Debate a patriarchy supporter/ anti feminist.
Scroll to see replies
Original post by tomclarky
Definitely. Brexit voters, Islamic extremists, Incels and Feminists. There's pockets of society that feel like the system isn't playing out fairly and they feel entitled to more. We can politcise them or we can find practical solutions?
I think you need to prepend the word "some" to words such as Brexit voters and feminists. There is nothing inherently wrong with wanting to leave the EU or wanting equality for both sexes.
Original post by Napp
merely thinking that the sexes should be equal is not exactly far flung like the others
merely thinking that the sexes should be equal is not exactly far flung like the others
For most of history it has been.
Changing the current paradigm will not happen overnight. There are a series of achievable policy goals that would eventually lead to a more patriarchal system.
-making it far harder to divorce and ensuring that the leaving party does not get the fruits of the marriage. Right now a married woman can leave on a whim and automatically be entitled to the kids and at least half their stuff.
- ending various government supported protections and incentives for women in the workplace eg maternity leave, tax credits etc.
-limiting abortion
- Ban porn. Legalise brothels
The following would de incentive women to pursue a career and focus on building families etc. I would not completely bar women from jobs but limit it to sectors conducive to their nature such as care, hospitality and catering but would reduce their hours so they could only work limited hours.
It would also mean that both sexes would have be far more discerning with their partners and incentive chasity and waiting for marriage.
The last two would help to stop the weaponisation of sex against men. If men could safely buy a blow job for £100 it would do more damage to feminism.
(edited 2 years ago)
Original post by Surnia
What about the campaign for votes for women being the proudest achievement?
Why aren't you condemning men who abandoned their parental responsibilities and leave women to become single mothers?
Why have you left the last paragraph in your opening post when it now has no relevance?
Why aren't you condemning men who abandoned their parental responsibilities and leave women to become single mothers?
Why have you left the last paragraph in your opening post when it now has no relevance?
Sure, although obv that's not really talked about any more because it has become so entrenched.
Because I'm talking about feminism. But yes I do Condemn those people and would punish them/ ensure they meet their responsibilities under the sort of society I am advocating for. Men are just as guilty of supporting feminism as women are - primarily as supporting it as a means if approval in order to get sex.
Before anyone says that people who share my views must mean are unsuccessful with women..
Original post by Starship Trooper
So to get the ball rolling I think that feminism of all descriptions and egalitarianism more broadly has been a disaster for society, primarily for the benefit of a few to control and manipulate society.
- the proudest achievement of feminism is possibly abortion the ability of a potential mother to "choose what to do with her body" (I would word it differently)
-A huge increase in government reliance and subsidies. Feminism could not exist without widescale government support.
- millions if broken families. Being born to a single mother massively disadvantages you in life esp if you are a boy
-Women tend to think emotively about things which leads to rash and unwise policy decisions.
-anthropologically speaking there is a reason why primitive societies were matriarchal and why successful societies were patriarchal ones.
- the proudest achievement of feminism is possibly abortion the ability of a potential mother to "choose what to do with her body" (I would word it differently)
-A huge increase in government reliance and subsidies. Feminism could not exist without widescale government support.
- millions if broken families. Being born to a single mother massively disadvantages you in life esp if you are a boy
-Women tend to think emotively about things which leads to rash and unwise policy decisions.
-anthropologically speaking there is a reason why primitive societies were matriarchal and why successful societies were patriarchal ones.
1. One of the many achievements of feminism and not a bad thing either.
2. Not true. You don't need government reliance or subsidies for the right to vote, abortion, no fault divorce, etc.
3. Not related to feminism. In fact, single parent households have been on the decline over the last 10 years despite ever increasing amounts of feminism.
4. Lol. I'm sure we're going to see plenty of rational, fact and statistics driven arguments in this thread.
5. Define "success", since for all intents and purposes we are living during the most successful (and also most feminist) period of human history.
(edited 2 years ago)
Original post by SHallowvale
1. One of the many achievements of feminism and not a bad thing either.
2. Not true. You don't need government reliance or subsidies for the right to vote, abortion, no fault divorce, etc.
3. Not related to feminism. In fact, single parent households have been on the decline over the last 10 years despite ever increasing amounts of feminism.
4. Lol. I'm sure we're going to see plenty of rational, fact and statistics driven arguments in this thread.
5. Define "success", since for all intents and purposes we are living during the most successful (and also most feminist) period of human history.
2. Not true. You don't need government reliance or subsidies for the right to vote, abortion, no fault divorce, etc.
3. Not related to feminism. In fact, single parent households have been on the decline over the last 10 years despite ever increasing amounts of feminism.
4. Lol. I'm sure we're going to see plenty of rational, fact and statistics driven arguments in this thread.
5. Define "success", since for all intents and purposes we are living during the most successful (and also most feminist) period of human history.
1- What would you say are other top achieve ments of feminism?
