[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by rad_student)
I have Never been dumped, r u trying to shame me? or detract from the Reality of my post? I know, you are disagreeing with me & will come back with strong, cited arguments & are not a manipulating embarrasment. Like I need a relationship www.mycrazygirlfriend.com

Would I still be wrong in what I have said? Do you know what happens in Family divorce courts MrHappy_J? More correctly "I take it someone" knows what's what & cares for children. Don't just read about Families Need Fathers, find out from men's experiences & the lack of help available. Erin Pizzey is knowledgeable. It's like saying that 100 years ago women didn't work (in nursing, bakery, tailoring, farming, etc).

Feminist Shaming language: "Charge of Rationalization (Code Purple) – The Sour Grapes Charge"

I don't want to say which Govt department/company I worked for, in the MI/stats department; let's say I know more than I let on.http://www.manwomanmyth.com/video/fa...athers-rights/ - there are a few videos in the Family section. Some reasons why men are finding video games more fufilling than a relationship with women, MGTOW/'grass-eating' men in Japan; unless its a phyisical relationship, hard to fight biology. Men are dropping out, just as women but LEGALLY forced into their obligations (See posts #358, 125).

Gotta meet a friend now, as an Everton supporter; as I have a lot more to say.

who do you think you are, the Dark Lord? Thy shall not betray thee! haha.

In recent years feminism has done a lot to address men's issues too. It doesn't look like you know a lot about feminism and are too lazy/not willing to find out more.

2nd bold: I highly doubt it.

[snozzle]

(Original post by MrHappy_J)
oh what nonsense. the whole point of feminism was to make women out there realise that there was an alternative to the traditional housewife lifestyle, that they didn't have to be tied to the kitchen all day obeying their husbands, that they were capable of doing a lot more than that. it was meant to make women feel liberated, that there were people out there just like them who listened to their needs. Never was it intended to make women feel guilty about their lifestyle, quite the contrary. Your whole argument is based on the flawed idea that everything should remain status-quo because it's always been like that and therefore that's what's right.

i also put it to you that the whole women having a natural instinct to procreate is nonsense that's been propagated by society and the media to justify women's subordinate place. for women to have that instinct men must have it too. it takes two to make a child. women dont just suddenly hit twenty and give no further thought to their lives other than marriage and kids.

and why shouldn't women compete in the world of work? give me one good reason. In the 21st century I believe that a woman should feel she can become successful because she is a woman, not in spite of it. And that doesn't mean she's any less of a woman.

I wasn't making a value judgement about what women should do BTW, just calling it the way I see it.

FYI society constantly tells women explicitly and implicitly that career/work place is valuable and home/motherhood is less worthy.

As sexist as this might sound lots of young women are impressionable and want to be 'good' and that means obeying societies pressure to have a career etc as the road to some almost religious eternal fulfillment. Women are more obedient that men and this is why they do better at school which is a kind of socialisation as a subordinate to authority, and they are better for some work/career roles for this reason.

So IMHO feminism was a ideological deployment originating from the needs of Capital; women being more important as producers/consumers than child bearers and raisers.

I am probably a bit older than you and lots of girls from my age group are married with kids now. I'd say the smartest of them have married decent chaps and are happily having children, whilst the unfulfilled are still pursuing the mirage of career success and the 'joy' it never brings which they have sublimated their feminine need to love and be loved into instead of kids.

Just my opinion.

[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by snozzle)
I wasn't making a value judgement about what women should do BTW, just calling it the way I see it.

FYI society constantly tells women explicitly and implicitly that career/work place is valuable and home/motherhood is less worthy.

As sexist as this might sound lots of young women are impressionable and want to be 'good' and that means obeying societies pressure to have a career etc as the road to some almost religious eternal fulfillment. Women are more obedient that men and this is why they do better at school which is a kind of socialisation as a subordinate to authority, and they are better for some work/career roles for this reason.

So IMHO feminism was a ideological deployment originating from the needs of Capital; women being more important as producers/consumers than child bearers and raisers.

I am probably a bit older than you and lots of girls from my age group are married with kids now. I'd say the smartest of them have married decent chaps and are happily having children, whilst the unfulfilled are still pursuing the mirage of career success and the 'joy' it never brings which they have sublimated their feminine need to love and be loved into instead of kids.

