can be put into both roles with success, we will see way more equality in custody cases. This also involves men jumping in as well and saying "hey, we men can be excellent caregivers as well, I don't just provide," and then show it. Fight in court guys and prove gender essentialism wrong. *
> 
> 3.* See above. Men don't fight as hard for joint or sole custody and when they do, they get it. To add though, part of some schools of feminism is fighting against the notion that mothers are automatically the best caregivers because it's based in things like "biology" and "common sense" and breaking down those notions that may not be as applicable in modern society. (some) Feminists are serious about breaking down biotruths and examining what cultural biases are behind them for equality and that includes things like "mothers are more nuturing," when we may only be basing such common sense truths on little more than centuries of being told that this is true.
> *
> 
> I'm just going to leave this link here where the following quote came from: Feminism: It’s Good For Men, Too ‹ Feminspire


It is refreshing to hear feminists say what you say BUT I do wonder if yours is but a lone voice crying in the wilderness of institutional sexism. With regards to your answer to my second question, you quote what I can only suppose to be credible and authoritative sources. However, what you probably have not considered is that, courts now tend to grant so called joint custody (US)/ joint residency (UK) to SIMPLY MAKE A STATEMENT to children, father and mother while the preponderant amount of contact time still goes to women. I honestly do not believe that contesting is the issue.

Rather, I am talking about equal time not the every two weeks plus bonus time for holidays stuff. I will hazard a guess that contested cases do not result in fair and equal time which recognises, as you suggest, the right of the child to time with each parent.

Your insinuation that it is men's fault essentially for not fighting the system in court is like me saying it is women's fault for not fighting hard enough against a terrible system that objectifies them. That's even before we start talking about how many women will allow their child's partner to have equal time as they have with the said child. Why? Because women DO believe they are better care givers and nurturers. Men get penalised for not paying Alimony or child support (fair) but women rarely even get a reprimand for blatantly violating a court order by refusing father access to his child. I for one have full custody of my 3 kids and had to fight tooth and nail in court for nearly two years despite the fact that the courts were faced with substantive medical evidence of mother's serious mental health condition, her history of non compliance and potential threat to kids. All along, shared custody (again that statement thing) was ordered with children spending approx. 65% time with their mum. Despite the shared custody, she was regarded as the PRIMARY CARER which carries legal weight in Britain. It took another hospitalisation for the same reasons and me literally crying my eyes out before a female judge (I had no lawyer, she had a barrister) at a third case in 2 years before I got full custody. I was the only male in the court room and honestly thought I was done for but alas, reason ruled the day. Kids are now doing great and thriving.

So I wonder what would have happened had the case been the other way round i.e if I was the one with history of mental health who had his chops dragged to court two years ago. I would NEVER be allowed to see my kids unsupervised whereas she had shared custody all along. 

Please pardon the rant, my point is that your views about feminism is very much in a minority but nevertheless, I do applaud the rather balanced take on things. Also note that I am not denying that sexism against women take place. I know it does. I am also very aware that in other walks of life, especially that which I think hurts more than access to jobs/fair pay i.e access to your own flesh and blood, men are thoroughly shafted EVEN IF they contest it. So I still maintain that feminism has gone too far in that its discourse rarely takes a balance view about gender equality as it focuses primarily on woman ---> man.


----------



## TiggyBlue

iBolt said:


> It is refreshing to hear feminists say what you say BUT I do wonder if yours is but a lone voice crying in the wilderness of institutional sexism. With regards to your answer to my second question, you quote what I can only suppose to be credible and authoritative sources. However, what you probably have not considered is that, courts now tend to grant so called joint custody (US)/ joint residency (UK) to SIMPLY MAKE A STATEMENT to children, father and mother while the preponderant amount of contact time still goes to women. I honestly do not believe that contesting is the issue.
> 
> Rather, I am talking about equal time not the every two weeks plus bonus time for holidays stuff. I will hazard a guess that contested cases do not result in fair and equal time which recognises, as you suggest, the right of the child to time with each parent.
> 
> Your insinuation that it is men's fault essentially for not fighting the system in court is like me saying it is women's fault for not fighting hard enough against a terrible system that objectifies them. That's even before we start talking about how many women will allow their child's partner to have equal time as they have with the said child. Why? *Because women DO believe they are better care givers and nurturers.* Men get penalised for not paying Alimony or child support (fair) but women rarely even get a reprimand for blatantly violating a court order by refusing father access to his child. I for one have full custody of my 3 kids and had to fight tooth and nail in court for nearly two years despite the fact that the courts were faced with substantive medical evidence of mother's serious mental health condition, her history of non compliance and potential threat to kids. All along, shared custody (again that statement thing) was ordered with children spending approx. 65% time with their mum. Despite the shared custody, she was regarded as the PRIMARY CARER which carries legal weight in Britain. It took another hospitalisation for the same reasons and me literally crying my eyes out before a female judge (I had no lawyer, she had a barrister) at a third case in 2 years before I got full custody. Kids are now doing great and thriving.
> 
> So I wonder what would have happened had the case been the other way round i.e if I was the one with history of mental health. I would NEVER be allowed to see my kids unsupervised whereas she had shared custody all along.
> 
> Please pardon the rant, my point is that your views about feminism is very much in a minority but nevertheless, I do applaud the rather balanced take on things. Also note that I am not denying that sexism against women take place. I know it does. I am also very aware that in other walks of life, especially that which I think hurts more than access to jobs/fair pay i.e access to your own flesh and blood, men are thoroughly shafted EVEN IF they contest it. PHEW


There are women do believe that they are automatically a better parent because of there gendre but there are plenty who don't and I don't really believe that's a feminist issue more than a issue with people who have abit of a superiority complex.

Saying that I understand why you would feel that way after all you had to go through for custody of your kids.


----------



## TiggyBlue

Im not sure if i would call myself a feminist but I definitely believe in equality for all, personally prefer equalist then feminist.
Feminism has become a pretty complex notion because there are a minority of misandrists who hide behind feminism and a minority of misogynists who try to use the word feminist to shame you and shut you up.


----------



## iBolt

abitlost said:


> Im not sure if i would call myself a feminist but I definitely believe in equality for all, personally prefer equalist then feminist.
> Feminism has become a pretty complex notion because there are a minority of misandrists who hide behind feminism and a minority of misogynists who try to use the word feminist to shame you and shut you up.


:iagree:

Despite my experiences, I totally still would rather be in a world where everyone had equal access to the best this great world has to offer irrespective of their race, gender, creed or weight. Most people I know who fight against an ism can sometimes be so myopic and intense that the entire world is viewed through this tinted monocle while losing sight of the other side of the equation. Perception then starts to shape reality - their reality.


----------



## curlysue321

My husband is in charge of the finances and I feel he is the leader. Doesn't mean I don't have an opinion. I just prefer not to be in charge of things. I appreciate the fact that he is willing to lead because my exh put me in charge of everything and I resented it.


----------



## iBolt

abitlost said:


> There are women do believe that they are automatically a better parent because of there gendre but there are plenty who don't and I don't really believe that's a feminist issue more than a issue with people who have abit of a superiority complex.
> 
> Saying that I understand why you would feel that way after all you had to go through for custody of your kids.


I think you missed the point of my post which was that where I think feminism has gone wrong or too far is that its discourse rarely includes overall gender inequalities. Since masculism as an ism is NOWHERE near as influential or even vocal as feminism has become, I guess we need the balanced feminist women to articulate a broader understanding of where things are heading instead of the nutcases who, as you say, are essentially misandrists.


----------



## TiggyBlue

iBolt said:


> I think you missed the point of my post which was that where I think feminism has gone wrong or too far is that its discourse rarely includes overall gender inequalities. Since masculism as an ism is NOWHERE near as influential or even vocal as feminism has become, I guess we need the balanced feminist women to articulate a broader understanding of where things are heading instead of the nutcases who, as you say, are essentially misandrists.


Sorry I didn't articulate myself properly, I ment thinking women are better parents than men is more of a misandrist way of thinking rather than a feminist way of thinking.
Feminism originated to create equality not to supress others,
it's a shame some people have seemed to use feminism for that reason.


----------



## iBolt

abitlost said:


> Sorry I didn't articulate myself properly, I ment thinking women are better parents than men is more of a misandrist way of thinking rather than a feminist way of thinking.
> Feminism originated to create equality not to supress others,
> it's a shame some people have seemed to use feminism for that reason.


Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## iBolt

FrenchFry said:


> *iBolt*
> 
> First off, I'm really sorry you had to go through all of that to gain custody of your kids. I don't pretend to understand the motives of the legal system, only to do my best to avoid it and to try and navigate it's biases.
> 
> 
> 
> I actually came to my conclusion after reading many feminist blogs about child custody and why women get awarded custody so often. I'm not a lone voice, but like anything else, feminism has multiple schools of thought and they don't always agree 100% with each other. One thing that most agree on though is that *strict adherence to traditional gender roles hurts all of us, not just women.*
> 
> If you think I'm (we! Thanks *in a tree*! a lone voice, I suggest trying to post your question in a feminist blog or forum and I think you'd be a little suprised at the answers you get. But, to be forewarned, most feminist blogs are wary of MRAs and trolls and some have a really short fuse from dealing with the above.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea. If there are studies which suggest so, that would be appalling to me and I'd want to look further into why this is.
> 
> 
> This was not an insinuation, rather an encouragement. I want men to stand up for themselves in court, to use the system in their benefit. If fathers want equal time and the court isn't granting it, that isn't a failing of feminism but a failing of the court, the judge and the legal system and can be attributed to the backwards thinking of the patriarchy.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, the women who believe that they are *by nature* or *biologically* or *with using common sense* that they are the better caregivers are not feminists, they are women just as sucked up into the patriarchy as the rest of us. Now there may be women in court arguing that they are the better caregivers because they _actually_ are; for example, they are the primary transport to and from school/doctor/activities, the primary cook of household meals, the primary clothes shopper, the primary homework helper, the primary cleaner or whatever while the father is in fact the primary money earner and for whatever reason isn't as involved in his kids life. Do I think that during a divorce the courts should allow the father the chance to prove that he is just as capable of managing both roles? *Absolutely.* It should be the default ruling. I have no idea how many men would accept it, but I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be the default ruling.
> 
> 
> 
> Men *NOT* getting shafted through the courts bias towards a female caregiver is something feminists get behind. Seriously!