2- no but you will do in order to make them viable in most workplaces hence mandatory maternity leave and anti discrimination laws as well as various benefits etc.
3- as I said in the other thread by Gaddafi, this is presumably due to the increase in step parents.
4- mmm... So you don't think men and women think differently or are different?
5- In that example I was referring to how patriarchal societies were more successful than matriarchal ones, mainly due to there not really being any!
To keep it on topic I would say that in a successful society women are not allowed to be promiscuous or wear immodest clothing
I would say we are living on the vastly diminishing fruits of when we were a successful Society rather than one which is declining in my view.*
*(Not entirely due to feminism but this is a factor)
Original post by Starship Trooper
1- What would you say are other top achieve ments of feminism?
2- no but you will do in order to make them viable in most workplaces hence mandatory maternity leave and anti discrimination laws as well as various benefits etc.
3- as I said in the other thread by Gaddafi, this is presumably due to the increase in step parents.
4- mmm... So you don't think men and women think differently or are different?
5- In that example I was referring to how patriarchal societies were more successful than matriarchal ones, mainly due to there not really being any!
To keep it on topic I would say that in a successful society women are not allowed to be promiscuous or wear immodest clothing
I would say we are living on the vastly diminishing fruits of when we were a successful Society rather than one which is declining in my view.*
*(Not entirely due to feminism but this is a factor)
2- no but you will do in order to make them viable in most workplaces hence mandatory maternity leave and anti discrimination laws as well as various benefits etc.
3- as I said in the other thread by Gaddafi, this is presumably due to the increase in step parents.
4- mmm... So you don't think men and women think differently or are different?
5- In that example I was referring to how patriarchal societies were more successful than matriarchal ones, mainly due to there not really being any!
To keep it on topic I would say that in a successful society women are not allowed to be promiscuous or wear immodest clothing
I would say we are living on the vastly diminishing fruits of when we were a successful Society rather than one which is declining in my view.*
*(Not entirely due to feminism but this is a factor)
1. The right to vote, the ability to have almost any job you like, having equal pay, being comparatively free from prejudice and discrimination, etc. These are all major successes of feminism.
2. The right to vote, abortion and no-fault divorce do not involve the workplace. Anti-discrimination laws had their place in the past but I don't see them as having much of an effect now, society has thankfully moved on. I don't see what maternity leave has to do with feminism, even non-feminist countries have it.
3. The trend has been caused due to changing attitudes towards marriage and, consequentially, declining divorce rates and marriages that last longer. Instead of getting married out of a sense of duty, people are deliberating about it properly and more likely to get married if they actually want to spend the rest of their life (and have children) with someone. Ergo fewer marriages break down so there are fewer single parent families. There's also the fact that fewer women are bring up children (from birth) on their own.
4. I don't know. Even if they did, I don't see this as an argument against feminism or an argument for stripping women of their rights. I've never encountered a woman in the workplace who is incapable of doing what a man can do, 'emotive rashness' and all.
5. You have an extremely perverted sense of success if you'd think a society which allows women to walk around wearing "immodest" clothing is an unsuccessful one. To me, the success of a society should involve numerous things, namely the stability of the society, how healthy people are, how long people live, how happy people are, how sustainable the system is, whether there are civil conflicts and wars, etc. The clothes people wear isn't even on the list.
Original post by SHallowvale
1. The right to vote, the ability to have almost any job you like, having equal pay, being comparatively free from prejudice and discrimination, etc. These are all major successes of feminism.
2. The right to vote, abortion and no-fault divorce do not involve the workplace. Anti-discrimination laws had their place in the past but I don't see them as having much of an effect now, society has thankfully moved on. I don't see what maternity leave has to do with feminism, even non-feminist countries have it.
3. The trend has been caused due to changing attitudes towards marriage and, consequentially, declining divorce rates and marriages that last longer. Instead of getting married out of a sense of duty, people are deliberating about it properly and more likely to get married if they actually want to spend the rest of their life (and have children) with someone. Ergo fewer marriages break down so there are fewer single parent families. There's also the fact that fewer women are bring up children (from birth) on their own.
4. I don't know. Even if they did, I don't see this as an argument against feminism or an argument for stripping women of their rights. I've never encountered a woman in the workplace who is incapable of doing what a man can do, 'emotive rashness' and all.
5. You have an extremely perverted sense of success if you'd think a society which allows women to walk around wearing "immodest" clothing is an unsuccessful one. To me, the success of a society should involve numerous things, namely the stability of the society, how healthy people are, how long people live, how happy people are, how sustainable the system is, whether there are civil conflicts and wars, etc. The clothes people wear isn't even on the list.
2. The right to vote, abortion and no-fault divorce do not involve the workplace. Anti-discrimination laws had their place in the past but I don't see them as having much of an effect now, society has thankfully moved on. I don't see what maternity leave has to do with feminism, even non-feminist countries have it.
