I have a question for the guys?


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – I have a question for the guys?

I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

If women were to simply roll over and say you’re right what do you want us to be? how do you want us to act? How would we answer them?

I have a lot of answers to this question. But a thought struck me! All my answers are world fixers only if the world operates smoothly and honestly and all answers are followed through to a successful conclusion.

The problem faced by women today is the expectations placed on them all detract from her ability to fend for herself. The exact opposite of men. With us the more of societies expectations we can conquer the better the life we can create for ourselves.

What would happen to this housewife to be if men decide they don’t want her? I.e. they don’t find her attractive due to age, looks, a disability or misfortune. if say this loyal young woman cooks cleans supports in the best way three successive men who in return each leave her with a new illegitimate child, alone and penniless and now with three hungry mouths to feed. Admit it especially among young men this isn’t an unheard of story. Women gave up career paths because we told them we wanted partners not competitors. So now what does she do?

In young modern society today men have effectively defeated feminism (it’s effectively restricted to courts and welfare agencies), and I don’t think feminists could feel more unwelcome than they do now. Plenty are facing the very real possibility of having to get a cat, with men simply importing replacements.

If we tell women they can fix this trend and find happiness by following our set path, are we not also obliged to create a safety net and some set of rights for women that would protect them from the misuse of this path by men and or if it simply does not produce the promised result of marital bliss?

As my name suggest I believe Feminists have a LOT to account for. But that’s no excuse for being opportunistic now that there on the ropes. Many successful women don’t believe that feminism is on the ropes but that’s simply because it’s not their individual time yet. Even Germane Greer gave a teary interview when she found that no amount of medical help would ever let her be a mother. This from the girl who once said motherhood is a tool of the patriarchy to keep women repressed.

So what’s it going to be guys are we really going to enforce “live by the sword die by the sword” or are we going to give them a way out?

08-26-2006 10:24 PM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk
I think you make a number of interesting and thoughtful points.

08-26-2006 10:29 PM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
AnnG
Contributor
AnnG

I know you asked for responses from the guys, but I’m confused.

How, exactly, would a woman end up with three illegitimate children from three difrerent men, if she had taken responsibility for her own body and used birth control?  (Or, for those religiously/philosophically opposed to birth control, kept her legs closed?)

What, exactly, do feminists such as myself have to account for?  The fact that life isn’t perfect?  Welcome to reality, dear.

By the way, I love my cats.  And my dogs.  And my career.  And my wonderful husband.

08-26-2006 10:38 PM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

The reason I was asking the Guys is I wasn’t exactly expecting any intelligent answers from the girls. I’m glad you love you cats, your going to need them.

As for what feminists need to account for, I’ll list a few. Not that I expect someone of your low capacity to understand but I suspect their is a wide variety of intelligent people simply reading silently who love to see people like you get shown up.

1) The demonizing of men and the family unit using false statistics and radical claims to separate fathers from children and create an underclass of welfare dependant single mothers with statistically poor performing children.

for example: while on guard at the local welfare office I get to speak with the social workers who use chatting with me as a way to vent after disturbing cases (I know they shouldn’t but they do) and one of the gems of our post feminist society was this workers story: A 15yo female came into the office to beg for public housing due to the mother who had her for the welfare payment and didn’t bother to keep track of who the father was routinely beating her. The worker who had dealt with this case many times before simply said the situation hasn’t changed, the huge demand on public housing means that only young women who are drug addicted and pregnant stand a chance. To which the 15yo replied that’s not fair I am on drugs but I’ve been trying to get pregnant with my 21yo boyfriend for 3years and I can’t get pregnant because underage sex with this much older guy has permanently damaged her uterus. Granted that isn’t her exact language but I’m simply telling the facts of the story. This was not something that happened (especially not in the numbers to drain public housing) when men had rights and family was key!

2) The destruction of the independent living wage.

Due to the massive increase in workers as women were no longer given a choice but to enter the work force the relative working wage has dropped dramatically, to the point where it not takes dual income in most feminized areas to support a mortgage especially if you are a first home buyer. There was a time pre feminism where a single working wage could support a home and a family, now that honor is bestowed on a limited few career choices.

The list goes on but I simply don’t feel you’re worth wasting any more keystrokes on.

Ow and as for how she got three kids I was eluding to the act of baiting the girl into bed with promises of marriage then doing a runner when she gets pregnant.

08-26-2006 11:35 PM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

your hole lifes an illusion, so obviosly fact is going to seem like fantasy to you!

08-26-2006 11:47 PM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
AnnG
Contributor
AnnG

Thank you for your most illuminating response.  I can’t comment about your story regarding the 15-year-old, as your garbled prose makes the story essentially unintelligible.  (May I suggest a remedial writing class?)  I think most readers will be able to decide our respective “capacities” for themselves.