Just my opinion.

1st bold: erm i think the pressure works the other way round society tells women that motherhood is more valuable than a career since they'll never get that far up the corporate ladder anyway. and there is no evidence to suggest that women conform more to society's expectations than men.

And why do you think a career brings no joy to a woman yet it is satisfying for a man? on what basis do you say that? I want an enjoying and fulfilling career without the burden of a husband and kids. and don't say i'll change my mind once my "maternal instinct" kicks in, that's just patronising

2nd bold: disagree entirely, you need to read up on the origins of feminism, I'm not going to bother explaining it to you.

and just because a woman may be married with kids doesnt mean she doesnt want the freedom and independence of a well paid job. it also doesn't mean that she doesnt want to be seen as equal. i doubt many women would choose to rely completely on another man. if it is true that half of marriages end in divorce then that can only lead to devastation.

and lastly, your opinion=/=fact.

[Snagprophet]

(Original post by Skill)
I wonder what 'feminists' have to say about this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...n-fathers.html

Not much I imagine!

Yeah, it's absolute bull****. I had to move away from my town when my parents split and go to a school I didn't want to be. I wanted to be in my hometown, with my father. After a few stupid years spent at secondary school I didn't want to be at, I managed to move back to my hometown and live with my father. I felt distant from everyone there because they had made new friends and I felt intimidated. My dad was made to pay stupidly high amounts of money, like £450 a month, in child support for me, I'm an only child. I'd heard of other people paying £600 for four kids. Not only that, but my mother's boyfriend had a £50,000 a year job and she lied and said she was a lodger in his house. And to cap it all, when I moved back the CSA refused to make mum pay for child support while I was still a child.

This whole thing terrifies me in case I am conned into nonsense because of my gender.

[kratos90]

(Original post by MrHappy_J)
1st bold: erm i think the pressure works the other way round and there is no evidence to suggest that women conform more to society's expectations than men.

And why do you think a career brings no joy to a woman yet it is satisfying for a man? on what basis do you say that? I want an enjoying and fulfilling career without the burden of a husband and kids. and don't say i'll change my mind once my "maternal instinct" kicks in, that's just patronising

2nd bold: disagree entirely, you need to read up on the origins of feminism, I'm not going to bother explaining it to you.

People have partner's and a child because they are enjoyable and fulfilling, how are they a burden? Maybe having a relationship and a child takes a lot of effort, but so does a job. And 'maternal instinct' isn't patronising, it stems from a thing called evolution. Having relationships and children is what humans have evolved to do, it is natural, and equivalently men have a 'paternal instinct'.

Note this is not implying in any way that a woman should not pursue and enjoy a career, I wouldn't want my wife being stuck at home all day if it made her miserable, but if she enjoyed it I wouldn't mind either. Kids and relationships may not be for everyone, but if you see these things as a burden then they are actually better off without you than you are without them.

[noisy06]

(Original post by MrHappy_J)
1st bold: erm i think the pressure works the other way round and there is no evidence to suggest that women conform more to society's expectations than men.

And why do you think a career brings no joy to a woman yet it is satisfying for a man? on what basis do you say that? I want an enjoying and fulfilling career without the burden of a husband and kids. and don't say i'll change my mind once my "maternal instinct" kicks in, that's just patronising

2nd bold: disagree entirely, you need to read up on the origins of feminism, I'm not going to bother explaining it to you.

Well, a career is pretty burdensome and women are vastly inferior to men in terms of strength, stamina and durability. Society would be better if more women thought about their kids and took care of them properly rather than just chucking them into childminders hands and focusing on a career. Men are vastly inferior to women in taking care of children.

[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by kratos90)
People have partner's and a child because they are enjoyable and fulfilling, how are they a burden? Maybe having a relationship and a child takes a lot of effort, but so does a job. And 'maternal instinct' isn't patronising, it stems from a thing called evolution. Having relationships and children is what humans have evolved to do, it is natural, and equivalently men have a 'paternal instinct'.