Thank you for your reasoned response. I'll take them on board.


----------



## iBolt

Heard this joke the other day. Please do not shoot me down for this and do resist googling it

What is the opposite of a feminist? ....


----------



## costa200

> Men NOT getting shafted through the courts bias towards a female caregiver is something feminists get behind. Seriously!


Really? I haven't seen much of that. What i do see is whenever a feminist organization gets somehow involved in a divorce situation it is usually to crucify the guy without giving him the right to even defend himself. 

In fact there are plenty of "feminist" organizations whose main objective is to aid women disappear with the kids without much investigation on why they want to do it. 

Cases abound where men must wait for years until the court finally decides to grant them the opportunity to visit their children in these situations. 

But what is funny is that men that try to do the same are often hunted down like criminal kidnappers and get in a lot of legal heat for it, while women enjoy institutional support. 

So, please forgive my skepticism of groups of women waving the flag of "feminism" when they get involved in custody battles. The facts speak for themselves.


----------



## iBolt

I knew the boyz were out there somewhere in the TAM green room Costa200  

In the UK, there's an organisation called Fathers for justice . They're always doing bizarre things like breaching tight security to scale the walls of Buckingham Palace or breaking into Parliament to protest the institutional sexism that says by default children always remain in the care of mothers while leaving fathers to have to beg to see their own kids.

I have never seen any of the major female figures in Britain argue in their support.nor any well known feminist . I can accept that there are feminist who have a much more balanced and.less adversarial approach to.equality (as has been well demonstrated here) but you rarely here of them unless you go on some online forums etc. 

Also bear in mind, NO POLITICIAN wants to mess with women. I work in politics and I know that apart from the retired old age pensioners , the one demographic group you don't mess with is that of women. The family law system reflects this fear .. So while men rule the political landscape , these same men know whose votes they need more of. These I believe are true at least in Western democracies anyways
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## *LittleDeer*

With regards to child custody, why should custody go 50% to any parent (Father or mother) who has not done at least 50% of the care before the divorce? Why should the parent who didn't sacrifice their career in order to stay home and raise the children automatically get 50% care?

I don't care what your gender is, but if your children are used to you being the primary care giver, and particularly if the children are young, then they should have majority care with that parent, the one who has done most of the sacrificing and care up to that point. However both parents should always have lots of access to the children (that doesn't mean equal time at each residence).
You have to look at what is best for the children.

It just so happens that more women still make this sacrifice and do have a greater bond with children (IMO), but not all ways. It's a case by case thing.

I have an ex who will never take time off work, not even if our child is sick, everything falls to me, I had to get a job with better hours and I still do all the sacrificing, he even moved quite a way away, yet he still thinks he should have 50% care. That to me is baffling.


----------



## iBolt

FrenchFry said:


> Thass funny. I work in politics too, the boring statistical numbers and data side of politics and the reason you don't mess with women (and old people) as a demographic group (at least in the US) is because more women vote than men, *and when political changes occur, men are the ones fluctuating their decisions more than women. Women aren't monolithic voters, but they are more stable voters,* and the gender gap in voting patterns isn't caused by women flocking to the left (again, US sorry for the bias) but by men swinging harder to the right while women only move a couple percentage points either way.
> 
> High up politics though is still largely a boy's club, but boy's clubs know very well that pandering to and placating women is one of those sure methods that will garner more votes.


You make it sound as though there is something fundamentally flawed with being a floating or undecided voter. If anything, common sense dictates that in a close race, it the undecided voters that you need to flock to. Women might not be monolithic as you suggest but they sure are much more monolithic than men i.e generally more left leaning but not for the reasons you'd imagine such as Abortion or Equal Rights laws (see Unconventional Wisdom: Facts and Myths about American Voters by Karen Kaufmann)

The bizarre thing is that politicians know EXACTLY what they need to say and do to rock the world of female voters. I think it is very patronising but I am in a business where the vote is queen  like profits to a listed company. Since it appears we both agree on this point, should this not make the blood of a feminist boil when they hear politicians start "pandering to and placating women"? (your words)


----------



## iBolt

*LittleDeer* said:


> With regards to child custody, why should custody go 50% to any parent (Father or mother) who has not done at least 50% of the care before the divorce? Why should the parent who didn't sacrifice their career in order to stay home and raise the children automatically get 50% care?
> 
> I don't care what your gender is, but if your children are used to you being the primary care giver, and particularly if the children are young, then they should have majority care with that parent, the one who has done most of the sacrificing and care up to that point. However both parents should always have lots of access to the children (that doesn't mean equal time at each residence).
> You have to look at what is best for the children.
> 
> It just so happens that more women still make this sacrifice and do have a greater bond with children (IMO), but not all ways. It's a case by case thing.
> 
> I have an ex who will never take time off work, not even if our child is sick, everything falls to me, I had to get a job with better hours and I still do all the sacrificing, he even moved quite a way away, yet he still thinks he should have 50% care. That to me is baffling.


I am very sorry that you've one of those exs but that nevertheless does not make the logic of your argument risible. For example, no one in their right mind goes into a marriage envisioning divorce or separation. If according to your flawed logic, all men were to consider your formula for access i.e what you put in is what you get out, more should make sure they lovingly coerce their wives to go and work, bring home the bacon before going to the gym at night ...just in case.

Further, this ridiculous formula would dictate that the person who earned or contributed the most financially should keep the same proportion after the unfortunate dissolution of a marriage.

I think you should seriously reconsider your position and its ramifications. Children should not be used as pawns in a chess game of immaturity, entitlement and selfishness by adults. Sadly, the law is on your side in this regard and you help to make the point that I made earlier. Do you consider yourself a feminist? If so, what is your branch of feminism called? 

You contradict yourself stating what the law also states - "You have to look at what is best for the children". If you REALLY believed this, why would you then impose this arbitrary formula which CLEARLY puts women in THE driving position and you then say "I don't care what your gender is.." You clearly do.

For me and despite my ex wife's mental health, I am happy to facilitate and encourage weekly contact with our children and half holidays with her because I believe the children need BOTH parents and plus, I too need to have a life. I often wonder if the wrangling that goes on over contact with children is not an attempt by one parent to 'get at' the other or teach 'em a lesson for past hurts when it has little to do with what's best for the child.

I am very sorry if I come across a little strongly on this topic. I can empathise with your situation.


----------



## TiggyBlue

*LittleDeer* said:


> With regards to child custody, why should custody go 50% to any parent (Father or mother) who has not done at least 50% of the care before the divorce? Why should the parent who didn't sacrifice their career in order to stay home and raise the children automatically get 50% care?
> 
> I don't care what your gender is, but if your children are used to you being the primary care giver, and particularly if the children are young, then they should have majority care with that parent, the one who has done most of the sacrificing and care up to that point. However both parents should always have lots of access to the children (that doesn't mean equal time at each residence).
> You have to look at what is best for the children.
> 
> It just so happens that more women still make this sacrifice and do have a greater bond with children (IMO), but not all ways. It's a case by case thing.
> 
> 
> 
> I can see how the parent stay at home sacrificed alot to stay with their kid/s, but playing devils advocate there are some cases that one partner wants to stay at home and raise the kid so the other partner works their *ss of to make that happen even though they would love to stay at home with their kids but have taken even more hours to be able to support their family so have sacrificed time with his/her kid so that the other spouse can stay at home and his/her kid will have a parent with them all the time.
> 
> Now if they couple seperate it's not really fair that the parent who worked hard at work and sacrificed time away from their kid to make it possible for the other spouse to raise the child full time to get less custody because their sacrifice took away from spending time with their kid.
> 
> It's a difficult debate with custody because every case is so different.
Click to expand...


----------



## ScarletBegonias

i think equality is good.I also think balance is good. Man hating isn't cool and neither is woman hating. 

Balance people  

As a woman today sometimes you have to be masculine and sometimes you have to be feminine. Same goes for men. We can't all walk around acting like there is no need for us to tap into our feminine side or masculine side.

Feminism started with a message about equality.Somewhere along the line that message turned into man degrading hatefulness for many people.


----------



## costa200

> Can you specifically name one? I'd like to check this out.


One i know pretty well, It's a portuguese one called APAV. Run by women and for women (although you won't get any sort of official confirmation). Supposedly a victims of domestic abuse association, a woman only has to make a call and she can be hidden with her kids for years while the father (guilty or not of domestic abuse) has to prove his innocence in court (supposed to be the other way around in all cases except this). Then after years in the courts he may be able to see the kids again. 

But i'm pretty sure you equivalent of this in every western country. This model is not original to my country. 



> Parental kidnapping is parental kidnapping and from a quick overview of what statistics I can find, it seems that the gender of an abductor once found makes little difference on if they will be prosecuted or not.
> 
> The biggest factor I can find that makes a difference on eventual prosecution is if said abductor is fleeing from domestic abuse and/or protecting their child, but even with statutes in place to protect DV victims and their children from their abusers, DV victims who abduct their child are still thrown in jail and have their children taken away. Unfortunately this is mostly women and of course any DV victim, male or female needs special consideration when an abduction occurs.


Every divorced dad's forum is filled with "she won't let me see my kids and isn't respecting visitation rights" threads. The problem is that most of the time when this happens it gets registered nowhere and so there are no numbers. Apparently nobody gives a damn except the father and his family.

Guys doing the same are "kidnappers"...



> That combined with 53% of abduction cases being perpetrated by the biological father could indicate why it seems like fathers get treated harsher than women in the legal system and why there may be more women's groups (not necessarily feminist organizations) out there dedicated to parental abductions, but I can't find clear stats saying that women abductors get treated less harshly in the legal system than men. Let me know if you find them.


Can you see anyone releasing stats for that? Do you imagine the amount of pain they would be in for if it happen? Every lawyer knows that for the same crime women often get less time. This is common knowledge. For family matters the unbalance is even worse. Domestic violence against men hardly registers when the complainers aren't laughed at from the start. 

When it comes to kids, when was the last time you saw a large number of women being thrown in the slammer for avoiding visitation rights?

There is a lot of things in which men take an advantage, but in family courts we lose by default...