08-27-2006 12:03 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
legacy42
Contributor
legacy42

Regarding your example of the woman who had three illegitimate children.  I tend to agree with the person who suggested she exercise a little more discretion and not jump in bed with any idiot who comes along, but not only that there are child support laws that aggressively pursue fathers who fail to financially support their children.  Laws that occasionally result in “dead-beat” dads being thrown in jail.  So while your foolish woman may have it rough there are remedies available to her.

08-27-2006 12:23 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

Yawn just as I expected from the women, not one argument, statement of fact or counterpoint. Just standard nonsense from women who think if they speak without saying anything there responding. I don’t need to retype, men who are of naturally higher intellect than you, will be able to see a clear example of a child destroyed by the removal of a moral system were people were held to account and the replacement of the moral system by a feminist system were women do as they like including fail their children at tax payer expense.

08-27-2006 12:34 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
IWentThere
Contributor
IWentThere

. . .because the stepfather who was beating her and the pedophile who knocked her up are in no way, shape or form responsible for their actions.

Anti-Feminist, if I weren’t already engaged and you weren’t such a busy stud, I’d beg to have your children.  Actually, can I have them anyway?  My fiance would understand – I mean your vast intellectual superiority would justify it all!!

08-27-2006 12:41 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk

Anti_Feminist wrote:

The reason I was asking the Guys is I wasn’t exactly expecting any intelligent answers from the girls. I’m glad you love you cats, your going to need them.

As for what feminists need to account for, I’ll list a few. Not that I expect someone of your low capacity to understand but I suspect their is a wide variety of intelligent people simply reading silently who love to see people like you get shown up.

1) The demonizing of men and the family unit using false statistics and radical claims to separate fathers from children and create an underclass of welfare dependant single mothers with statistically poor performing children.

for example: while on guard at the local welfare office I get to speak with the social workers who use chatting with me as a way to vent after disturbing cases (I know they shouldn’t but they do) and one of the gems of our post feminist society was this workers story: A 15yo female came into the office to beg for public housing due to the mother who had her for the welfare payment and didn’t bother to keep track of who the father was routinely beating her. The worker who had dealt with this case many times before simply said the situation hasn’t changed, the huge demand on public housing means that only young women who are drug addicted and pregnant stand a chance. To which the 15yo replied that’s not fair I am on drugs but I’ve been trying to get pregnant with my 21yo boyfriend for 3years and I can’t get pregnant because underage sex with this much older guy has permanently damaged her uterus. Granted that isn’t her exact language but I’m simply telling the facts of the story. This was not something that happened (especially not in the numbers to drain public housing) when men had rights and family was key!

2) The destruction of the independent living wage.

Due to the massive increase in workers as women were no longer given a choice but to enter the work force the relative working wage has dropped dramatically, to the point where it not takes dual income in most feminized areas to support a mortgage especially if you are a first home buyer. There was a time pre feminism where a single working wage could support a home and a family, now that honor is bestowed on a limited few career choices.

The list goes on but I simply don’t feel you’re worth wasting any more keystrokes on.

Ow and as for how she got three kids I was eluding to the act of baiting the girl into bed with promises of marriage then doing a runner when she gets pregnant.

Firstly, you do not set yourself up for intelligent response from a group if you tell them you do not expect intelligent responses. Why would anyone bother if they are already discredited before they begin?

Secondly, you can find selfishness and stupidity in either gender. For every story of such women there are equally as many stories of selfish men. While your example goes a long way to explain your venom towards women, it does not excuse it.

08-27-2006 12:44 AM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – I have a question for the guys?

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

Legacy I understand your point, but remember this is a fictional woman here and even so the current system doesn’t really give a woman the support she needs to raise 3 kids on her own even with the aid of welfare and child support. Even though she may survive, is that really the life she deserves to live for trying to be a good wife not a good accountant? The main question I posed was can we really expect women to follow our advice if that is the risk she is taking without more guarantee of support from us? Remember where in a hypothetical work where women can’t get employment to better there situation.

08-27-2006 12:44 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
hayfever
Visitor
hayfever
anti-femme

I think that one problem here is that you are not stating what you think feminism means. Actually, this is a large problem with feminism today. In the past, feminism has been about equal consideration under the law, then equal consideration regarding work & education, then sexual freedom–from there it splintered into many different ideas that serve different social and political ends.