Note this is not implying in any way that a woman should not pursue and enjoy a career, I wouldn't want my wife being stuck at home all day if it made her miserable, but if she enjoyed it I wouldn't mind either. Kids and relationships may not be for everyone, but if you see these things as a burden then they are actually better off without you than you are without them.

They would be a burden to me because it's not the life I choose. For another person yes it would be highly beneficial, but not for me. So why the hate?

[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by noisy06)
Well, a career is pretty burdensome and women are vastly inferior to men in terms of strength, stamina and durability. Society would be better if more women thought about their kids and took care of them properly rather than just chucking them into childminders hands and focusing on a career. Men are vastly inferior to women in taking care of children.

highly stereotypical view of men and women that has no place in the 21st century.
strengh and stamina may have been relevant at a time when most working men were coal miners, women would not have been as capable in those jobs, yes, but I want to do something that involves some brain work, and I don't think I am any worse at that than an average man.

how about if fathers also took some of the responsibility for childcaring? They're only rubbish at it because society perpetuates the idea that it's not their job. and if as you say, men are vastly inferior to women at taking care of children, why do so many of them complain when they dont get custody of their kids and use that as an example of how they are unfairly discriminated against? lol. the truth is men would be just as capable if it didnt go against the view of what a traditional "man" should and should not do.

[noisy06]

(Original post by Snagprophet)
Yeah, it's absolute bull****. I had to move away from my town when my parents split and go to a school I didn't want to be. I wanted to be in my hometown, with my father. After a few stupid years spent at secondary school I didn't want to be at, I managed to move back to my hometown and live with my father. I felt distant from everyone there because they had made new friends and I felt intimidated. My dad was made to pay stupidly high amounts of money, like £450 a month, in child support for me, I'm an only child. I'd heard of other people paying £600 for four kids. Not only that, but my mother's boyfriend had a £50,000 a year job and she lied and said she was a lodger in his house. And to cap it all, when I moved back the CSA refused to make mum pay for child support while I was still a child.

This whole thing terrifies me in case I am conned into nonsense because of my gender.

That's pretty disgusting. We live in a society where women have gone beyond equality. They have achieved a position where they are over and above men and I don't call this progression. I call it degeneration.

[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by noisy06)
That's pretty disgusting. We live in a society where women have gone beyond equality. They have achieved a position where they are over and above men and I don't call this progression. I call it degeneration.

I call it hatred.

[noisy06]

(Original post by MrHappy_J)

highly stereotypical view of men and women that has no place in the 21st century.
strengh and stamina may have been relevant at a time when most working men were coal miners, women would not have been as capable in those jobs, yes, but I want to do something that involves some brain work, and I don't think I am any worse at that than an average man.

how about if fathers also took some of the responsibility for childcaring? They're only rubbish at it because society perpetuates the idea that it's not their job. and if as you say, men are vastly inferior to women at taking care of children, why do so many of them complain when they dont get custody of their kids and use that as an example of how they are unfairly discriminated against? lol. the truth is men would be just as capable if it didnt go against the view of what a traditional "man" should and should not do.

You are trying to deny something that will always be true and inherent. There's no point forcing the issue, men and women are not the same thing no matter what you say. There are things that men will always be better and other things women will be better. A man naturally does not have the same child bearing qualities as a woman does, that's an undeniable fact. These things cannot be taught to men, we just can't handle a child as good as a woman. I'm not saying they shouldn't help in bringing up a child, I'm saying they will never replace a mother. Similarly, Men are superior in more physical aspects of life (which includes the daily stress of going to work and handling emotions). If you're such a radical feminist then why don't you campaign for women to race the men in 100m olympics this year? Or campaign for women swimmers to only wear shorts like the men?

[snozzle]

(Original post by MrHappy_J)
1st bold: erm i think the pressure works the other way round society tells women that motherhood is more valuable than a career since they'll never get that far up the corporate ladder anyway. and there is no evidence to suggest that women conform more to society's expectations than men.

Well I think that society even deploys the idea of women being executives and being on the 'career ladder' is significant because >90% of jobs are just that...jobs.

I think our society values motherhood as quite low except as a certain middle class fetish type concept, where kids are an adjunct to the 30 something middle class career woman career.

(Original post by MrHappy_J)
And why do you think a career brings no joy to a woman yet it is satisfying for a man? on what basis do you say that? I want an enjoying and fulfilling career without the burden of a husband and kids. and don't say i'll change my mind once my "maternal instinct" kicks in, that's just patronising

I'm not sure it is wholly satisfying to men. It can satisfy a need to compete I think which is greater in men but in essence the world of work is fairly alienating and a slog possibly due to the nature of Capitalism..that would be Marxism 101.

(Original post by MrHappy_J)
2nd bold: disagree entirely, you need to read up on the origins of feminism, I'm not going to bother explaining it to you.

and just because a woman may be married with kids doesnt mean she doesnt want the freedom and independence of a well paid job. it also doesn't mean that she doesnt want to be seen as equal. i doubt many women would choose to rely completely on another man. if it is true that half of marriages end in divorce then that can only lead to devastation.

and lastly, your opinion=/=fact.

I was talking about the origins of feminism in reality not its surface origins.

I take your point about the last paragraph, but the nuclear family as a concept is very much a bourgeois concept, it has not always been so discrete or simple.

Anyway work itself is its own form of bondage, admittedly maybe better than some oppressive partichical type system but like I said the 'family' has not always been so conceptualised. Case in point even in modernity would be the 'respectable working class' of the late 19th and early 20th century which was more focused around matriarchs in the community (who provided the stability) and more extended families etc and social ties.

[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by noisy06)
You are trying to deny something that will always be true and inherent. There's no point forcing the issue, men and women are not the same thing no matter what you say. There are things that men will always be better and other things women will be better. A man naturally does not have the same child bearing qualities as a woman does, that's an undeniable fact. These things cannot be taught to men, we just can't handle a child as good as a woman. I'm not saying they shouldn't help in bringing up a child, I'm saying they will never replace a mother. Similarly, Men are superior in more physical aspects of life (which includes the daily stress of going to work and handling emotions). If you're such a radical feminist then why don't you campaign for women to race the men in 100m olympics this year? Or campaign for women swimmers to only wear shorts like the men?

no it's not mate, that's just your own opinion.

oh yes those nasty women are trying to take over the world, how dare they better put them back in the place or the whole of society will collapse!

lol you ignoramus.

[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by snozzle)
Well I think that society even deploys the idea of women being executives and being on the 'career ladder' is significant because >90% of jobs are just that...jobs.

I think our society values motherhood as quite low except as a certain middle class fetish type concept, where kids are an adjunct to the 30 something middle class career woman career.



I'm not sure it is wholly satisfying to men. It can satisfy a need to compete I think which is greater in men but in essence the world of work is fairly alienating and a slog possibly due to the nature of Capitalism..that would be Marxism 101.




I was talking about the origins of feminism in reality not its surface origins.
I take your point about the last paragraph, but the nuclear family as a concept is very much a bourgeois concept, it has not always been so discrete or simple.

Anyway work itself is its own form of bondage, admittedly maybe better than some oppressive partichical type system but like I said the 'family' has not always been so conceptualised. Case in point even in modernity would be the 'respectable working class' of the late 19th and early 20th century which was more focused around matriarchs in the community (who provided the stability) and more extended families etc and social ties.

bold: and that's bad because...?

even if it were true the overwhelming majority of people in managerial positions are men.

second bold: i dont know quite what you mean. the feminist movement originated from the suffragettes who fought for votes for women. although the ideology had already been present for quite some time and can be traced back to Mary Wollstonecraft's Vindication of the Rights of Women, written in the 18th century. It wasn't some mad conspiracy created by Capitalists

If motherhood is undervalued it's only because women are undervalued also as human beings. A mother's childcaring work is therefore less valuable than a man's work, but a mother will still be more respected than a career woman with no children of her own- most of the times she is viewed as a failure no matter how successful she might be in her professional life.

[neom]

I just want to be on equal footing with men! Have the same chances and opportunities and not get immediately shut down because I don't have the y chromosome
Y'know 'different but equal'

[ArcadiaHouse]

(Original post by twohanprincess)
I am all for equality, but I think the word 'feminism' may be interpreted as being a sexist word... If a male group called themselves 'masculinists', would this be seen as acceptable? This may be a personal thing, and I am honestly not arguing with anyone or anything, but isn't something like 'advocate for women's equality' better?

Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. Anyway the whole point of feminism is that there's never been any need for a male equivalent

[snozzle]

(Original post by MrHappy_J)
bold: and that's bad because...?

even if it were true the overwhelming majority of people in managerial positions are men.

Hmm I am not sure it is overwhelming. I don't have the stats to hand but I think executive positions are not all that skewed.

Anyway your original point was "1st bold: erm i think the pressure works the other way round society tells women that motherhood is more valuable than a career since they'll never get that far up the corporate ladder anyway."

...which I really don't agree with. The slight inequality in outcome does not tell women that career is bad just that opportunities are perhaps not totally equal which is different. On a more qualitative level you just have to look at the media and government to see how the young single mother is scorned etc and 'othered' to some extent as a welfare drain. I see constant imagery in the media portraying young career women in a positive light, especially in advertising, you won't see much positive about women having kids at 18 etc, they are supposed to either be studying or partying. Kids a seen as a burden to young women and obstacle.

(Original post by MrHappy_J)
second bold: i dont know quite what you mean. the feminist movement originated from the suffragettes who fought for votes for women. although the ideology had already been present for quite some time and can be traced back to Mary Wollstonecraft's Vindication of the Rights of Women, written in the 18th century.

I am talking about causes, why has society given women the vote and then mass participation in capitalism as producers and consumers? Surely the former is necessary for the latter also? Ok so saying it is the needs of Capital is somewhat teleological but it has unlocked lots of potential for Capitaists to make more money.

[snozzle]

(Original post by neom)
I just want to be on equal footing with men! Have the same chances and opportunities and not get immediately shut down because I don't have the y chromosome
Y'know 'different but equal'

Why do you want that out of interest? Is it your idea or some elses?

[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by snozzle)
Hmm I am not sure it is overwhelming. I don't have the stats to hand but I think executive positions are not all that skewed.

Anyway your original point was "1st bold: erm i think the pressure works the other way round society tells women that motherhood is more valuable than a career since they'll never get that far up the corporate ladder anyway."

...which I really don't agree with. The slight inequality in outcome does not tell women that career is bad just that opportunities are perhaps not totally equal which is different. On a more qualitative level you just have to look at the media and government to see how the young single mother is scorned etc and 'othered' to some extent as a welfare drain. I see constant imagery in the media portraying young career women in a positive light, especially in advertising, you won't see much positive about women having kids at 18 etc, they are supposed to either be studying or partying. Kids a seen as a burden to young women and obstacle.




I am talking about causes, why has society given women the vote and then mass participation in capitalism as producers and consumers? Surely the former is necessary for the latter also? Ok so saying it is the needs of Capital is somewhat teleological but it has unlocked lots of potential for Capitaists to make more money.

managerial positions are skewed, is that anything new to you?

http://www.womenonbusiness.com/more-...men-101-ratio/

i have loads of other references but i cant be bothered to take out my large Sociology textbook now.

I think you are misunderstanding the reason behind the scorn that single mothers receive. the reason they are detested so much is because they do not have a man to support them and therefore go against the values of the traditional nuclear family. They are seen as somehow a burden to the state.
In any case I dont see how women having children at 18 is anything to celebrate. it will significantly limit their life chances and they most likely are not able to afford to bring up children in a way that they deserve to be brought up. Statistically they are also significantly more likely to live in poverty. Surely in these cases it's reasonable to support young women trying to advance themselves so that they can have a better life in the future?

I still dont get your point, why shouldnt women participate in production and consumption? Of course it benefits capitalists, just as exploiting ethnic minorities also benefits capitalists. that doesn't mean they shouldn't have the right to work. but the movement against racial discrimination was not created by capitalists was it?
the cause of feminism? because women in victorian society were treated as second class citizens and some began to feel that something should be done about it. not that difficult to understand really.

[MrHappy_J]

(Original post by snozzle)
Why do you want that out of interest? Is it your idea or some elses?

why shouldnt she have the same chances and opportunities? :s