*LittleDeer* said:


> With regards to child custody, why should custody go 50% to any parent (Father or mother) who has not done at least 50% of the care before the divorce? Why should the parent who didn't sacrifice their career in order to stay home and raise the children automatically get 50% care?
> 
> I don't care what your gender is, but if your children are used to you being the primary care giver, and particularly if the children are young, then they should have majority care with that parent, the one who has done most of the sacrificing and care up to that point. However both parents should always have lots of access to the children (that doesn't mean equal time at each residence).
> You have to look at what is best for the children.
> 
> It just so happens that more women still make this sacrifice and do have a greater bond with children (IMO), but not all ways. It's a case by case thing.
> 
> I have an ex who will never take time off work, not even if our child is sick, everything falls to me, I had to get a job with better hours and I still do all the sacrificing, he even moved quite a way away, yet he still thinks he should have 50% care. That to me is baffling.


But maybe the absent parent now has more time to spend with the child, now that he doesn't have to work for two. Have you thought of that? You're talking like staying at home is one huge sacrifice while working long hours busting ass is some sort of paradise. It isn't. Working out there is often a lot more stressing than staying at home. 

And maybe now the stay at home parent has to work too. And so has less time. All conditions being equal why should a parent have less time to spend with the kids?


----------



## Tall Average Guy

costa200 said:


> Every divorced dad's forum is filled with "she won't let me see my kids and isn't respecting visitation rights" threads. The problem is that most of the time when this happens it gets registered nowhere and so there are no numbers. Apparently nobody gives a damn except the father and his family.
> 
> Guys doing the same are "kidnappers"...


A guy I know went through this a bit and saw it as the difference between hard facts and soft facts. A court can easily determine if alimony and child support is paid. The amount due per month is a "hard fact" (he/she owes $873.00 per month, for example). If it is not paid, it is easy to determine. 

Custody and visitation, on the other hand, tends to be more of a "soft fact". By that, he meant it was easy for his wife to say that his kids were sick on their visitation weekend or that they had been invited to a birthday party. Even though the pattern was to make it difficult for him to see his kids, there was no bright line (or hard fact) that she had clearly crossed. So suddenly the kids involved in an activity every weekend that prevents him from picking them up until Saturday afternoon, instead of Friday evening. 

He was surprisingly calm as he describe it - in fact even mentioned that he was not even sure she was doing it on purpose. But I can imagine there are women (and men) who do it on purpose with the intention of preventing their ex-spouse from seeign their kid.


----------



## costa200

> If you find any site with specific incarceration statistics, I'd love to have it. My speculation does little good here.


I had a hard time even finding examples of situations where this happened. 

Found these examples:

''MOTHER JAILED IN FIGHT OVER VISITATION RIGHTS

Woman ordered to jail after blocking ex's visitation rights : News : miNBCnews.com

Couldn't find a single one from my country.

And i think it is quite understandable that judges don't want to do it. They risk being trampled all over the media. So the events that do happen are media worthy. I would say that the percentage of situations where court action takes place compared to the number of such situations is very skewed.



> And feminists believe kidnapping is kidnapping. No gender needed.


Theoretically... In reality it's just not so. There is a huge difference between what feminism theoretically it as an abstract notion of equality of opportunity between genders (i don't think anyone disagrees with it these days) and what people that constantly identify themselves as feminists are doing. If you look at that place of free speech to the extreme of sincerity that is the internet (when people have less concerns about the politically correct) and take a look at so called "feminist" websites run by so called "feminists" what you see is mostly man hating. It's like everything bad that can ever befall a woman is ultimately a man's fault. Some go to the point of paranoia and accuse men of being organized to keep women down.

So good feminism is good but rare, bad feminism is bad but unfortunately abundant.




> A guy I know went through this a bit and saw it as the difference between hard facts and soft facts. A court can easily determine if alimony and child support is paid. The amount due per month is a "hard fact" (he/she owes $873.00 per month, for example). If it is not paid, it is easy to determine.
> 
> Custody and visitation, on the other hand, tends to be more of a "soft fact". By that, he meant it was easy for his wife to say that his kids were sick on their visitation weekend or that they had been invited to a birthday party. Even though the pattern was to make it difficult for him to see his kids, there was no bright line (or hard fact) that she had clearly crossed. So suddenly the kids involved in an activity every weekend that prevents him from picking them up until Saturday afternoon, instead of Friday evening.
> 
> He was surprisingly calm as he describe it - in fact even mentioned that he was not even sure she was doing it on purpose. But I can imagine there are women (and men) who do it on purpose with the intention of preventing their ex-spouse from seeign their kid.


Well, it's just that the will to enforce it is not that great. Why do the kids have scheduled activities for days they are not supposed to be there? If they are sick why can't they spend those sick days with the other parent (fairness requires that both parents be there for good and bad moments)?


----------



## Ten_year_hubby

abitlost said:


> *LittleDeer* said:
> 
> 
> 
> With regards to child custody, why should custody go 50% to any parent (Father or mother) who has not done at least 50% of the care before the divorce? Why should the parent who didn't sacrifice their career in order to stay home and raise the children automatically get 50% care?
> 
> I don't care what your gender is, but if your children are used to you being the primary care giver, and particularly if the children are young, then they should have majority care with that parent, the one who has done most of the sacrificing and care up to that point. However both parents should always have lots of access to the children (that doesn't mean equal time at each residence).
> You have to look at what is best for the children.
> 
> It just so happens that more women still make this sacrifice and do have a greater bond with children (IMO), but not all ways. It's a case by case thing.
> 
> 
> 
> I can see how the parent stay at home sacrificed alot to stay with their kid/s, but playing devils advocate there are some cases that one partner wants to stay at home and raise the kid so the other partner works their *ss of to make that happen even though they would love to stay at home with their kids but have taken even more hours to be able to support their family so have sacrificed time with his/her kid so that the other spouse can stay at home and his/her kid will have a parent with them all the time.
> 
> Now if they couple seperate it's not really fair that the parent who worked hard at work and sacrificed time away from their kid to make it possible for the other spouse to raise the child full time to get less custody because their sacrifice took away from spending time with their kid.
> 
> It's a difficult debate with custody because every case is so different.
> 
> 
> 
> My friend lost his job and stays home with three kids. His wife works and stays with her boyfriend on weekends. She filed and they are in the process of (no-fault) divorce.
> 
> So my friend wants equal custody and his lawyer wouldn't ask for it so he asks the judge if he can get another lawyer. The judge says don't even consider asking for equal custody because you're not going to get and makes him keep his old lawyer.
> 
> True story, happened last week
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## chillymorn

Ten_year_hubby said:


> abitlost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *LittleDeer* said:
> 
> 
> 
> With regards to child custody, why should custody go 50% to any parent (Father or mother) who has not done at least 50% of the care before the divorce? Why should the parent who didn't sacrifice their career in order to stay home and raise the children automatically get 50% care?
> 
> I don't care what your gender is, but if your children are used to you being the primary care giver, and particularly if the children are young, then they should have majority care with that parent, the one who has done most of the sacrificing and care up to that point. However both parents should always have lots of access to the children (that doesn't mean equal time at each residence).
> You have to look at what is best for the children.
> 
> It just so happens that more women still make this sacrifice and do have a greater bond with children (IMO), but not all ways. It's a case by case thing.
> 
> My friend lost his job and stays home with three kids. His wife works and stays with her boyfriend on weekends. She filed and they are in the process of (no-fault) divorce.
> 
> So my friend wants equal custody and his lawyer wouldn't ask for it so he asks the judge if he can get another lawyer. The judge says don't even consider asking for equal custody because you're not going to get and makes him keep his old lawyer.
> 
> True story, happened last week
> 
> 
> 
> special rights not equal rights.
> 
> thats what feminism is for.
> 
> true equality is women fighting on the front lines women digging ditches (instead of holding the slow sign).
> and that would mean paternity test at birth to keep the honest!
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## iBolt

I think I started off on this thread relating my experience re: how woefully biased the law is against men in terms of custody. It appears to have spawned (great) a chain of comments by others who see this the same. Glad to know I am not losing my marbles that as a man, the law and society sees me more as an ATM (provider) and bullet proof vest (protector) to my family. Luckily two years of battle resulted in the best outcome for me and my kids.

I would just totally disagree with the acceptable face of feminism that has been portrayed throughout this thread. I do not doubt that there are many many good women out there who are feminists and aren't man haters or riddled with a victim mentality. I just do not believe that at all that feminism as it is today cares about anyone else in society but women and females generally. 

Clearly, that needs to change somehow. Sadly, and in the same way that the Islamic extremists have overtaking the public discourse on Islam in the west, so have the nutters overtaken the feminist movement today. If we thus accept that families are the basic unit of a society, I am just not sure how beneficial feminism has been to the promotion of stable family life overall. 

Knowing what I know now, if my sons ever told me they were thinking of marrying a feminist, I would sit and have a very long conversation with them for reasons that I have mentioned earlier such as the very myopic nature of the field of thought. Life is too short to spend your time arguing against some natural laws and norms that have kept civilisations and millenia of human existence going on the back of a theoretical or philosophical ideal.


----------



## iBolt

The fight back has begun.. 

http://www.parenting.com/article/meet-the-modern-dad?page=0,0


----------



## costa200

Ten_year_hubby said:


> My friend lost his job and stays home with three kids. His wife works and stays with her boyfriend on weekends. She filed and they are in the process of (no-fault) divorce.
> 
> So my friend wants equal custody and his lawyer wouldn't ask for it so he asks the judge if he can get another lawyer. The judge says don't even consider asking for equal custody because you're not going to get and makes him keep his old lawyer.
> 
> True story, happened last week


He should not worry, i'm pretty sure he will get a croud of feminists backing him up in favor of equality... Oh wait... HE's a GUY... 

Stories like that make me sad.


----------



## alphaomega

All women love the ideals portrayed in the feminist movement. That's 100%!

But hey! Only 70% of them complain about thier husbands not being man enough around the house, then go out and have affairs with a REAL man!

Love them odds!

And the irony.


----------



## La Rose Noire

costa200 said:


> He should not worry, i'm pretty sure he will get a croud of feminists backing him up in favor of equality... Oh wait... HE's a GUY...
> 
> Stories like that make me sad.


You got to laugh a little at how some idealize feminism to the point of disconnecting from reality.


----------



## Juicer

Feminism had a reason back in the day. 
WOmen couldn't vote, didn't go to college, weren't suppose to get into the work force for the long term, once you married you started popping out kids (social norm), and they did all the house work, and it wasn't an equal load! 
And back then, chivalry had a reason! Women were objectified, and taken advantage of. 