I read an interesting essay recently, here is a small exerpt regarding a good definition of feminism today called the “On the Paradox of Feminism”:

“According to Peggy Phelan, feminism is based on the conviction that gender constitutes a fundamental category in our social systems. The latter are predicated on hierarchical patterns that normally put men first and women second, giving preference to the male segment of the population in a variety of fields. Even though many demands made by the feminist movement have clearly been met, the cultural image of women still leaves a lot to be desired.” http://www.kunsthausbaselland.ch/en/index_detail.php?id=69

I think this is really simple and clear. I don’t think we have to be afraid of redefining feminism. I was discussing this with a friend recently, and she felt that trusting women and having women friends was a feminist gesture. I believe that the image of the mainstream feminist has been warped into the perception of her as a deviant man-hater, ball-buster for political reasons. I have heard feminists described this way on conservative talk shows repeatedly. If this isn’t a repressive misongynist gesture, I don’t know what is. Teach women to hate each other in order to keep them in combat with themselves.

Be nice to other women-don’t hate them because they have careers and love their husbands. Don’t hate them because they find discrimination to be more subtle than it was 30 years ago. Don’t buy the hype about feminists undermining the familial and social fabric of the world. We feminists are girls next door who have kids, jobs, are unemployed, single but really, just expect to be treated equally and fairly in every situation we demand. Put the shoe on the other foot–can you imagine men even having this discussion? There is a reason…

08-27-2006 12:55 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

sunhawk I didn’t discredit everybody I discredited the women on this site as they have resorted to little more than childish name calling when faced with intelligent points from numerous men. Further I don’t need to have my venom excused by anybody I don’t need permission to have an opinion especially when I’m well placed to see the negative effects. Now as for the story I was not trying to say that the many complex factors involved are in anyway relieved of their personal guilt. What I was saying is that everything has its starting point in this girls case what started the cycle was the loss of the family unit due to the lies told by feminism and the creation of a class of welfare dependent single mothers. This girl’s fate started long before she was born. To look at the individual accountability in this case also means to look at individual solutions. The social workers are there for that what we as society need to do is look at the root cause and try to stop this at its source.

08-27-2006 01:00 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk

Anti_Feminist wrote:

sunhawk I didn’t discredit everybody I discredited the women on this site as they have resorted to little more than childish name calling when faced with intelligent points from numerous men. Further I don’t need to have my venom excused by anybody I don’t need permission to have an opinion especially when I’m well placed to see the negative effects. Now as for the story I was not trying to say that the many complex factors involved are in anyway relieved of their personal guilt. What I was saying is that everything has its starting point in this girls case what started the cycle was the loss of the family unit due to the lies told by feminism and the creation of a class of welfare dependent single mothers. This girl’s fate started long before she was born. To look at the individual accountability in this case also means to look at individual solutions. The social workers are there for that what we as society need to do is look at the root cause and try to stop this at its source.

I am a woman on this site yet i have not called anyone any names. So am I qualified to respond to your post now?

My comment about your venom has nothing to do with judging whether you should post your opinion. I do not believe venom is necessary from anyone in order to express themself and you (and everyone else) would be better off posting without it.

I think your evaluation of that girl is too single-minded, picking one thread from a number of possible causes. You blame single mothers, but you have no knowledge for the majority of those women regarding the involvement of the men who impregnated them; did they wear a condom? Was the sex consensual? Without hard evidence you are making a lot of assumptions. How much responsibility did these men have or did they take for the situation. Unlike women, men have the option of walking away from sexual irresponsibility in a completely phyical sense. And given the American attitude towards abortion, many of those women were not given any other options to deal with their mistakes.

08-27-2006 01:11 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk

hayfever wrote:
anti-femme

I think that one problem here is that you are not stating what you think feminism means. Actually, this is a large problem with feminism today. In the past, feminism has been about equal consideration under the law, then equal consideration regarding work & education, then sexual freedom–from there it splintered into many different ideas that serve different social and political ends.

I read an interesting essay recently, here is a small exerpt regarding a good definition of feminism today called the “On the Paradox of Feminism”:

“According to Peggy Phelan, feminism is based on the conviction that gender constitutes a fundamental category in our social systems. The latter are predicated on hierarchical patterns that normally put men first and women second, giving preference to the male segment of the population in a variety of fields. Even though many demands made by the feminist movement have clearly been met, the cultural image of women still leaves a lot to be desired.” http://www.kunsthausbaselland.ch/en/index_detail.php?id=69

I think this is really simple and clear. I don’t think we have to be afraid of redefining feminism. I was discussing this with a friend recently, and she felt that trusting women and having women friends was a feminist gesture. I believe that the image of the mainstream feminist has been warped into the perception of her as a deviant man-hater, ball-buster for political reasons. I have heard feminists described this way on conservative talk shows repeatedly. If this isn’t a repressive misongynist gesture, I don’t know what is. Teach women to hate each other in order to keep them in combat with themselves.