3. The trend has been caused due to changing attitudes towards marriage and, consequentially, declining divorce rates and marriages that last longer. Instead of getting married out of a sense of duty, people are deliberating about it properly and more likely to get married if they actually want to spend the rest of their life (and have children) with someone. Ergo fewer marriages break down so there are fewer single parent families. There's also the fact that fewer women are bring up children (from birth) on their own.
4. I don't know. Even if they did, I don't see this as an argument against feminism or an argument for stripping women of their rights. I've never encountered a woman in the workplace who is incapable of doing what a man can do, 'emotive rashness' and all.
5. You have an extremely perverted sense of success if you'd think a society which allows women to walk around wearing "immodest" clothing is an unsuccessful one. To me, the success of a society should involve numerous things, namely the stability of the society, how healthy people are, how long people live, how happy people are, how sustainable the system is, whether there are civil conflicts and wars, etc. The clothes people wear isn't even on the list.
2- So why do we need them then lol? Also state subsidised child care is another big one. Right now we pay mother's money to pay strangers to look after their children so they can go and work in Tesco's or wherever. What are non feminist countries? I doubt they have paid maternity leave in Afghanistan.
3: do you think feminism might be beging these "changing attitudes"?
Also women who have zero sexual partners are least likely to divorce and gave happier marriages. I believe there are similar studies looking at arranged marriages.
https://ifstudies.org/blog/does-sexual-history-affect-marital-happiness
4. Well I think they do and I think the science dies too. Sure women can often do the same job as men can unless it involves manual labour. But I think generally through things like *****ing as well as things like office romance it has a detrimental effect on things - I've witnessed this first hand and many female colleagues actually agree with me here about how horrible women are to work with.
5. Sure but as I said I was trying to limit it to the be related to this topic. Obviously what makes a society successful is a long and multi faceted debate and I agree with the three examples you gave. I'm sure we could agree on lots of things there but that is beyond the scope of this discussion.
So speaking specifically about women in a successful society I think that they should aspire to be dutiful wives, loving mothers and be respectful and chaste.
I'm not a monarchist but Kate Middleton would be s good exemplar of this. Virtually every other female cekebrity would not be a good role model.
Original post by Starship Trooper
2- So why do we need them then lol? Also state subsidised child care is another big one. Right now we pay mother's money to pay strangers to look after their children so they can go and work in Tesco's or wherever. What are non feminist countries? I doubt they have paid maternity leave in Afghanistan.
3: do you think feminism might be beging these "changing attitudes"?
Also women who have zero sexual partners are least likely to divorce and gave happier marriages. I believe there are similar studies looking at arranged marriages.
https://ifstudies.org/blog/does-sexual-history-affect-marital-happiness
4. Well I think they do and I think the science dies too. Sure women can often do the same job as men can unless it involves manual labour. But I think generally through things like *****ing as well as things like office romance it has a detrimental effect on things - I've witnessed this first hand and many female colleagues actually agree with me here about how horrible women are to work with.
5. Sure but as I said I was trying to limit it to the be related to this topic. Obviously what makes a society successful is a long and multi faceted debate and I agree with the three examples you gave. I'm sure we could agree on lots of things there but that is beyond the scope of this discussion.
So speaking specifically about women in a successful society I think that they should aspire to be dutiful wives, loving mothers and be respectful and chaste.
I'm not a monarchist but Kate Middleton would be s good exemplar of this. Virtually every other female cekebrity would not be a good role model.
3: do you think feminism might be beging these "changing attitudes"?
Also women who have zero sexual partners are least likely to divorce and gave happier marriages. I believe there are similar studies looking at arranged marriages.
https://ifstudies.org/blog/does-sexual-history-affect-marital-happiness
4. Well I think they do and I think the science dies too. Sure women can often do the same job as men can unless it involves manual labour. But I think generally through things like *****ing as well as things like office romance it has a detrimental effect on things - I've witnessed this first hand and many female colleagues actually agree with me here about how horrible women are to work with.
5. Sure but as I said I was trying to limit it to the be related to this topic. Obviously what makes a society successful is a long and multi faceted debate and I agree with the three examples you gave. I'm sure we could agree on lots of things there but that is beyond the scope of this discussion.
So speaking specifically about women in a successful society I think that they should aspire to be dutiful wives, loving mothers and be respectful and chaste.
I'm not a monarchist but Kate Middleton would be s good exemplar of this. Virtually every other female cekebrity would not be a good role model.
2. They were needed to address what was once a culture which was heavily set against women in the workplace. We've moved on since then, so the vast majority of women will not need that legislation. Some might still need it, hence why it should remain. If we removed it, though, I don't see us slipping back into old ways. Society has moved on.
Regarding maternity pay, I was thinking of countries like Saudi Arabia, Egpyt, UAE, etc. Not exactly feminist places, or are they?