Now a days, when women get favorable divorce settlements, even if they are the reason the marriage fell apart (like infidelity)! 
In most states that is. Not all, but most. 

So today, yes, there are women that say feminism is all about equality. 
The problem is, the ones that actually have the drive and passion to go out and do something, tend to be the "Women are superior," ones, and because of that, most people look pretty negatively towards feminism. 

Which explains why at a seminar for men that were victims of domestic abuse to the nth degree, it was interrupted and cancelled when a large group of feminist barged in, and started yelling and screaming profanities at the men. (who were the victims.)


----------



## costa200

> Which explains why at a seminar for men that were victims of domestic abuse to the nth degree, it was interrupted and cancelled when a large group of feminist barged in, and started yelling and screaming profanities at the men. (who were the victims.)


Juicer, it's not the first time i see people talking about that incident. Do you have more details on that incident? Where it happened, when etc?


----------



## Gaia

That's just sad..... I hope they were arrested.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Juicer

costa200 said:


> Juicer, it's not the first time i see people talking about that incident. Do you have more details on that incident? Where it happened, when etc?


Well, I will look. But it won't be easy for the reasons of:

It is old
Plus it was an attack by feminist. They are like that crazy backwater church in Florida where if you say anything negative about them, they will tie you and burn you to a stake unti you are ruined. 
Plus, most news stations tend to be a bit...liberal. So they aren't going to post this, because liberals tend to be with women's rights and feminism. 

But I'll see what I can find.


----------



## Juicer

GOT IT!

Here is the video, of women yelling at men. Apparently there are quite a few, and yes, they are all crap quality. 
Feminists Disrupt a Forum About Battered Husbands 1 - YouTube

So, from what I gather, (and hoping the description in the video is correct):
The event was in Ottawa Canada. And it was held by a miss Anne Cools. Originally a feminist in the 70's who then turned to become a defender of men's and father's rights after the feminist movement went from equality to female superiority. Also looks like it was held in 2000 I think...dating is kinda hard to find. They called security, and they were all escorted out. No arrest were made. (Equality?)
The forum was discussing giving male victims of domestic abuse some of the same aid and facilities already avaliable to women to use. Like shelters, counseling, etc. 
The feminist that barged in, opposed sharing these facilities, if I got my facts straight. 

Something I found interesting, in the crowd (that was mostly men) the men were all just sitting there, not responding. Not reacting. I doubt very many men would actually just sit there and take that. But almost every single one of them, except the men that organized and put the event together. 
I have a feeling these men acted the same with their abuser. Just sit or stand there, and take it. Take the hits, the yelling, the abuse, just sit there and take it, because you are a man, and that is expected of a man.


----------



## Gaia

Holy hell! Yeah there are men that beat women but not all men are like that... damn.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Gaia

This is one reason why I hate generalizations.... innocent people like these men... get blamed and screwed over.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bahbahsheep

It really depends on how those self proclaimed feminists conduct themselves in public.

I do think its easier to pick on the failures of a certain set of beliefs than to look for the good in it beacuse it is more identifiable.


Feminism does not mean lesbianism or female dominance - it simply means equality but the methods of acheiving it by selected few has perhaps affected the public's perception with its originally embodied beliefs.


----------



## Entropy3000

Juicer said:


> GOT IT!
> 
> Here is the video, of women yelling at men. Apparently there are quite a few, and yes, they are all crap quality.
> Feminists Disrupt a Forum About Battered Husbands 1 - YouTube
> 
> So, from what I gather, (and hoping the description in the video is correct):
> The event was in Ottawa Canada. And it was held by a miss Anne Cools. Originally a feminist in the 70's who then turned to become a defender of men's and father's rights after the feminist movement went from equality to female superiority. Also looks like it was held in 2000 I think...dating is kinda hard to find. They called security, and they were all escorted out. No arrest were made. (Equality?)
> The forum was discussing giving male victims of domestic abuse some of the same aid and facilities already avaliable to women to use. Like shelters, counseling, etc.
> The feminist that barged in, opposed sharing these facilities, if I got my facts straight.
> 
> Something I found interesting, in the crowd (that was mostly men) the men were all just sitting there, not responding. Not reacting. I doubt very many men would actually just sit there and take that. But almost every single one of them, except the men that organized and put the event together.
> I have a feeling these men acted the same with their abuser. Just sit or stand there, and take it. Take the hits, the yelling, the abuse, just sit there and take it, because you are a man, and that is expected of a man.


I have seen violence of men against women. I have taken serious personal action against this. I will leave it at that. It is pretty much #1 on my list of horrible things right there with child abuse.

This said, it is not uncommon for some women to use violence against a man and and then call the police and have him thrown in jail. Just like there is battered wife syndrome, any guy that stays in a relationship like this is equally messed up. But they may do this because they have kids. But this tactic ultimately undermines other women as well.

As bad as physical violence can be to a man, I think women have other ways of inflicting more damage and some do. We see this on this forum. 

But what I find more than a little upsetting is when there is open laughing when we hear that a man's penis for example has been cut off and thrown in the garbage disposal. There is the feeling of underlying resentment for men. It is not even aimed at a specific man. That I find most disturbing. A man can be mistreated and even mutilated. Somehow it is in retribution for some other men somewhere. We see the same thing with ethnic and religious groups. Simply based on hate.

I think there are any number of definitions for feminism. Too often like many topics we have a different idea of what that means and the positive mesages get obscured by the hateful ones because the hate seems to standout more.

There is no equality until people can be judged on their own character and not their gender, race or any other category. Neither women nor men were put on this earth to be a punching bag for anyone.

Who gets hurt in this mess? Along with the chosen group to put down of the day, those people with a positive message that got hijacked.

Women who point to bad examples of men and then seek to emulate that behavior are the biggest joke on us all. Too often the resentment is taken out on the wrong guys. I guess it is taken out on the weaker males that can be cut from the herd. After all they do not fight back. Yes cowardly of course. As cowardly as their counterparts who hit on defenseless women. But it is becoming institutionalized to where it is impacting a larger segment of men. So I am not sure how much more the pendulum will swing. Perhaps a long way yet. The answer I think for men is to not put up with it.

So society moves ahead if treatment of human beings improves across the board. However if all that is done is move the victimization around then there is nothing to celebrate. I fear this is the way of things however.

I find it interesting that when a women is showing violence to a man people assume he is cheating on her. No doubt that scenario happens. But it is just as likely these days that she is beating on him because he caught her cheating. No?


----------



## iBolt

I think there is a general acceptance on this thread that 

1. Feminism has gone too far

or

2. Feminism has lost its way.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Caribbean Man

Entropy3000 said:


> So society moves ahead if treatment of human beings improves across the board. * However if all that is done is move the victimization around then there is nothing to celebrate. I fear this is the way of things however.*
> 
> I find it interesting that when a women is showing violence to a man people assume he is cheating on her. No doubt that scenario happens. But it is just as likely these days that she is beating on him because he caught her cheating. No?


:iagree:

I believe in many instances,
The pendulum has swung too far.

There was a case in our country of a guy who was a professional boxer. Married this woman who used to beat him. He never retaliated because legally he could not.
You see a professional boxer's fist are licensed to the state and by law he cannot hit a civilian. 
Things were so bad that she started to hit him in public. He retaliated and all hell broke loose.
Obviously, you know what side the " feminist " took.

Whilst I agree that feminism and women rights activist have done a great deal to advance the cause of women , I think in some aspects ,it has gone too far.
There is need for a more conciliatory approach to solving whatever remaining problems of gender based inequality that exist.


----------



## WillK

iBolt said:


> Heard this joke the other day. Please do not shoot me down for this and do resist googling it
> 
> What is the opposite of a feminist? ....


ok, what is the opposite of a feminist?


----------



## WillK

FrenchFry said:


> 3.* See above. Men don't fight as hard for joint or sole custody and when they do, they get it. To add though, part of some schools of feminism is fighting against the notion that mothers are automatically the best caregivers because it's based in things like "biology" and "common sense" and breaking down those notions that may not be as applicable in modern society. (some) Feminists are serious about breaking down biotruths and examining what cultural biases are behind them for equality and that includes things like "mothers are more nuturing," when we may only be basing such common sense truths on little more than centuries of being told that this is true.
> *
> 
> I'm just going to leave this link here where the following quote came from: Feminism: It’s Good For Men, Too ‹ Feminspire


I think there's a general sense that women are entitled to equality, should not that be mission accomplished.

What i find sad about the above post and most of the posts in this thread is that it is devoid of the notion that divorce happenning so frequently is a bad thing. There's an implication that divorce is acceptable, and the tragedy of feminism is the fact that marriage so often leads to divorce.

Why is it a good thing to break down biotruths? What good can come of it?

Equality is a noble notion, but the only way to implement it that has any semblence of fairness is to base equality on sameness. But women are not the same as men, so that analysis is invalid. And any other analysis is inherently based in subjectivity, and prone to abuse out of self-interest.

Feminism as a cause is viewed by many including myself based on such figureheads as Gloria Allred and Lilly Ledbetter. I don't think either of them are interested in saving marriage.


----------



## costa200

Juicer said:


> GOT IT!
> 
> Here is the video, of women yelling at men. Apparently there are quite a few, and yes, they are all crap quality.
> Feminists Disrupt a Forum About Battered Husbands 1 - YouTube
> 
> So, from what I gather, (and hoping the description in the video is correct):
> The event was in Ottawa Canada. And it was held by a miss Anne Cools. Originally a feminist in the 70's who then turned to become a defender of men's and father's rights after the feminist movement went from equality to female superiority. Also looks like it was held in 2000 I think...dating is kinda hard to find. They called security, and they were all escorted out. No arrest were made. (Equality?)
> The forum was discussing giving male victims of domestic abuse some of the same aid and facilities already avaliable to women to use. Like shelters, counseling, etc.
> The feminist that barged in, opposed sharing these facilities, if I got my facts straight.
> 
> Something I found interesting, in the crowd (that was mostly men) the men were all just sitting there, not responding. Not reacting. I doubt very many men would actually just sit there and take that. But almost every single one of them, except the men that organized and put the event together.
> I have a feeling these men acted the same with their abuser. Just sit or stand there, and take it. Take the hits, the yelling, the abuse, just sit there and take it, because you are a man, and that is expected of a man.