Be nice to other women-don’t hate them because they have careers and love their husbands. Don’t hate them because they find discrimination to be more subtle than it was 30 years ago. Don’t buy the hype about feminists undermining the familial and social fabric of the world. We feminists are girls next door who have kids, jobs, are unemployed, single but really, just expect to be treated equally and fairly in every situation we demand. Put the shoe on the other foot–can you imagine men even having this discussion? There is a reason…

i think you make a good point about the need to redefine the term feminism

08-27-2006 01:13 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

I take your point Hayfever, and no I guess I haven’t drawn any distinction between a feminist hater and a woman hater and the line can get very confusing. When I refer to feminist I refer to the women who left babies in cots to starve because a paper known as the suffragette instructed them only to nurse female children. I refer to women who use lies such as the 1:4 statistics to demonize men out of their basic human rights such as simply to see there own children and remain safe from violence and domestic assault. I refer to women who alter the law to say men can never be victims and women can never be criminals. A friend of mine who was small in stature was raped by a group of women who stuck a tube of mercury into his ass and threatened to kill him by breaking the tube if he didn’t co-operate, before they had finished they tied him to the bed and ironed his genitals with a steam iron. The case was not followed up because the police said men could not be the victims of sexual assault. He later committed suicide as there simply are no help resources for male victims. If my venom for women offends people TOO BAD!

Now why would I take the same view to “normal” women as radical you may ask having probably never participated in the above list? let me ask you if I was part of a group that bullied a child at school but I never laid a hand on them or never uttered an insult, but instead simply made the task of standing up to the bully seem so big by my presence that the child resigns to being bullied, am I not as guilty as the bully doing the hitting if by giving him power by virtue of my support am I not guilty of every acting he does? its the same with feminists the man bashing was possible due to the overwhelming support normal women gave these radicals and all I seem to hear now from women is the cry well it wasn’t actually me who did it. I may not have defined feminist but neither did feminists the sisterhood included all women. So I ask you did you distinguish yourself in any way to those who would attack us as human being or did you just sit idly by and wait for the proceeds of men’s pain?

08-27-2006 01:29 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
ajosselyn
Contributor
ajosselyn

okay,  I have a question too. I’ve asked this before. What are we suppose to do? I went to school (because we are suppose to), I have a career because I don’t have children. And now that I am getting married, I want children someday. Yes I think they should be taken care of by a parent, but how? I didn’t decide that women should go to school or work, society did, and now, women are working and taking care of children and husbands. I don’t think this is what feminists were looking for. Maybe they were, I don’t know. All I know is I am a career woman, I have a stb husband, and want children. It is close to necesary for both parents to work, so now what?
I’m not looking for the answer “I make more money than you”, or “grow up”, or any other nasty comment people are flinging at each other.  If this is really a concern that men and women seem to be having (so many people have commented on this site alone) then why are we using this discussion to attack each other and not learn?

08-27-2006 01:43 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

sunhawk ok I have to give you due credit your responses are of a far higher standard than most I’m seeing, for instance the “No sex for Noer” wannabee dingbat who posted a while back. and as such your are deserving of a civilized discussion! Though I need you to use that intelligence to take one step back in the chicken and egg argument I’m posting here. there was a time were to walk out on a pregnant woman was a social death sentence for a man and the accountability questions you have which are valid questions once didn’t need to be asked. I don’t want to need answers to those question I want a society which doesn’t allow the cause of those questions.

08-27-2006 01:43 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk

Anti_Feminist wrote:

When I refer to feminist I refer to the women who left babies in cots to starve because a paper known as the suffragette instructed them only to nurse female children. I refer to women who use lies such as the 1:4 statistics to demonize men out of their basic human rights such as simply to see there own children and remain safe from violence and domestic assault.

Now why would I take the same view to “normal” women as radical you may ask having probably never participated in the above list? let me ask you if I was part of a group that bullied a child at school but I never laid a hand on them or never uttered an insult, but instead simply made the task of standing up to the bully seem so big by my presence that the child resigns to being bullied, am I not as guilty as the bully doing the hitting if by giving him power by virtue of my support am I not guilty of every acting he does? its the same with feminists the man bashing was possible due to the overwhelming support normal women gave these radicals and all I seem to hear now from women is the cry well it wasn’t actually me who did it. I may not have defined feminist but neither did feminists the sisterhood included all women. So I ask you did you distinguish yourself in any way to those who would attack us as human being or did you just sit idly by and wait for the proceeds of men’s pain?

I would be interested to see the sources of the material you are refering to, i have not heard of those specific sufferigette materials before.

And no, a bullied child is never as at fault as the bully. You confuse normal women supporting the same cause as the radicals with those women directly supporting the radicals. Do some women sit on the sidelines and let more aggressive women act? Yes. But there are women like myself who do not stand idle and not speak out against other women who are not acting or speaking in a humane fashion against men or against other women.

What exactly are the proceeds of men’s pain?