3. Possibly. I think the changing attitudes surrounding marriage are a good thing. It's better for people to wait longer to get married, it enables better decision making and the evidence is quite clear that it leads to fewer divorces.
Regarding women who have had fewer sexual partners, I believe we've gone through this already. The correlation you see is actually explained better by religious attitudes (probably location too) than they are sexual partners. People who are religious tend to have a stricter view on both sex outside of marriage and also divorce, hence the trend that those with fewer (or no) sexual partners before marriage will also have lower divorce rates. What you'll notice is that after 2-3 partners there is no effect of past sexual history on divorce and marital happiness.
4. Sounds like you've worked with some extremely immature and incompetent people, then? All the women I've worked with have been excellent at their job and have had very good relationships with their colleagues (both male and female). I recall reading about the science behind increased 'emotional rashness' from women. If I recall correctly, the view of psychologists is that this exists but is not great enough to cause a meaningful difference between the sexes (and certainly not enough to justify stripping women of the right to work).
5. Women, and men also, should aspire to live a life that is healthy and makes them happy. Not all women want to be wives, let alone mothers, and we shouldn't force this expectation on them or classify them as 'failures' if they don't hold to that standard. If women want to be wives and have children then all power to them, but this isn't for everyone.
Original post by SHallowvale
2.
Regarding maternity pay, I was thinking of countries like Saudi Arabia, Egpyt, UAE, etc. Not exactly feminist places, or are they?
3. Possibly. I think the changing attitudes surrounding marriage are a good thing. It's better for people to wait longer to get married, it enables better decision making and the evidence is quite clear that it leads to fewer divorces.
Regarding women who have had fewer sexual partners, I believe we've gone through this already. The correlation you see is actually explained better by religious attitudes (probably location too) than they are sexual partners. People who are religious tend to have a stricter view on both sex outside of marriage and also divorce, hence the trend that those with fewer (or no) sexual partners before marriage will also have lower divorce rates. What you'll notice is that after 2-3 partners there is no effect of past sexual history on divorce and marital happiness.
4. Sounds like you've worked with some extremely immature and incompetent people, then? All the women I've worked with have been excellent at their job and have had very good relationships with their colleagues (both male and female). I recall reading about the science behind increased 'emotional rashness' from women. If I recall correctly, the view of psychologists is that this exists but is not great enough to cause a meaningful difference between the sexes (and certainly not enough to justify stripping women of the right to work).
5. Women, and men also, should aspire to live a life that is healthy and makes them happy.
Not all women want to be wives, let alone mothers, and we shouldn't force this expectation on them or classify them as 'failures' if they don't hold to that standard. If women want to be wives and have children then all power to them, but this isn't for everyone.
Regarding maternity pay, I was thinking of countries like Saudi Arabia, Egpyt, UAE, etc. Not exactly feminist places, or are they?
3. Possibly. I think the changing attitudes surrounding marriage are a good thing. It's better for people to wait longer to get married, it enables better decision making and the evidence is quite clear that it leads to fewer divorces.
Regarding women who have had fewer sexual partners, I believe we've gone through this already. The correlation you see is actually explained better by religious attitudes (probably location too) than they are sexual partners. People who are religious tend to have a stricter view on both sex outside of marriage and also divorce, hence the trend that those with fewer (or no) sexual partners before marriage will also have lower divorce rates. What you'll notice is that after 2-3 partners there is no effect of past sexual history on divorce and marital happiness.
4. Sounds like you've worked with some extremely immature and incompetent people, then? All the women I've worked with have been excellent at their job and have had very good relationships with their colleagues (both male and female). I recall reading about the science behind increased 'emotional rashness' from women. If I recall correctly, the view of psychologists is that this exists but is not great enough to cause a meaningful difference between the sexes (and certainly not enough to justify stripping women of the right to work).
5. Women, and men also, should aspire to live a life that is healthy and makes them happy.
Not all women want to be wives, let alone mothers, and we shouldn't force this expectation on them or classify them as 'failures' if they don't hold to that standard. If women want to be wives and have children then all power to them, but this isn't for everyone.
2: probably not. I'm not against maternity pay either, provided that women are working in limited capacity. I imagine there aren't many Egyptian soldiers getting maternity pay for instance!
3- what do you mean "wait longer for marriage" that's not the issue, the issue is having multiple sexual partners before marriage. As above those with zero sexual partners are least likely to get divorced and will be more likely to have good marriages
Are you saying that people with religious/ traditional values that are in religious/ traditional societies are more likely to not get divorced and have better marriages? I mean that's literally my argument. And obviously those people are less likely to be promiscuous...
4- lmao I don't need a peer reviewed study to tell me that women are emotionally rash. "Meaningful" sounds pretty subjective to me...
5: I agree to a large extent. Unfortunately I think they are being led astray by destructive ideologies like feminism that are destroying their lives and convincing them it's freedom making them ugly inside and out.