Thanks juicer... Did you get that part at 1:17 when that lady says: "You, your son, everybody and your friends are a bunch of fvcking men, all you..." :scratchhead:

At what point does a woman begins to think that calling "men" to a bunch of... men... is some sort of worthwhile insult?

BTW, suggested in that video this other video:

A Feminist's Dream Date - YouTube

Can see it working...


----------



## SimplyAmorous

In my life, it seems men have always treated me better over women.....in my family, even in school... I was the new kid on the block, I walked into the bathroom & some nasty girl decided she wanted to beat me up after school -I must have looked at her the wrong way :wtf:...so after school some BOY came to my rescue & told her to back the he** off. Seems to be the story of my life.

I am not a man hater......but I know it helps that the majority of men in my life- have been good examples to uphold.

I hold the highest RESPECT and Praise for the GOOD men who feel it is their life's purpose to honor, protect & provide for their wives and children. I think so highly of men like this, it is hard to explain....and I know these men appreciate how we feel in return of them....it fills them up, gives them more courage & inner strenge to do what they need to do, braving the world every day for us... putting thier lives on the line -for the love and admiration of a woman and future generations. 

I love love love Old Fashioned Traditional men... the type that don't look down on a women/Mom who desires to stay home & raise the children they've created (if they can swing it financially), her holding a household together -honoring her contribution as well (I think of the Proverbs 31 woman)
...... I realize some sit on their butts eating bon bons & watching soap operas all day while the house looks like a cyclone when the husband walks through the door -this makes "Stay at homes" look BAD -just as some men make other men look BAD. 

I read alot of opinions on this forum.... and because the tide has swung so far in one direction... it is near SHAMEFUL if a woman does not go to college today, get a degree & live on her own before she marries a man. This sort of woman is looked upon as niave & generally less valued in society-also not a good choice for a wife. 

Well that would be ME ! I was never on my own -had my own house before I married. But my good husband would never look down on me like this... I have been a huge blessing to his life -as he has been to mine, we both honor & cherish what each brings to our Union.... even though our roles are very different. 

I don't want equality with a man... I have no desire for it -I feel we were born for different roles in life. I think overwhelmingly men should be our Firefighters, Police officers, Building our Skyscrapers and being on the Front lines in War...they have 10-20 times more testosterone (look at their muscles) -not to mention adrenline...this was God's design....they are equipped for those roles to play Protector /Provider. And women will always always always look up to that. I don't want my daughter drafted because feminism has swung too far! 

Generally women make the best Caretakers also, it is build into us. 

I also feel the way attraction works for women...a very good % of them (I didn't say all)....will end up looking down on her husband if he suddenly is earning less than her...women DO NOT marry down. Just as me, we look up to the male Provider. I just don't need a CEO, but a career woman might!! We admire that Providing successful Alpha, women admire success. Once she starts to feel this way....she may feel she is carrying more weight, providing more..a little resentment there.. it has a way of seeping into her attitude towards him, emasculating him little by little.....the admiration takes a dive, so does her attraction to him. 

I don't know, I think it all makes some sense. It's a sad sad state we are heading in some ways. I don't feel many men have much incentive to marry anymore......they get lots of free sex, the majority of women admittedly and proudly boast they don't NEED a man at all, and if she decides he is boring or she finds another lover at work -who she's more attracted too deciding to go for him - 90% of the time -she gets the house & kids ! 

I feel overwhlemingly Men's inner motivations is to Provide & protect..in return for his wife's admiration and respect, he thrives on his woman having a need for him even. I wouldn't down him a minute for admitting to such. It is similar to us women thriving, being emotionally fullfilled when we feel his desire for us-our being his one and only in this world . 

Men want RESPECT.... women want LOVE. When this gets messed with, the results aren't always so pretty. 

Love & Respect: The Love She Most Desires; The Respect He Desperately Needs: Emerson Eggerichs: Books


----------



## MrsKy

Feminism was supposed to be about *choices*. Instead, the choice of being a married SAHM is looked upon with scorn. I think the women who look down on uneducated SAHM's feel that women have worked long and hard to be able to support themselves and be independent. These women know that a marriage can end and they want to be able to leave an abusive situation without having to worry about how they will feed themselves.

My husband makes a lot more than me, but that doesn't stop me from wanting to become more educated and increase my earning power. I want to contribute what I can financially and build a nest egg for the two of us and myself if our marriage goes sour. Those are the reasons I attend college and look for work. Nobody ever gets married thinking they will divorce, but it obviously happens every day. 

Every man is different and I agree that most men will find a self sufficient women very attractive. My parents wanted me stay home until marriage and not learn too much about the world on my own. I know my husband would not have been interested in me if I did not seek higher education, live alone before we married or have some sort of career. To each his own. 

Now I don't really care if a woman wants to marry and have kids instead of seeking education. Not my life, not my business. I just think it is a very risky choice, given the fact that marriages do not always last forever. A woman cannot afford to put all her eggs in the any basket and that includes making a marriage or a career her only focus. A recession can change a woman's livelihood as it did for me. I have seen many lonely feminists who are single because they refuse to do anything to enhance the lives of the men they love. 

I knew a woman who started having kids at age 17. She is now 30 with four children and no high school diploma. Her husband and her daughters have lost respect for her, so she is frantically trying to find work. I don't think it is fair or respectful for this woman's husband to look down on her. After all, she did the difficult job of staying home with his children! Sometimes it feels like women can't win no matter what we do.

I will add that women have been terrible to me my entire life. Starting with my own mother, women have been violent with me, spread vicious rumors and tried to make me look bad in the workplace. The women who have been awful to me often lack something that I have and lately it has been a happy marriage or not being big and fat. The females who hate me are always one or more of these characteristics: very overweight, unhappily single, hideously ugly, have a deadbeat ex who does not look after their kids. Hey, it isn't my fault that they made poor choices.


----------



## costa200

> Feminism was supposed to be about choices. Instead, the choice of being a married SAHM is looked upon with scorn.


You're absolutely right. I've often seen someone's opinion being dismissed immediately after people become aware of the SAHM status. I remember a particular situation in another forum where a woman was basically mob lynched after saying she wanted to be a SAHM. It was like she blasphemed against the most holy of holies of some religion. In the end it was men who defended her and her "choice". How ironic is that?

Apparently some of those women thought that the expression "equal opportunities" meant she has the "opportunity" to be like them and was wasting it...


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> Now I don't really care if a woman wants to marry and have kids instead of seeking education. Not my life, not my business. I just think it is a very risky choice, given the fact that marriages do not always last forever. A woman cannot afford to put all her eggs in the any basket and that includes making a marriage or a career her only focus.


I get this - I really do, but in my own marital situation....had I went to College, it would not have helped us since we wanted a large family -this would have been impossible if I worked, given the cost of childcare. We also lived on back country roads with driveways from hell -would have requird another 4x4 just for me to get out in the winter... ..and with all the college loans I would have had.... we would never have managed to get debt free by age 40 ...So for US, our personal situation....I feel we did the best thing....I speak from my own personal experience ...as we all do. 

I guess because I married a wonderful man, never doubted his devotion to me for a moment, I was never worried about these things. (we dated for 8 yrs before we married -so I knew him inside & out).

I've seen what you are talking about though.... I worked for a lady who wasn't married to a good man, he didn't treat her right ... one day she confided in me her plan...to get her Degree in Nursing, she put herself through school after 2 kids ...then LEAVE HIM.... and that is exactly what she did.... she gave herself the power. And thank God it was there for her to make that choice. I agree. 

I feel I would do the same-had I been in her shoes. But I've just never felt this need, or desire. I have only been made to feel Less by others expectations on me as a woman, never my husband.


----------



## MrsKy

SA, I hope you don't feel like you had to justify your choices to me. Do what works for *you *and *to hell with anyone who puts you down.* Your children and husband will always benefit from your devotion. My mother wishes she could have been a SAHM, but she wanted a certain lifestyle for her kids so she had to work. My poor dad could not support six people to my mother's liking. Unlike you, my mother is very materialistic.

I am wondering if you were trying to imply that I am concerned about my finances and education because my husband is not wonderful and devoted to me....I didn't want to automatically respond with my own assumptions which could be incorrect. It is always good to check if our perceptions are true. I am a practical and realistic woman; marriage does not always last forever despite the best of intentions. 

My husband treats me like a princess, but he loves the fact that I don't want to sit down and depend on him. 

Feminism has also been undermined by women because females do not support each other. Instead, many of us like to cut each other down and be catty for no reason. I think it stems from a lack of confidence and self love; many women feel better when they pick on another female. If only these types could see how pathetic and juvenile they look doing this. 

I used to hang out with this overworked single mom. She was very bitter because her daughter's father left them when the baby was less than six months old. At that time, I was looking for a career and not just a menial low paying job like she had. This heifer constantly made nasty comments about my husband, my appearance and the way he looked after me. She tried to shame me for buying nice things. I finally stopped talking to her and let her know that making fun of other people's husbands would not help her meet a nice man. It was not my fault that she let men use her for sex or that she chose to have a baby with a selfish and irresponsible man.


----------



## Caribbean Man

MrsKy said:


> *I knew a woman who started having kids at age 17. She is now 30 with four children and no high school diploma. Her husband and her daughters have lost respect for her, so she is frantically trying to find work. I don't think it is fair or respectful for this woman's husband to look down on her*. After all, she did the difficult job of staying home with his children! Sometimes it feels like women can't win no matter what we do.
> 
> I will add that women have been terrible to me my entire life. Starting with my own mother, women have been violent with me, spread vicious rumors and tried to make me look bad in the workplace. The women who have been awful to me often lack something that I have and lately it has been a happy marriage or not being big and fat. The females who hate me are always one or more of these characteristics: very overweight, unhappily single, hideously ugly, have a deadbeat ex who does not look after their kids. Hey, it isn't my fault that they made poor choices.


Life can be cruel at times.
Funny how family, society and even the feminist who are supposed to support the plight of " the hand that rocks the cradle " , can now turn against their own.

" All movements go too far..."
Bertrand Russell.


----------



## Created2Write

Gratitude said:


> Have women lost respect for men in the last 50 years?


I can't speak for other women, but for myself, "respect" must be earned. It can not be given unconditionally. Neither men nor women should get unconditional respect based on their sex. _Individuals_ should get respect from the people around them, once they have earned that respect.



> Have women gone overboard in the notion of feminism?