08-27-2006 01:43 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk

Anti_Feminist wrote:

sunhawk ok I have to give you due credit your responses are of a far higher standard than most I’m seeing, for instance the “No sex for Noer” wannabee dingbat who posted a while back. and as such your are deserving of a civilized discussion! Though I need you to use that intelligence to take one step back in the chicken and egg argument I’m posting here. there was a time were to walk out on a pregnant woman was a social death sentence for a man and the accountability questions you have which are valid questions once didn’t need to be asked. I don’t want to need answers to those question I want a society which doesn’t allow the cause of those questions.

Thank you. I have done my best to treat people here with respect, regardless of gender, because gender is not a deciding factor for me – intelligence and compassion holds more weight and are sexless.

Some of the women’s responses here have been as appalling as some of the men’s. Such anger and hatred.

I also want a society where that situation with those single mothers does not occur.

08-27-2006 01:46 AM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – I have a question for the guys?

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

what are the proceeds of mens pain? devorse court isnt nic named womens court for nothing!
and as for the source it was an old feminist newspaper similar to SCUM (society for cutting up men) which i belive is printing its own magazene today just google it!

08-27-2006 01:51 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

I’m tired I’m starting to make simple spelling errors alright I’ll be back to answer questions tomorrow

08-27-2006 01:54 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk

Anti_Feminist wrote:
what are the proceeds of mens pain? devorse court isnt nic named womens court for nothing!

and as for the source it was an old feminist newspaper similar to SCUM (society for cutting up men) which i belive is printing its own magazene today just google it!

Oh you meant the benefits of men’s pain, sorry I wasn’t sure that was what you meant.

Both sides of the gender gap have had their share of pain in this “battle” – neither side’s losses or struggled should be discounted. It is unfortunate that there are women AND men out there who take advantage of the efforts of well-meaning people to better society. They twist and warp laws and conventions in manners that were never intended by their makers. This is true of many religious texts and government laws. Neither gender is more guilty of that abuse and neither gender possesses more of these uncompassionate and greedy individuals.

08-27-2006 02:04 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
hayfever
Visitor
hayfever
Anti-Femme:
I am sorry that your friend was tortured so cruelly. I am not sure what you mean by 1:4–are you referring to 1 out of 4 women being sexually assaulted?

You seem more frustrated than venomous. Honestly, I am not familiar with the feminist histories that you are recounting–but I do not doubt that it existed. In many third world countries, baby girls are killed or sold into prostitution because they burden the family–so I am sure it has happened to boys as well for various reasons. I think the domestic violence thing is actually pretty hard-core. Many women are beaten and killed by men with whom they willfully entered relationships.

I don’t think you are going to find anyone who is going to say that women and men don’t abuse the laws to their own ends. So do business people, politicians, leaders, farmers–everyone. So I think you are ruining your chance to make a clear argument against feminism if you condemn the entire history of the movement with the acts of the few who are bad.

If you truly think that equality for women in the eyes of the law, in education and in the workplace is wrong, then just say it. If you don’t think that women should be free to make a decision about how they act sexually, then say so. I know feminists who are not pro-choice, tho I would say that “choice” is a feminist issue–so if you aren’t pro-choice, then say so. Those are the major acheivements and goals of the feminist movement.

Again, I am not going to say that both women and men don’t abuse the system or do horrific acts, but I don’t think you can condemn a movement for the bad deeds of individuals. Maybe you can make an argument that a social atmosphere has been created that supports these deeds…but…you are mainly arguing about legal abuses. And I think the legalistic nature of the world in contemporary society is more to blame than the feminist movement.

I am so glad that I can vote, that I can own property, I have a great education, I can travel on my own, and I can love whomever I want. Now I wish that there was not so much discrimination in my field, I wish that if I wanted to have a child, I could do so without being ostracized in my field, I wish I could get paid the same amount as a man who does the same quality of work, and I REALLY hope that these issues will be rendered ridiculous in the future by men and women who do not see any societal gains from treating women as less than equal.

08-27-2006 02:10 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk
well said hayfever

08-27-2006 02:14 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

1:4–are you referring to 1 out of 4 women being sexually assaulted?

This ‘fact’  is simply not true.  Unless one so loosely defines sexual assault that it becomes meaningless.  There are about 1 forced rapes for each college campus per year in the U.S., which makes sense.  College educated men would have more to lose than men who are not.  There are about 90,000 rapes in the U.S. each year and there are 146 million females.  That’s 1 in 1622.

I think the domestic violence thing is actually pretty hard-core. Many women are beaten and killed by men with whom they willfully entered relationships.

Many men are beaten, attacked and stabbed by women with whom they willfully entered relationships.  It’s about 55% male on female and 45% female on male.  Some women also kill their partners.  As many as men?  No.  But that is no reason to only look at domestic violence as a man on woman issue.  It is not.

I don’t think you are going to find anyone who is going to say that women and men don’t abuse the laws to their own ends.