97% of sexual assaults are perpetrated by men, women aren’t the sex class that weaponise sex, you’ve got it the wrong way around. It’s not in our interests to have sex with random males because pregnancy (and abortions) can have significant health implications. Women are adults, we don’t need the state to restrict our rights in our own interests and don’t be saying that women have particularly bad judgement, the facts and figures aren’t exactly a ringing endorsement of men’s behaviour. Across cultures men are way more likely to behave violently (incidentally towards men).
It’s true, women as a class do have a tendency to behave in certain ways and make certain choices. What is right for some women, is not right for all. Equality of opportunity.
It also makes sense that in most cases women ‘get the kids’ after a divorce, women (almost) always carry the greatest burden when we reproduce. For young children, in most circumstances again their mother is the most important figure in their life. That’s not to say that fathers aren’t important, positive male role models are very much needed by children.
You are incredibly authoritarian.
It’s true, women as a class do have a tendency to behave in certain ways and make certain choices. What is right for some women, is not right for all. Equality of opportunity.
It also makes sense that in most cases women ‘get the kids’ after a divorce, women (almost) always carry the greatest burden when we reproduce. For young children, in most circumstances again their mother is the most important figure in their life. That’s not to say that fathers aren’t important, positive male role models are very much needed by children.
You are incredibly authoritarian.
(edited 2 years ago)
Original post by Starship Trooper
2: probably not. I'm not against maternity pay either, provided that women are working in limited capacity. I imagine there aren't many Egyptian soldiers getting maternity pay for instance!
3- what do you mean "wait longer for marriage" that's not the issue, the issue is having multiple sexual partners before marriage. As above those with zero sexual partners are least likely to get divorced and will be more likely to have good marriages
Are you saying that people with religious/ traditional values that are in religious/ traditional societies are more likely to not get divorced and have better marriages? I mean that's literally my argument. And obviously those people are less likely to be promiscuous...
4- lmao I don't need a peer reviewed study to tell me that women are emotionally rash. "Meaningful" sounds pretty subjective to me...
5: I agree to a large extent. Unfortunately I think they are being led astray by destructive ideologies like feminism that are destroying their lives and convincing them it's freedom making them ugly inside and out.
3- what do you mean "wait longer for marriage" that's not the issue, the issue is having multiple sexual partners before marriage. As above those with zero sexual partners are least likely to get divorced and will be more likely to have good marriages
Are you saying that people with religious/ traditional values that are in religious/ traditional societies are more likely to not get divorced and have better marriages? I mean that's literally my argument. And obviously those people are less likely to be promiscuous...
4- lmao I don't need a peer reviewed study to tell me that women are emotionally rash. "Meaningful" sounds pretty subjective to me...
5: I agree to a large extent. Unfortunately I think they are being led astray by destructive ideologies like feminism that are destroying their lives and convincing them it's freedom making them ugly inside and out.
2. Right, so as I said this isn't related to feminism.
3. "Waiting longer for marriage" as in... people not getting married early in their relationship and marrying at an older age. It's the reason why we've seen a decline in divorce rates, and subsequently a decline in single parent families.
Religious belief, along with urbanicity, education and age at marriage, explain the difference in divorce rates seen between people with no sexual partners before marriage and the people with one or more sexual partners before marriage. After one sexual partner, further sexual partners do not have a meaningful difference on divorce rates. Does having merely one sexual partner before marriage (who may be the same person you marry) make someone "promiscuous"? I wouldn't think so.
As for marital happiness, the roll of religion is less prominent. The article suggests that genetics might play the largest roll in this, and the more I think about this the more it makes sense. Marital happiness and sexual history may be correlated, but not because one causes the other. They'd have the same cause. If you are predisposed to want numerous sexual partners, or simply be unhappy with relationships in general, then chances are you're not going to be as happy in marriage as someone who is predisposed to be happy with just one sexual partner. Would forcing these people to have only one partner really make them more happy? Probably not. I'll point out, though, that the difference in marital happiness between those with one previous sexual partner and those with two or more previous sexual partners is not massive.
4. I'll take the word of a psychologist. It's the most wise and unrash thing I can do, which you seem to place very high value in.
5. Feminism is bad because someone took an unflattering photo of a person shouting? Well, there goes my whole belief system. I am totally convinced now, thank you.
What would lead people astray would be telling them that their ambitions, hobbies and personal interests don't matter, which is what you want to do. Out of curiosity, do you hold yourself to the same standard that you want women to be held to? For example, if someone told you to drop your career, your income, your ambitions, etc, and be a stay at home husband who must have children and look after them... would you do that?
Original post by Starship Trooper
3- as I said in the other thread by Gaddafi, this is presumably due to the increase in step parents.
You don't think it might have something to do with the declining divorce rates we're also seeing?
Divorces rose substantially under Thatcher, and declined dramatically during the Blair years. So much for traditional values.