I think they have to a certain extent. I believe, in the initial phases of feminism, we were clear headed and moved in the right direction. Women should be seen as equal to men, and men should be seen as equal to women. However, in recent years, I believe we have gone too far. When applying for scholarships, I saw _over ten_ that were for women alone, and _none_ that were strictly for men. _That_, I believe, is wrong. If we're supposed to be really about equality, then both men and women should have the same amount of opportunities. 



> Men, do you feel your wife respects you as the man of the house? Do you believe you are the man of the house? Or do you feel she is overbearing and talks down to you?


My husband and I are both firstborns, so we both like to take charge and get things done. That said, I try my hardest to show him respect and let him lead. I'm more of a traditional girl, and I believe that in my marriage, my husband should be the leader in most cases. Saying that is easier than doing that, but I do try my best.



> Women, do you treat your man like the man of the house? Do you believe he is the leader of your household? If he says yes and you say no, will you do whatever you want anyway, regardless of his word? If he says 'I'm the leader of this household and I'm putting my foot down', would you let him?


It would depend on the situation. In a circumstance where I know more about what's going on, he usually looks to my advice. Regardless though, we work through issues together as much as possible.


----------



## Created2Write

SimplyAmorous said:


> I get this - I really do, but in my own marital situation....had I went to College, it would not have helped us since we wanted a large family -this would have been impossible if I worked, given the cost of childcare. We also lived on back country roads with driveways from hell -would have requird another 4x4 just for me to get out in the winter... ..and with all the college loans I would have had.... we would never have managed to get debt free by age 40 ...So for US, our personal situation....I feel we did the best thing....I speak from my own personal experience ...as we all do.


This is something which has, recently, become very close to my heart. As a young teen, I always wanted a big family...at least four or five kids. My husband and I married with the understanding that we wanted a family. I started school and it was practically instantaneous...I wanted to be a career woman. I began to hate kids. I declared that I didn't want them, and likely never would, and it broke my husband's heart. 

Well, within the last few weeks things have really changed. We have found a new and better place of living, my husband has steady work, and I'm starting to tire of the school system. I was so excited to go the university this year, and now I'm beyond dreading it. They've really p*ssed me off in the last few months, and it's caused me to evaluate where I'm going with my life. I thought about all the schooling I'm going through to teach, yet with each week that goes by I hear more about how teachers are being laid off and schools are being closed. I don't want thousands of dollars in debt and no job to pay them off. 

Moreover, I've thought about how fulfilling it would be if I went through six years of school, got my education, worked my tail off for the next ten years in a job, and still had no kids. I've decided to finish my associates degree, and get a part time job. I see how much work this bachelor's degree is going to be, and I am totally willing to put in that work...but not to the expense of my marriage. I would rather put all of my eggs in one basket, and invest in my marriage and a potential family. If, God forbid, it were to turn sour and the marriage fails, I have an associates degree and can pursue a bachelor's if I so desire. But as if this point, I haven't even been doing the things I enjoy. Up until this week, I hadn't read merely for pleasure in years. I hadn't worked on my novel is years. 

I don't want a career, I don't want a bachelor's degree. I did for a while, as I liked the feeling of independence and I enjoyed my classes. At this point, however, I'm dreading the life I would have to lead and the amount of money I'd have to spend, and with absolutely no guarantee of a job whatsoever. My mother never got to stay at home with us like she wanted, and it tore her apart. I don't want to regret being in a job. 



> I guess because I married a wonderful man, never doubted his devotion to me for a moment, I was never worried about these things. (we dated for 8 yrs before we married -so I knew him inside & out).
> 
> I've seen what you are talking about though.... I worked for a lady who wasn't married to a good man, he didn't treat her right ... one day she confided in me her plan...to get her Degree in Nursing, she put herself through school after 2 kids ...then LEAVE HIM.... and that is exactly what she did.... she gave herself the power. And thank God it was there for her to make that choice. I agree.
> 
> I feel I would do the same-had I been in her shoes. But I've just never felt this need, or desire. I have only been made to feel Less by others expectations on me as a woman, never my husband.


My husband totally supports my decision as well. He is SO good with kids, and wants his own really, really badly. We weren't going to have kids until he and I had both finished school...and that would have been, at least, ten years from now. And then we'd have loads of student loans to pay back...realistically speaking it doesn't sense for us. And I doubt that my opportunity to continue my education will ever disappear, so I'll be fine if things do turn out for the worse.


----------



## Ten_year_hubby

MrsKy said:


> Feminism was supposed to be about *choices*. Instead, the choice of being a married SAHM is looked upon with scorn.


Scorn and worse. The number of condescending and belittling messages directed at (female) home makers every day is staggering.


----------



## iBolt

WillK said:


> ok, what is the opposite of a feminist?


A good woman
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## mr.rightaway

SimplyAmorous said:


> In my life, it seems men have always treated me better over women.....in my family, even in school... I was the new kid on the block, I walked into the bathroom & some nasty girl decided she wanted to beat me up after school -I must have looked at her the wrong way :wtf:...so after school some BOY came to my rescue & told her to back the he** off. Seems to be the story of my life.
> 
> I am not a man hater......but I know it helps that the majority of men in my life- have been good examples to uphold.
> 
> I hold the highest RESPECT and Praise for the GOOD men who feel it is their life's purpose to honor, protect & provide for their wives and children. I think so highly of men like this, it is hard to explain....and I know these men appreciate how we feel in return of them....it fills them up, gives them more courage & inner strenge to do what they need to do, braving the world every day for us... putting thier lives on the line -for the love and admiration of a woman and future generations.
> 
> I love love love Old Fashioned Traditional men... the type that don't look down on a women/Mom who desires to stay home & raise the children they've created (if they can swing it financially), her holding a household together -honoring her contribution as well (I think of the Proverbs 31 woman)
> ...... I realize some sit on their butts eating bon bons & watching soap operas all day while the house looks like a cyclone when the husband walks through the door -this makes "Stay at homes" look BAD -just as some men make other men look BAD.
> 
> I read alot of opinions on this forum.... and because the tide has swung so far in one direction... it is near SHAMEFUL if a woman does not go to college today, get a degree & live on her own before she marries a man. This sort of woman is looked upon as niave & generally less valued in society-also not a good choice for a wife.
> 
> Well that would be ME ! I was never on my own -had my own house before I married. But my good husband would never look down on me like this... I have been a huge blessing to his life -as he has been to mine, we both honor & cherish what each brings to our Union.... even though our roles are very different.
> 
> I don't want equality with a man... I have no desire for it -I feel we were born for different roles in life. I think overwhelmingly men should be our Firefighters, Police officers, Building our Skyscrapers and being on the Front lines in War...they have 10-20 times more testosterone (look at their muscles) -not to mention adrenline...this was God's design....they are equipped for those roles to play Protector /Provider. And women will always always always look up to that. I don't want my daughter drafted because feminism has swung too far!
> 
> Generally women make the best Caretakers also, it is build into us.
> 
> I also feel the way attraction works for women...a very good % of them (I didn't say all)....will end up looking down on her husband if he suddenly is earning less than her...women DO NOT marry down. Just as me, we look up to the male Provider. I just don't need a CEO, but a career woman might!! We admire that Providing successful Alpha, women admire success. Once she starts to feel this way....she may feel she is carrying more weight, providing more..a little resentment there.. it has a way of seeping into her attitude towards him, emasculating him little by little.....the admiration takes a dive, so does her attraction to him.
> 
> I don't know, I think it all makes some sense. It's a sad sad state we are heading in some ways. I don't feel many men have much incentive to marry anymore......they get lots of free sex, the majority of women admittedly and proudly boast they don't NEED a man at all, and if she decides he is boring or she finds another lover at work -who she's more attracted too deciding to go for him - 90% of the time -she gets the house & kids !
> 
> I feel overwhlemingly Men's inner motivations is to Provide & protect..in return for his wife's admiration and respect, he thrives on his woman having a need for him even. I wouldn't down him a minute for admitting to such. It is similar to us women thriving, being emotionally fullfilled when we feel his desire for us-our being his one and only in this world .
> 
> Men want RESPECT.... women want LOVE. When this gets messed with, the results aren't always so pretty.
> 
> Love & Respect: The Love She Most Desires; The Respect He Desperately Needs: Emerson Eggerichs: Books


Great post. I think, however, that things are complicated by the changing nature of employment needs and structures. We no longer have an agrarian society where the provider type of work was necessary (human capital). Employers want an educated workforce, and that largely serves those at the top while the typical "agrarian-type work"--that many men were needed for--is replaced with technology and machinery. I don't see society going back to that type of life, so while these gender-role changes seem odd to those who knew something different, it may feel normal to those in the future. Also, in today's climate, a woman does have a greater risk of poverty on some level if she marries wrong or doesn't seek an education. And as much as I am not a fan of feminism, there is some behavior in males that make me say, "Now that's why feminism happened." 

Are we at the pivot point of feminism? Men tired of being disrespected, and women are tired of wimpy men? I don't know. While more women are speaking out about the downsides of feminism, largely I am not yet seeing a reverse in younger women or those feminists in position of power; these women are still pushing for an increase in the number of women in combat roles in the armed services, which I agree is nuts. Men can't have children, so not protecting women who are responsible for the growth of the species doesn't make much sense. I think the changes of the past several decades in gender relations rival that of the type of environment that existed during the Industrial Revolution. You mention Proverbs 31. Not go get too much into religion, but the Bible teaches that a woman is to be submissive to the male. Trend-wise, it looks like we are moving away from religion as a society. Men and women are not biologically equal, and I think that is the failure of this experiment with feminism. It's okay not be equal to a man if it is within the confines of much of what your post eluded to. Congratulations on your marriage. You both sound lucky to have one another.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

MrsKy said:


> SA, I hope you don't feel like you had to justify your choices to me. Do what works for *you *and *to hell with anyone who puts you down.* Your children and husband will always benefit from your devotion. My mother wishes she could have been a SAHM, but she wanted a certain lifestyle for her kids so she had to work. My poor dad could not support six people to my mother's liking. Unlike you, my mother is very materialistic.


 No , I didn't think for a second you was putting me down, and it's very true, I am not very materialistic. All I ever cared about was.... building a family, being able to afford them (used to pray over the scripture below -forever on my lips)... and living in the country .... Like a page out of "Little House on the Prairie" book I guess. 



> *1 Thes. 4:11-12 *Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, just as we told you, so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody.