Except that the current legal and social climate gives women much more power in situations with a man than vice versa.  A woman’s accusation of abuse is considered defacto proof and is used to evict a man from his own home.  You presume that women tell the truth in instances of rape, abuse, during a divorce.  Sadly this is not always the case and stories abound of predatory women.  The laws need to be brought back to balance.  For instance, women who rape boys need to get exactly the same sentence as men who rape girls, and we need to stop using words like ‘romantic’ and ‘consentual’ when referring to cases like Mary Kay LeTourneau, etal.

If you truly think that equality for women in the eyes of the law, in education and in the workplace is wrong, then just say it.

Women don’t have equality in the eyes of the law, they have preferential treatment.Women who commit the same crime get shorter sentences than men.

Women don’t have equality in education, they have preferential treatment.
Title IX gives women precise numbers of sports participants based on student body composition.  Thus men’s wrestling programs are in decline.
Women are 57%-60% of current college enrollees, yet they claim this is equality, or oppression.  How can that be?

Women don’t have equality in the workplace, they have preferential treatment.
Women can claim sexual harassment and get a man fired for no reason other than spite.  Women have many rules and regulations worded specifically to benefit them.

I wish that if I wanted to have a child, I could do so without being ostracized in my field…

Why?  The men and single men and women who you are competing with don’t take off time for a child, and as a result they rise faster in their field.  Why should you receive preferential treatment, be able to take off 3, 6 ,12 months to have a baby, and expect to resume your career track at the same level as a man who worked during that entire time frame?

Men don’t get the option to travel the world for a year, and then expect to pick up their career at the exact point that someone who worked that time did.  That’s not good business, it makes no sense, and it is completely unfair to the workers who devoted themselves to the company.

08-27-2006 02:52 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

leeraconteur wrote:
Women don’t have equality in the workplace, they have preferential treatment.
Women can claim sexual harassment and get a man fired for no reason other than spite.
Sexual harrassment is actually a very difficult claim to prove.  For example, men have more success with sexual harassment claims against other men than women do against men.

So this idea that women can easily get a man fired is grossly incorrect.

08-27-2006 03:05 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Xasthur_Within
Contributor
Xasthur_Within

Marta2003 wrote:

leeraconteur wrote:

Women don’t have equality in the workplace, they have preferential treatment.

Women can claim sexual harassment and get a man fired for no reason other than spite.

Sexual harrassment is actually a very difficult claim to prove.  For example, men have more success with sexual harassment claims against other men than women do against men.

So this idea that women can easily get a man fired is grossly incorrect.

Actually, while I can’t ‘prove’ it, there was a co-worker (female) who tried to get me fired because I found her undesirable. I ignored her advances, it angered her, and she tried to convince the boss (and her daughter) I was not a productive worker on the job and even was sexually crude and resentful towards women. My boss cut back my hours for two weeks, but once she discovered the charges were lies, she gave me full time status again. But she DID consider them as possible at first.

Again, I can’t ‘prove’ it with offical documentation or video evidence, but I’m sure its one of many occurences that could end in dismissal. Note the women making the accusations didn’t have any proof either, but people took her word over mine at first before the truth came out.

08-27-2006 04:05 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
tomshh
Regular Contributor
tomshh

What I would want out of women.

I just want TRUE equality.  Make our education system tough again, yes the number of women in college would drop like flies, but that is what we need.  Make the work force tough and competitive again, so that if anyone wants a job, they by god want it.

If we hold ourselves to the same standards as 50 years ago, women would be running for the kitchen.  Maybe 10% of women would be okay completing with men.  Good, these women are better suited in the work force, it will help our society.

To the majority women, who would truely be better in the kitchen, raising babies, and keeping men (thus our society in good shape) would be where they need to be.

So women would still have their choice, but would no longer be pampered or expected to compete with men.

08-27-2006 04:39 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
ajosselyn
Contributor
ajosselyn

I’m not trying to be smart here, but if society was to do all these things wouldn’t hurt men too? I mean colleges have tried to make it so that everyone can go not just smart men right? I think there are others that schools are trying to help out other than women. I went to college, and when I did I heard men and women alike complaining about special treatment (mainly of the football players). Just a thought.

08-27-2006 04:53 AM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – I have a question for the guys?

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Pelican
Regular Contributor
Pelican
How do you plan to make the education system “tough again”? If the education system is currently weak and, according to your theory, men are inherently more intelligent — then men would be in the top half of every class and women would be in the bottom. But that’s not what has happened — with slight variations for subjects like science and math or language and history, women share the top spots with men.

Making the system “tougher” isn’t going to keep women out while letting men in. It might keep the majority of the population from getting further education, but that’s not really relevant to the issue. It would just mean men and women duking it out for the jobs with lower education requirements.