Original post by Starship Trooper
For most of history it has been.
Changing the current paradigm will not happen overnight. There are a series of achievable policy goals that would eventually lead to a more patriarchal system.
-making it far harder to divorce and ensuring that the leaving party does not get the fruits of the marriage. Right now a married woman can leave on a whim and automatically be entitled to the kids and at least half their stuff.
- ending various government supported protections and incentives for women in the workplace eg maternity leave, tax credits etc.
-limiting abortion
- Ban porn. Legalise brothels
The following would de incentive women to pursue a career and focus on building families etc. I would not completely bar women from jobs but limit it to sectors conducive to their nature such as care, hospitality and catering but would reduce their hours so they could only work limited hours.
It would also mean that both sexes would have be far more discerning with their partners and incentive chasity and waiting for marriage.
The last two would help to stop the weaponisation of sex against men. If men could safely buy a blow job for £100 it would do more damage to feminism.
Changing the current paradigm will not happen overnight. There are a series of achievable policy goals that would eventually lead to a more patriarchal system.
-making it far harder to divorce and ensuring that the leaving party does not get the fruits of the marriage. Right now a married woman can leave on a whim and automatically be entitled to the kids and at least half their stuff.
- ending various government supported protections and incentives for women in the workplace eg maternity leave, tax credits etc.
-limiting abortion
- Ban porn. Legalise brothels
The following would de incentive women to pursue a career and focus on building families etc. I would not completely bar women from jobs but limit it to sectors conducive to their nature such as care, hospitality and catering but would reduce their hours so they could only work limited hours.
It would also mean that both sexes would have be far more discerning with their partners and incentive chasity and waiting for marriage.
The last two would help to stop the weaponisation of sex against men. If men could safely buy a blow job for £100 it would do more damage to feminism.
Yes and no, depends on the society and the age..
I donyt know, women have equality before the law and i personally wouldnt say society is overly sexist these days. I do agree on the marriage comment though plus that of childrens custody
Why would you want to see maternity leave ended? It being rather necessary for raising kids, plus men benefit from it to (as well as being able to take it). Abortion on the other hand i fail to see how that falls under sexism, except when you limit access to it - that. by definition, is sexist.
Sounds awfully like a victorian/islamic view on life..?
How is chastity/waiting for marriage a good/desirable thing exactly? Sounds damn boring.. plus completely unenforceable given most people will simply ignore it
you'll have to enlighten me on the last point as to what the 'weaponisation of sex against men' means? I can think how sex is weaponised but rape tends to be against women..
Original post by SHallowvale
2. Right, so as I said this isn't related to feminism.
3. "Waiting longer for marriage" as in... people not getting married early in their relationship and marrying at an older age. It's the reason why we've seen a decline in divorce rates, and subsequently a decline in single parent families.
Religious belief, along with urbanicity, education and age at marriage, explain the difference in divorce rates seen between people with no sexual partners before marriage and the people with one or more sexual partners before marriage. After one sexual partner, further sexual partners do not have a meaningful difference on divorce rates. Does having merely one sexual partner before marriage (who may be the same person you marry) make someone "promiscuous"? I wouldn't think so.
As for marital happiness, the roll of religion is less prominent. The article suggests that genetics might play the largest roll in this, and the more I think about this the more it makes sense. Marital happiness and sexual history may be correlated, but not because one causes the other. They'd have the same cause. If you are predisposed to want numerous sexual partners, or simply be unhappy with relationships in general, then chances are you're not going to be as happy in marriage as someone who is predisposed to be happy with just one sexual partner. Would forcing these people to have only one partner really make them more happy? Probably not. I'll point out, though, that the difference in marital happiness between those with one previous sexual partner and those with two or more previous sexual partners is not massive.
4. I'll take the word of a psychologist. It's the most wise and unrash thing I can do, which you seem to place very high value in.
5. Feminism is bad because someone took an unflattering photo of a person shouting? Well, there goes my whole belief system. I am totally convinced now, thank you.
Out of curiosity, do you hold yourself to the same standard that you want women to be held to? For example, if someone told you to drop your career, your income, your ambitions, etc, and be a stay at home husband who must have children and look after them... would you do that?
3. "Waiting longer for marriage" as in... people not getting married early in their relationship and marrying at an older age. It's the reason why we've seen a decline in divorce rates, and subsequently a decline in single parent families.
Religious belief, along with urbanicity, education and age at marriage, explain the difference in divorce rates seen between people with no sexual partners before marriage and the people with one or more sexual partners before marriage. After one sexual partner, further sexual partners do not have a meaningful difference on divorce rates. Does having merely one sexual partner before marriage (who may be the same person you marry) make someone "promiscuous"? I wouldn't think so.