If going to school for 10 extra yrs was a requirement to get those things, I would have jumped for it, instead we choose to be as frugal as possible & have kids right away, I feared having trouble later in life & ironically did struggle with infertility for 6 long yrs ...so I am glad we didn't wait- I think I would have wanted to lay down & die if I faced that in my late 30's.

I even used cloth diapers on our 1st 3 kids hanging them on the line to save $$, we bought our 1st 4x4 in peices -Cab detached from the bed, motor & transmission out of it --because the deal was such a steal with many new parts -anything to save $$....Because our dream for a family & being able to afford a country home meant everything to us.... we worked very hard to acheive these things... Probably a little too hard and lost a little of ourselves along the way. 

And I've always had side jobs throughout the yrs. So I helped contribute too. 



> I am wondering if you were trying to imply that I am concerned about my finances and education because my husband is not wonderful and devoted to me


 No, this never entered my head at all. I understand most today want their children to be prepared for the worst, it is honorable. We want the best for our children. 

I plan for my daughter to go to college -just as everyone else. I don't know if everyone is cut out for it though.

My Mother did the opposite of me, she wanted a career- but got married & had me instead, never her hearts desire...she was NOT happy being the traditional wife/SAHM.... she was bored, wanted more freedom & an education. One of her peices of wisdom to me -from a her best friend next door who raised horses for a living, used to tell her ''Look at me, I Love Horses, so I raise them - Do what brings YOU happiness". It's as simple as that. 

So I followed my heart and did what made ME happy. I don't need to justify.... it's just our stories, they are all so different. 



> My husband treats me like a princess, but he loves the fact that I don't want to sit down and depend on him.


 :smthumbup: 



> I used to hang out with this overworked single mom. She was very bitter because her daughter's father left them when the baby was less than six months old. At that time, I was looking for a career and not just a menial low paying job like she had. This heifer constantly made nasty comments about my husband, my appearance and the way he looked after me. She tried to shame me for buying nice things. I finally stopped talking to her and let her know that making fun of other people's husbands would not help her meet a nice man. It was not my fault that she let men use her for sex or that she chose to have a baby with a selfish and irresponsible man.


 There is a lady at our church , 4 kids on welfare though she is a nice woman, I know she thinks we are rich -her husband does too...and we get alot of comments such as "must be nice" -or I will hear her made remarks about others how it is so easy for them.... I always get the feeling they think this stuff comes easy for everyone -but it doesn't...whether going to college, or like us, just trying to squeeze every dime, saving and doing our own Projects so we don't have to hire someone. 

I want to say both is responsible...and that is honorable. We'll never be someone high on an income ladder - but it's true, it's not something we are after in life either. 

I do believe we all need to feel we have a purpose though. For me now, it's my kids, maybe in the near future, I will feel they don't need me & I'll get bored, maybe take a Photograghy class, that is another passion. And writing.....obvioulsy.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Mr Rightaway said*: And as much as I am not a fan of feminism, there is some behavior in males that make me say, "Now that's why feminism happened."


Obviously, how can anyone argue with this. Of course. 

Everything we do as a society has a COST down the line that has a way of affecting us all.


----------



## chillymorn

Ten_year_hubby said:


> Scorn and worse. The number of condescending and belittling messages directed at (female) home makers every day is staggering.


envy! they are jellious that they have to work to keep up with the jones, they are a slave to their possessions.


----------



## TiggyBlue

There are people who are opinionated and judgmental about sahs, career women but I don't think that directly correlates to 'feminists'.
Im sure there are judgmental feminists as there are judgmental religious people, judgmental athiests, judgmental egalitatians ect.

In every walk of life there are a minority people who are judgemental and opinionated of people's life choices feminism isn't a totally infallible movements, just like any other spectrum of society.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

abitlost said:


> There are people who are opinionated and judgmental about sahs, career women but I don't think that directly correlates to 'feminists'.
> Im sure there are judgmental feminists as there are judgmental religious people, judgmental athiests, judgmental egalitatians ect.
> 
> In every walk of life there are a minority people who are judgemental and opinionated of people's life choices feminism isn't a totally infallible movements, just like any other spectrum of society.


Doesn't this sum it up ~ :iagree: I think we should all do what our *passion* is in this world...with as little fundamendalism as possible in it (what I mean by that is -too much black & white thinking -always allow an area of Grey towards others in understanding "their walk" ~ "their view of the world").


One of my favorite sayings :



> "*Different Drums for Different Drummers*"
> 
> If I do not want what you want, please try not to tell me that my want is wrong.
> 
> Or if I believe other than you, at least pause before you correct my view.
> 
> Or if my emotion is less than yours, or more, given the same circumstances, try not to ask me to feel more strongly or weakly.
> 
> Or yet if I act, or fail to act, in the manner of your design for action, let me be. I do not, for the moment at least, ask you to understand me. That will come only when you are willing to give up changing me into a copy of you.
> 
> If you will allow me any of my own wants, or emotions, or beliefs, or actions, then you open yourself to the possibility that some day these ways of mine might not seem so wrong, and might finally appear as right--- FOR ME. To put up with me is the 1st step to understanding me.
> 
> Not that you embrace my ways as right for you, but that you are no longer irritated or disappointed with me for my seeming waywardness. And in understanding me you might come to prize my differences from you, and, far from seeking to change me, preserve and even nurture those differences.
> 
> I may be your spouse, your parent, your offspring, your friend, or your colleague. But whatever our relation, this I know: You are I are fundamentally
> 
> different and both of us have to march to our own drummer.


----------



## iBolt

I truly consider that perhaps the most noble of women on God's green earth are those who despite the clarion call of pomp and pageantry still choose to set these aside and be a SAHM. I find something incredibly humbling about you women who make this generation shaping decision.

I know two remarkable women. One did her MA and PhD at Cambridge while the other did her PhD at Oxford. They both began well paying consulting jobs and no doubt filled a need for them. However, when they started having children, they realised that they could not have it all. The friend who did her PhD at Oxford was saying to me while I was visiting with her and her husband last Sunday that you can have a great career, a great marriage and a great family BUT you can very rarely have more than two at the same time. NEVER ALL THREE AT THE SAME TIME!!!

I was shocked hearing this from a lady who is soo smart (and yet so unassuming). She decided that no buzz in all the world could compensate her for failing her marriage and children. She admitted that the pressures of work, deadlines and feelings of importance that comes from being an Oxford PhD holder got to her. 

So she quit and chose to become a full time homemaker. Her marriage has never been better. Her husband, sitting next to her, nodded - carefully. Is her husband perfect, hell no but she knows her worth will NEVER be fully addressed by her PhD, 2 Masters and Bachelors degrees. BTW, she is an American lady.

ONLY A PATENTLY STUPID MAN, WITH A BRAIN THE SIZE OF HIS TOENAIL WILL LOOK DOWN ON A SAHM (Educated or not). I have my 3 kids full time while running my business from home and I tell you - it ain't easy BUT it is without question the most rewarding decision I have ever made.

We live in such a competitive world in which human existence boils down to how much better/richer/smarter/stronger etc we are compared to the next person/people. Everything has to be gauged against another. Marriages suffer because of this as the 'self', me-ism and its attending selfishness sucks love dry. I think the poem by William Wordsworth (The World is too much with us) is very apt to this subject.


----------



## iBolt

The world is too much with us; late and soon,
Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers;
Little we see in Nature that is ours;
We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!
This Sea that bares her bosom to the moon;
The winds that will be howling at all hours,
And are up-gathered now like sleeping flowers,
For this, for everything, we are out of tune;
It moves us not.--Great God! I'd rather be
A pagan suckled in a creed outworn;
So might I, standing on this pleasant lea,
Have glimpses that would make me less forlorn;
Have sight of Proteus rising from the sea;
Or hear old Triton blow his wreathed horn.

by William Wordsworth


----------



## SimplyAmorous

iBolt -you sound like a very wonderful man, but I am a little biased ! 

I was just looking up that poem, I seen you posted it ...


*Analysis of "The World is too much with us"* >>>



> The world is too much with us" is a sonnet with an abbaabbacdcdcd rhyme scheme. The poem is written from a place of angst and frustration. All around him, Wordsworth sees people who are obsessed with money and with manmade objects. These people are losing their powers of divinity, and can no longer identify with the natural world. This idea is encapsulated in the famous lines: "Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers; / Little we see in Nature that is ours." Wordsworth believes that we have given our hearts (the center of ourselves) away in exchange for money and material wealth. He is disgusted at this especially because nature is so readily available; it almost calls to humanity. In the end, Wordsworth decides that he would rather be a pagan in a complete state of disillusionment than be out of touch with nature.
> 
> The final image of the poem is of Wordsworth standing on a lea (or a tract of open land) overlooking the ocean where he sees Proteus and Triton. He is happy, but this happiness is not what the reader is meant to feel. In actuality, the reader should feel saddened by the scene, because Wordsworth has given up on humanity, choosing instead to slip out of reality.


----------



## iBolt

SimplyAmorous said:


> iBolt -you sound like a very wonderful man, but I am a little biased !
> 
> I was just looking up that poem, I seen you posted it ...
> 
> 
> *Analysis of "The World is too much with us"* >>>


SA. With such a compliment coming from a highly regarded TAM contributor like yourself is rather flattering. Maybe I should provide you with my wife's email address and you tell her that 

Anyhoo, I love this poem. The opening few lines, for me, says soo much about human nature and what happens when we get too clever. Feminism in my view got too clever and moved away from the universal message of loving and treating our neighbours as we would like to be loved and treated ourselves.

I spent a fair amount of time in graduate school and studied tons of social theories, isms and ideologies which aim to explain why we do certain things and as usual these offer a solution. I see feminism as no different to capitalism, socialism, existentialism etc THESE ALWAYS FALL FLAT cos every -ism has a target on the other side..at least it ends up that way.


----------



## iBolt

Bittersweet......so how will you know when you're satisfied I.e when/how will you know when there is equality in "domestic work"? What parameters will you use to gauge equality in say dishwashing or doing laundry? Who will be your bean counter? Should there be a government department or special task force setup to monitor this?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *iBolt said*:
> 
> I spent a fair amount of time in graduate school and studied tons of social theories, isms and ideologies which aim to explain why we do certain things and as usual these offer a solution. I see feminism as no different to capitalism, socialism, existentialism etc THESE ALWAYS FALL FLAT cos every -ism has a target on the other side..at least it ends up that way.


You sure are well studied to know of what you speak then :smthumbup::smthumbup: ...... I haven't studied any of these things.... don't even know what Existentialism is. 



> the universal message of loving and treating our neighbours as we would like to be loved and treated ourselves.


 This one is universal or should be... every religion on the face of the earth has it's Golden Rule / Ethics of Reciprocity ....except for 2, so I've read...and one is Satanism. At least this is one thing most humans agree on -whether they live it or not is a whole nother matter. And of course we all miss it sometimes. 

I feel looking at History often tells the story of many things, someday in our future, our children's....man will look back and see where some of the extremes/isms have taken us.....books will be written, then we'll be headed in another direction, to counter the ills this one gave us. I guess this is all "progress" in the making. 

Talking to my husband last night -a little about these things...he just feels it is in the best interest of the children for Mom to be home & goes on mentioning a kid he grew up with. No Mom in the home, he was always in mischief -even wanted him to rob a place....Husband said "you're on your own buddy!" 

But I pointed out I know lots of Great kids where the Mom is working, she may not have a High career position -but she works full time....& the kids are wonderful -doing well, so this does not hold up either . Nothing is black & White - Clinton's wife said it take a village or something, she wasn't the 1st to say that.


----------



## SkyHigh

I feel that feminism HAS gone too far.

I'm for equal rights for both sexes. I believe that when you treat people like HUMAN BEINGS, there is equality.

The problem with hardcore feminists is that they don't see it that way. 

They will always see men as control freaks, jerks, and refuse to respect or acknowledge their humanity. 

I especially LOVE the excuse of "You don't know hard it is to (insert situation where just being yourself and doing what's right will help instead of whining)".

Feminists destroy equality by claiming they don't want special treatment, while covertly expecting it, which in turn, creates inequality under the guise of equality.

It's a paradox.


----------



## Viseral

For a great understanding on the problem of feminism and its effect on our relationships, families, and society I highly recommend watching this video series on YouTube:

1) Defining the feminist problem:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlHFj208qPs&feature=youtube_gdata_player

2) The Death of Distinction:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fc6v4AUjQT4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

3) Manhood Criminalized:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-_6wwHpAr8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

4) Women Sold Short:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSq86Gov0FU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

5) Confessions of a GI Jane:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOmMIZRQo0w&feature=youtube_gdata_player

6) Backlash:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pO0pJ4mms8&feature=youtube_gdata_player


----------



## Created2Write

BitterSweetGanderSauce said:


> As for feminism. I have not read all the thread but I would vote for it going far enough when you can demonstrate equal pay and prospects and equal domestic work.


When it can be proven that the lack of equal pay is based on nothing more than _gender_, then I would agree with this. But each employer has the right to choose which employees are payed what based on their time on the job, and how they perform. If a woman does not perform as well as a man in her job, she should not be paid more merely because she is a woman. If a man does not perform as well as a woman in his job, he should be paid more merely because he is a man.


----------



## TiggyBlue

Created2Write said:


> When it can be proven that the lack of equal pay is based on nothing more than _gender_, then I would agree with this. But each employer has the right to choose which employees are payed what based on their time on the job, and how they perform. If a woman does not perform as well as a man in her job, she should not be paid more merely because she is a woman. If a man does not perform as well as a woman in his job, he should be paid more merely because he is a man.


To be fair there I have had the unfortunate displeasure of finding out I was being paid 25% less than men who was doing the same job and brought in less work than I did.
I had a friend who was in accounting and dealing with the yearly bonuses when she found out.
When I confronted my boss the reason that was given is 'that women are the primary carers of there children and have to take time off to care for them, so we lose buisness when that happens', when I calmly (yeh right ) pointed out the fact I don't even have children she said 'well that's the company policy'.
Went to a lawyer to see if anything could be done about this, even though this trinket of info wasn't written anywhere in my contract the buisness is to big to take on and there is nothing that can be done since it's not against the law.
So me and my friend quit, started our own buisness and my clients decided to terminate there contract with the firm I was working for and take up contracts with me and my buisness partner :smthumbup:


----------



## Created2Write

abitlost said:


> To be fair there I have had the unfortunate displeasure of finding out I was being paid 25% less than men who was doing the same job and brought in less work than I did.
> I had a friend who was in accounting and dealing with the yearly bonuses when she found out.
> When I confronted my boss the reason that was given is 'that women are the primary carers of there children and have to take time off to care for them, so we lose buisness when that happens', when I calmly (yeh right ) pointed out the fact I don't even have children she said 'well that's the company policy'.
> Went to a lawyer to see if anything could be done about this, even though this trinket of info wasn't written anywhere in my contract the buisness is to big to take on and there is nothing that can be done since it's not against the law.
> So me and my friend quit, started our own buisness and my clients decided to terminate there contract with the firm I was working for and take up contracts with me and my buisness partner :smthumbup:


In this situation, yes, the actions of that employer is wrong. I find it incredibly odd that such a thing wasn't illegal...And you deserved better pay. But I doubt very much if every situation is this way. 

I'm sure there are women who work very hard at their jobs and aren't paid enough. But how many of those women aren't given better pay because of their gender? Obviously your case was just such a one. And there may be others. But that doesn't mean that society, as a whole, still doesn't accept women as equals. There are corrupt business men throughout the country who support all kinds of causes. As a whole, however, I believe women are treated equal to men and, in many cases, are even treated better. Which I disagree with strongly. 

My husband works the hardest out of everyone at his job(even those who have been there for 20+ years), and he doesn't make half of what he should for the work he does. Does this mean that his employer is sexist? Hardly. Does this mean that society has failed the male gender? Hardly. It's one example of one injustice in this world. 

Sure, women in the workforce are sometimes not paid what they should be. But there are also men in the workforce who, also, are not paid what they should be.


----------



## costa200

While looking through youtube i landed at a video that sent me to this page:

Radfem Hub: the underbelly of a hate movement | A Voice for Men

If you want an example of feminism taken to the point of pure hatred this one is it. A bunch of goodies there. Since talk about selectively aborting boys to outright killing children with certain traits. Then there are the "moderate ones", those only want to segregate men into ghettos in a sort of apartheid. 

Female supremacists...


----------



## COguy

abitlost said:


> To be fair there I have had the unfortunate displeasure of finding out I was being paid 25% less than men who was doing the same job and brought in less work than I did.
> I had a friend who was in accounting and dealing with the yearly bonuses when she found out.
> When I confronted my boss the reason that was given is 'that women are the primary carers of there children and have to take time off to care for them, so we lose buisness when that happens', when I calmly (yeh right ) pointed out the fact I don't even have children she said 'well that's the company policy'.
> Went to a lawyer to see if anything could be done about this, even though this trinket of info wasn't written anywhere in my contract the buisness is to big to take on and there is nothing that can be done since it's not against the law.
> So me and my friend quit, started our own buisness and my clients decided to terminate there contract with the firm I was working for and take up contracts with me and my buisness partner :smthumbup:


I can't believe that's not illegal.

In my experience, and I know because I know the salaries of a big department in our organization with both men and women doing the same job, when men get paid more for the same work it's because they are better negotiators and more adamant about their pay.

Example, 6 months after this guy worked at this job, he said something to the effect of "If I don't get more money I'm leaving." He started at the same time as 2 other girls and they all started at the same level. He got a raise in 6 months and as far as I know the girls still haven't said anything about it 3 years later.

I've heard similar stories in the company about starting salaries. Guys saying, "I need more money" at the initial offer letter, and girls just taking the first thing that's offered.

I couldn't imagine someone in our company saying, "Yeah well, we're going to pay her less because she's a woman." Or anything to that effect. Consciously or subconsciously. If a woman is confident about her work skills and negotiates well, she's going to make the same amount as a guy working the same job and with the same attitude, at least at our company.

I'll also say that she'll be more easily employable, since HR seems to have a hard-on for hiring women or minorities. That bias I see every day and it's completely ok to talk about.


----------



## Runs like Dog

I would rather work for a woman than a male superior.


----------



## TiggyBlue

COguy said:


> I can't believe that's not illegal.
> 
> In my experience, and I know because I know the salaries of a big department in our organization with both men and women doing the same job, when men get paid more for the same work it's because they are better negotiators and more adamant about their pay.
> 
> Example, 6 months after this guy worked at this job, he said something to the effect of "If I don't get more money I'm leaving." He started at the same time as 2 other girls and they all started at the same level. He got a raise in 6 months and as far as I know the girls still haven't said anything about it 3 years later.
> 
> I've heard similar stories in the company about starting salaries. Guys saying, "I need more money" at the initial offer letter, and girls just taking the first thing that's offered.
> 
> I couldn't imagine someone in our company saying, "Yeah well, we're going to pay her less because she's a woman." Or anything to that effect. Consciously or subconsciously. If a woman is confident about her work skills and negotiates well, she's going to make the same amount as a guy working the same job and with the same attitude, at least at our company.
> 
> I'll also say that she'll be more easily employable, since HR seems to have a hard-on for hiring women or minorities. That bias I see every day and it's completely ok to talk about.


You definitely have to pay hardball in the business world are your walked all over.
I get that it's pretty cut throat and the firm found a loophole to save money, I was just happy my friend found out about it.
I was offered a pretty nice bonus to stay at the company but decided to quit and set my own business (can't really complain about something but not do anything about it).

Fortunately I snagged and made good relationships with a few good clients so the business didn't take long to get off the ground.
As daunting as it was to start a buisness at 20 it's probably the best thing that could have happened I love being my own boss (plus have a great business partner).
I totally believe individual actions have a much bigger impact then mass complaining no matter what it's about.


----------



## WillK

Runs like Dog said:


> I would rather work for a woman than a male superior.


2 data points a trend does not make,but twice I've had female supervisors, and in both cases I count them as the worst supervisors I've ever had. They did not provide any direction at all and when I asked for and didn't receive direction, the outcome was obviously not as intended and the blame was mine. 

In retrospect, when these 2 women interviewed me for the jobs, the interviews were very short and completely lacked the depth of exploring my skills usually present in most interviews. They went off feelings or something. And in both cases the jobs were not suited to my skills, and I only took them because they were offered and i needed a job.


----------



## Accipiter777

Jellybeans said:


> Feminism means equality so no I don't think equality is "going too far."


Maybe originally... but IMHO it has BECOME man bashing.


----------