Message Edited by Pelican on 08-27-2006 05:42 AM

08-27-2006 05:35 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
radiator
Regular Contributor
radiator

When was this mythic time when men were socially ostracized for knocking up and abandoning women?  Data, please.

I don’t want to google the source.  You should provide it because you are making the claims, none of which have I heard either.

As for “true” equality, how does women being better in the kitchen constitute “true” equality?  If that is so, shouldn’t all the professional chefs be women?  Or, I suppose you mean that women should only be in the kitchen if they are not paid for it–if paid, then only men can be in the kitchen? Which one is it?  Are you not just saying that women shouldn’t be allowed to earn money at all, at least not enough to make her independent of you, or to compete with you, or to be more accomplished than you?

Perhaps you need reminding that, unless you are a member of the elite (like Mr. Forbes for instance), about 50 years or so ago you most likely would never have been to college.  It was only the GI Bill which allowed the working and even middle class to go to college.  So this mythic “true” equality has been around only since then.  Let’s not also forget the Jim Crow Laws and the Civil RIghts movement. Before that, higher education was a class/gender/race-based system.  Of course, with the incursion of more of the working and middle class and brown MEN going to college, that also created more competition where there had been little before.  Then the WOMEN started going to college and that has really put the heat on.  Most of this controversy is about just that–increased market competition, masked by so-called family values.  And now we have the problem of losing jobs to more competitive markets.  Frankly, if you want to blame someone for that, blame the conservatives and the corporate leaders.  And stockholders.  They want to pay cheap retail prices, but the only way to do that is to outsource the labor to places like India and China because American wages are too high–except minimum wage, which you can’t raise a family on, much less a single person!  Now we end up being a service/information economy, and not an industrial one, but that always lowers job availability.  The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and as usual the middle class is in the middle blaming themselves like the stupid dupes that they are, or in this case, blaming their women since it’s uncool to blame the black/Latino/Native men for taking jobs.

You see, America is supposedly for liberty and justice for all.  That includes women (supposedly, although we still don’t have equal rights for equal pay).  We like to preach this abroad quite often.  Yet strangely, other countries just think we are full of **bleep**.  Why is that?  Well, because, for instance, in some countries in Europe both parents get parental leave when they have a child.  Now, if we could put caps on CEOs exorbitant salaries (something I’m sure is anathema to readers of this rag we’re blogging on) and redistribute that money so that workers in corporations could have some of the pressure taken off of their family lives, that could actually work.  Just as a thought–it may not be the only or best solution.  Pricewaterhouse Coopers just did the right thing–they are closing shop for 10 days per year to FORCE their employees to take vacations in America.  The company WANTS them to be HAPPIER, because then (DUH) they will make better workers.  Congrats to PWC.  You’re the kind of company I want to work for.

Or there are some other countries in Europe where prostitution is legal, or where abducting women as wives is common.

Honestly, it seems like most of you men who are all hysterical about these issues want women wearing burkas.  Wasn’t that allegedly what we invaded Iraq for–to make it more of a “democracy” like ours?  Or was it to make America more like Iraq–a religious dictatorship where the women are in even worse shape than here?  Funny how these things work.

Men get all upset (supposedly) if women treat them like walking bags of money–they start whining that women only want to use them and take advantage of them–see some of the other blogs.  Then at the same time they get threatened if women earn their own keep and don’t “need” them financially.  This is basic doublespeak.  It’s just designed men to trick women into feeling guilty about everything they do and are so that men can continue to stay in control of things.  My impression–and I would really like to be wrong–is that men really do prefer it if women are financially dependent on them, because then the women have no choices.  Men then feel like they are good for something, because if women don’t need them, then what are they for?  Walking sperm banks?

All of these attitudes presuppose an instrumentalist, cynical view of relationships.  There isn’t any thought of love, compassion, understanding, or wanting to have a partner to support each other and enjoy life with.  There isn’t even any justification for having children, which is part of the point, apparently.  Why do the men even want children?  Why have a family?  Why not just live the freewheeling single life?  Why do the women want children?  What’s the point?  A lot of assumptions under the surface that aren’t being dealt with.  I think one thing underlying all this is that the men don’t believe the women will really stay with them unless they imprison them. Well, frankly, that is your own insecurity, for which you should seek out therapy.  If you don’t think you are worthy of love then you may well not be.

That said, I agree with sunhawk that women are not perfect–we’re humans, just like men.  But there are still statistically vastly more men who are serial killers, child molestors and pornographers, rapists, deadbeat dads, and gang members.  Stop the psychopath routine and you’ll get more sympathy from me.

08-27-2006 07:39 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
hayfever
Visitor
hayfever
leerac

In almost every argument you made about women gaining “preferential treatment”, your issue was with how the law works, not with feminism. Laws aren’t written to give women preferrential treatment–they are written to give them equality. I am tempted to write a page about the “preferential treatment” afforded to men since, well, the beginning of time…but it is so obvious in this context.