As for marital happiness, the roll of religion is less prominent. The article suggests that genetics might play the largest roll in this, and the more I think about this the more it makes sense. Marital happiness and sexual history may be correlated, but not because one causes the other. They'd have the same cause. If you are predisposed to want numerous sexual partners, or simply be unhappy with relationships in general, then chances are you're not going to be as happy in marriage as someone who is predisposed to be happy with just one sexual partner. Would forcing these people to have only one partner really make them more happy? Probably not. I'll point out, though, that the difference in marital happiness between those with one previous sexual partner and those with two or more previous sexual partners is not massive.
4. I'll take the word of a psychologist. It's the most wise and unrash thing I can do, which you seem to place very high value in.
5. Feminism is bad because someone took an unflattering photo of a person shouting? Well, there goes my whole belief system. I am totally convinced now, thank you.
Out of curiosity, do you hold yourself to the same standard that you want women to be held to? For example, if someone told you to drop your career, your income, your ambitions, etc, and be a stay at home husband who must have children and look after them... would you do that?
2: it is, it's just not necessarily a bad thing. I am not saying no woman should ever have any rights or protections that has never been the case not even under the Taliban. Removing maternity pay would put a lot if women off working and feminists would rightly oppose cutting maternity pay as an attack on women.
3:
Lefties always bring up the decline in divorce when in reality its irrelevant when you look at how things were in the fifties and thirties.
The same is presumably true of single parent families.
Again with the "meaningful" difference. There is a difference it's just not as profound as the first one. Again, still doing nothing for your argument.
The exception proves the rule. It is theoretically possible that you might marry a virgin who will divorce you and chest on you with the entire cast of Emmerdale or marry a prostitute who will be faithful to her dying breath. But these are anomalies.
If there is a promiscuity gene then these women should either fight that tendency or become prostitutes.
4: you do that buddy
5: theres lots if other photos, videos I could use. Check out libs on tik tok on twitter if you want to see some real specimens. The pretty girl goes to uni and becomes a deranged she beast arc is practically a cliche now. And inb4 "it's just Twitter " just go outside and youll see these people.
No because I'm not a woman. Is that supposed to be a gotcha? I also think children should be allowed to drink alcohol despite myself drinking alcohol, gee what a hypocrite I am!
Original post by Captain Haddock
You don't think it might have something to do with the declining divorce rates we're also seeing?
Divorces rose substantially under Thatcher, and declined dramatically during the Blair years. So much for traditional values.
Divorces rose substantially under Thatcher, and declined dramatically during the Blair years. So much for traditional values.
See above.
Sigh, as I said to you last time Thatcher was not a traditional Conservative. The Tory party hasn't been for over a hundred years
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2308783/PETER-HITCHENS-Lets-remember-Maggie-really--tragic-failure.html
Original post by Starship Trooper
See above.
Sigh, as I said to you last time Thatcher was not a traditional Conservative. The Tory party hasn't been for over a hundred years
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2308783/PETER-HITCHENS-Lets-remember-Maggie-really--tragic-failure.html
Sigh, as I said to you last time Thatcher was not a traditional Conservative. The Tory party hasn't been for over a hundred years
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2308783/PETER-HITCHENS-Lets-remember-Maggie-really--tragic-failure.html
Divorces are never going to crash down to zero overnight. The best you can hope for is a downward trend, and that's what you're getting.
No but you have called her the best since *checks notes* the Marquess of Salisbury.
Original post by Starship Trooper
2: it is, it's just not necessarily a bad thing. I am not saying no woman should ever have any rights or protections that has never been the case not even under the Taliban. Removing maternity pay would put a lot if women off working and feminists would rightly oppose cutting maternity pay as an attack on women.
3:
Lefties always bring up the decline in divorce when in reality its irrelevant when you look at how things were in the fifties and thirties.
The same is presumably true of single parent families.
Again with the "meaningful" difference. There is a difference it's just not as profound as the first one. Again, still doing nothing for your argument.
The exception proves the rule. It is theoretically possible that you might marry a virgin who will divorce you and chest on you with the entire cast of Emmerdale or marry a prostitute who will be faithful to her dying breath. But these are anomalies.
If there is a promiscuity gene then these women should either fight that tendency or become prostitutes.
4: you do that buddy
5: theres lots if other photos, videos I could use. Check out libs on tik tok on twitter if you want to see some real specimens. The pretty girl goes to uni and becomes a deranged she beast arc is practically a cliche now. And inb4 "it's just Twitter " just go outside and youll see these people.
No because I'm not a woman. Is that supposed to be a gotcha? I also think children should be allowed to drink alcohol despite myself drinking alcohol, gee what a hypocrite I am!
3:
Lefties always bring up the decline in divorce when in reality its irrelevant when you look at how things were in the fifties and thirties.
The same is presumably true of single parent families.
Again with the "meaningful" difference. There is a difference it's just not as profound as the first one. Again, still doing nothing for your argument.
The exception proves the rule. It is theoretically possible that you might marry a virgin who will divorce you and chest on you with the entire cast of Emmerdale or marry a prostitute who will be faithful to her dying breath. But these are anomalies.
If there is a promiscuity gene then these women should either fight that tendency or become prostitutes.
4: you do that buddy
5: theres lots if other photos, videos I could use. Check out libs on tik tok on twitter if you want to see some real specimens. The pretty girl goes to uni and becomes a deranged she beast arc is practically a cliche now. And inb4 "it's just Twitter " just go outside and youll see these people.
No because I'm not a woman. Is that supposed to be a gotcha? I also think children should be allowed to drink alcohol despite myself drinking alcohol, gee what a hypocrite I am!
2. If it's not necessarily a bad thing then why bring it up? Why say 'feminism is bad because maternity pay' if you yourself aren't against maternity pay?
3. It's totally relevant. The argument is that feminism creates broken homes. Over the last 10-20 years we've seen increasing amounts of feminism yet stable or even declining divorce rates. Ergo, feminism isn't relevant to broken homes. What caused the spike in divorce during the 70s was the Divorce Reform Act. Calling no-fault divorce laws from the 70s "feminist" would be a bit foolish given how the same rules can be found in non-feminist countries.
I'm not exactly sure what you're responding to with your follow up replies here, but the long story short is that the data you've presented doesn't support your overall argument.
4. For someone who decries women as emotional people who make rash and unwise decisions, you sure are keen to base your arguments on emotion and end up with rash and unwise beliefs.
5. Yes, it demonstrates that you're a hypocrite. Why hold women to a standard that you don't want to be held to yourself? In the case of alcohol, our laws are hypocritical but that's at least somewhat acceptable because they exist to deter children from alcohol and keep them safe. Ultimately those children will grow up and gain the right to choose for themself. In your case, however, you want to limit the rights of women altogether (regardless of age) and not even for the sake of their safety.
Original post by Napp
Yes and no, depends on the society and the age..
I donyt know, women have equality before the law and i personally wouldnt say society is overly sexist these days. I do agree on the marriage comment though plus that of childrens custody
Why would you want to see maternity leave ended? It being rather necessary for raising kids, plus men benefit from it to (as well as being able to take it).
Abortion on the other hand i fail to see how that falls under sexism, except when you limit access to it - that. by definition, is sexist.
Sounds awfully like a victorian/islamic view on life..?
How is chastity/waiting for marriage a good/desirable thing exactly? Sounds damn boring.. .
plus completely unenforceable given most people will simply ignore it
you'll have to enlighten me on the last point as to what the 'weaponisation of sex against men' means? I can think how sex is weaponised but rape tends to be against women..
I donyt know, women have equality before the law and i personally wouldnt say society is overly sexist these days. I do agree on the marriage comment though plus that of childrens custody
Why would you want to see maternity leave ended? It being rather necessary for raising kids, plus men benefit from it to (as well as being able to take it).
Abortion on the other hand i fail to see how that falls under sexism, except when you limit access to it - that. by definition, is sexist.
Sounds awfully like a victorian/islamic view on life..?
How is chastity/waiting for marriage a good/desirable thing exactly? Sounds damn boring.. .
plus completely unenforceable given most people will simply ignore it
you'll have to enlighten me on the last point as to what the 'weaponisation of sex against men' means? I can think how sex is weaponised but rape tends to be against women..
Roughly the last two thousand years of western history say 200 BC to 1950 AD
I know that's the problem. Society should be more "sexist" (another leftist scare word to demonise critique of their work and make it above scrutiny)
I don't want to see maternity leave ended as a whole I was using it as an example.
I don't think men should have abortions either
See above for women. Now I don't think anyone should be promiscuous but to be honest I don't think it's as bad to be promiscuous as a man as it is for women. We're just built differently. Or to put it another way- a key that opens lots if locks is s master key. But a lock that opens to lots of keys is a rubbish lock
That's what laws are for. Also you can obviously try and shape public opinion as well as use government to enforce your worldview.
Simple. The use of sex to manipulate or control men. EG
https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/sex-relationship_b_1659021
Now to some extent this is natural/ normal and has throughout history been how women have been able to get a say in things and it s not necessarily their fault either. Additionally men are hugely to blame here as well for basically simping and being weak.
Original post by Captain Haddock
Divorces are never going to crash down to zero overnight.
The best you can hope for is a downward trend, and that's what you're getting.
No but you have called her the best since *checks notes* the Marquess of Salisbury.
The best you can hope for is a downward trend, and that's what you're getting.
No but you have called her the best since *checks notes* the Marquess of Salisbury.
Agreed
I don't think it's going to stay that way. It might go down a little bit more but it's still minor esp when you factor in less people getting married anyway.
Correct. It is a very low bar. Unlike the others I think her heart was mostly in the right place. (Same is true of Trump and Nixon)
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