You clearly think that men are more intelligent and hardworking than women. I think this assumes that men set the rules, and women play their game. It is my greater hope for feminism that society will actually value the input of women when deciding what the rules of the game are. I suppose this has happened in education somewhat, but not the workplace. Giving genders equality does not assume that they are exactly the same. Certainly men and women do things differently. These differences are boiled down to “smarter” “harder working” or “better” when it suits a particular social or political end.

08-27-2006 11:21 AM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
tomshh
Regular Contributor
tomshh

I’m not trying to be smart here, but if society was to do all these things wouldn’t hurt men too? I mean colleges have tried to make it so that everyone can go not just smart men right? I think there are others that schools are trying to help out other than women. I went to college, and when I did I heard men and women alike complaining about special treatment (mainly of the football players). Just a thought.
———————————————–

It would hurt men as well, but not nearly to the same effect.

It would ensure that only the brightest and most dedicated get their degrees.  Not anyone with a daddy that can pay for it.

08-27-2006 01:31 PM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
tomshh
Regular Contributor
tomshh

If the education system is currently weak and, according to your theory, men are inherently more intelligent — then men would be in the top half of every class and women would be in the bottom. But that’s not what has happened — with slight variations for subjects like science and math or language and history, women share the top spots with men.
————————————————————–

Men beat women in IQ scores, always have, always will, fact.

There is no proof yet that a female genius can exist, fact.

With this said, if you add in the fact men have more natural drive to compete and succeed, women would get burned if we go back to the education system of the 1950’s.

Some women would do fine, and these women might very well help our society more by being outside of the home.  Most women would not make it, and that is fine as well, they would do society more good by being in the kitchen.

Our education system is now dumbed down enough, most men do just enough to graduate, or skip school altogether, and now start their own businesses.  It is why there are still so many self made millionaire men in the USA, compared to women, even though more women graduate college.

08-27-2006 01:34 PM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

tomshh wrote:
Men beat women in IQ scores, always have, always will, fact.
What does this mean?  That no woman has an IQ higher than any man?  That can’t be.  So what exactly does this mean?  I know what it means, I just want you to articulate it correctly.

There is no proof yet that a female genius can exist, fact.
If genius is defined by IQ, I assure you that female geniuses exist.  If you have some other definition, bring it on, I’m confident I could find women at just about any level you come up with.

Message Edited by Marta2003 on 08-27-2006 07:53 PM

08-27-2006 04:51 PM

Re: I have a question for the guys?
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

I.Q is the most useless method of intelligence testing on earth!!!

For example here is an I.Q question I take vigorous exception too.

QUESTION: If you become lost in the woods what action would you take?

for 2 points: any answer that shows a set method of thinking I.E. find a clearing and get your bearings from the sun or look for which side of the tree the moss is growing on and use that to determine in which direction to go.

for 1 point: any answer that is an action without a set method of thinking I.E. just keep walking until you reach the end of the wood or come to a cabin or road.

For no points: any non answer. I.E. I don’t know or STAY WHERE YOU ARE!!!

Now when you are lost what is the first thing the rescue authorities tell you to do so that they can find you? In this question a person who demonstrates true intelligence is deemed less intelligent than a person who simply shows academic skill. Or even deemed less intelligent than a person who would wander aimlessly.

When I was getting my masters in psychology I challenged the instructor on this point and his answer was that points are given to people whose answers demonstrate a thinking process and more points are given for the depth of that thinking process. I can go on and on about my issues with current I.Q testing. But let me ask now two questions. Who here thinks they are more intelligent than a tribal bushman?  Now who if placed in their circumstances could survive like a tribal bushman? my point is intelligence is relative to the task at hand, an Accountant trying to practice medicine looks like a fool and vice versa.

If all we do on this board is try to insult people’s intelligence this argument is going to go nowhere! A person who does not know something was like likely learning something else while you were learning whatever it was, and we will find out what that something else is when it come to what you don’t know!

Now the first problem is that’s everybody seems to think its up to someone else to “gimme something” I.E. gimme a good wife or gimme a career! Or worse gimme the completely undefined term “equality” which translated means whatever I want whenever I want it cause you owe me!!

The second problem is nobody wants to do anything for it. Once the other side is “fixed” the first side will say thanks now that I’m happy its all better!

Can we try instead to perhaps list the issues we have all with solid definitions of what we think is wrong and why!

Noer’s article is a prime example, pointing to women and saying you’re not worth the bother I have statistics is pointless. Can the response to that be anything but well thanks for telling me now I know, beat it dweeb! I mean really, the whole reason I started this post was to point out that no matter how righteously you believe the other side must change, it is not ok to just point and say you do at your potential expense, without an offer of understanding and compromise/help!

08-27-2006 05:45 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: