Where? I just re read the thread... don’t see it.I conceded to that and agreed that was part of the factor.
That's what you personally think of feminism but it's still how it's perceived or explicitly said by radical feminists.no one is shaming the nuclear family
I agree to disagreeanyway the nuclear family is a modern invention, invented by the Victorians
It's also true for men in some extent, It's a class problem.there has never been a time when women did not work, stayed home, cooked cleaned and serviced men. Even elite women worked in the royal courts as hand maids, dressers, stitchers.
Anti feminists have been using the man hating argument since feminism began, these posters are over 100 years old and its the same argument your using
I'm not disagreeing, i'm saying today's feminism has practically nothing to do with it's initial purpose.Today's feminism is anti-male by essence.and again feminism is not a one fits all ive shown its diverse, get some new arguments.
honey everything you have said so far has been debunked. your just upset you cant control women and no one believes your diatribeFeminists are too proud and even fearful that what we know as the feminist movement turned out to in actuality not even benefit what is vital/ relevant to MOST women, families, and even children in the long run... They gained a lifetime in the workforce basically at the expense and trade off of off a more family oriented life.
you can disagree but honey its history, you can but your hands over your ears and go lalalalalala but the nuclear family is an invention of the Victorians, even the bible doesn't have nuclear families, they have men with concubines, sex slave and the like, women have always worked in some capacity for a wage, but in the modern era its our money not our husbandsThat's what you personally think of feminism but it's still how it's perceived or explicitly said by radical feminists.
I agree to disagree
It's also true for men in some extent, It's a class problem.
I'm not disagreeing, i'm saying today's feminism has practically nothing to do with it's initial purpose.Today's feminism is anti-male by essence.
What were the main focuses of the original feminist movement, because last time i checked it was about female inequality pertaining to certain rights and work and not the workforce needing more positions filled because of the IR.Where? I just re read the thread... don’t see it.
feminism was a reaction to a problem, not the cause of the problem. We still have institutional factors fueling the problem that don’t have anything to do with feminism... ask yourself why two parents living together who don’t marry are better off at tax time and as far as benefits are concerned then those same two parents with the exact same incomes and situations who do get married.
Jesus Christ man... women were already forced into the workforce by the IR before feminism became a thing. Feminism was a reaction to the changes in family life, the economy, and gender roles not the cause of them. Seriously do yourself a favor and google this for an hour. Just one hour. Read about it.What were the main focuses of the original feminist movement, because last time i checked it was about female inequality pertaining to certain rights and work and not the workforce needing more positions filled because of the IR.
..at the time the solution to the ir was putting women to work? Why wasnt a different solution formed instead of one catering to appease feminists? Was it because of the feminist contention of inequality? Do you think if it wasnt for the movement it would have even been conceived as more women in the workforce as a solution? Why was the solution instantly putting women to work? That was influence of feminism at the time
The only thing robbing anyone of the opportunity to stay home instead of work is our economic system.Most women like men dont even like their jobs and there are a handful that do, but most dont... Whos to say the feminist influence didnt rob them of missing out on taking care of the house and their children in a more hands on fashion giving them more fulfillment than working a miserable 9 to 5 to survive ... But feminists have basicslly spoken for them ...
Now, yes... ...at the time feminism began to grow not so much.The only thing robbing anyone of the opportunity to stay home instead of work is our economic system.
Your not understanding... women were already in the workforce due to IR (they’ve always been in the workforce but the IR significantly increased this and made it more visible). That wasn’t feminism’s solution. It was what had already happened. Feminism fought for those jobs to be more fair and safe and for women to have access to better jobs as well. That’s why you have another wave of feminism following wwii as well.. because the war forced women back into the workforce after a period of them being retracted back to the home front - all the men were at war and someone needed to keep things running at home. On top of that it made a lot of widows so old rules about property ownership became obsolete as they were a massive problem in a time of massive death among young men.Now, yes... ...at the time feminism began to grow not so much.
Feminism ushered in a cultural normalcy and acceptance for all women to be part of the working class normal whereas before a substantial amount of women were caretakers of the home. It was a solution that may have otherwise not been sought after as the answer if it wasnt being pushed so hard by the elite. Why was more women in the workforce the solution to the IR and not something else entirely? It didnt have to happen, but why did the cia use gloria steinham?
Like I have said idc if women have rights and work. There is indeed a trade off tho and taking women out of the home has had effects on the family and children, marriages and all social elements within society which have been degenerative... We cant blame it all on IR as if women in the workforce was the only solution... Tho If thats the trade off some women prefer then so be it, but nobody can really deny there is a tradeoff and it is indeed feminist mantra that the typical woman would somehow be more satisfied in the workforce than she would a stay at home mother.
...whats miserable is that this is a subject that deserves real reexamination like many other movements geared toward revolutionziing the social fabric of society( becsuse of the the crisis of family and mental health problems) and you have useful idiots like yourself unable to think outside your sensitive emotions. If as an african American man i can accept that entities and movements such as blm is a cruel hoax perhaps some of u victimized feminists can do the sameA miserable man trying to tell a bunch of women that they are miserable LOL.
Im glad your enjoying life, because there are allot of broken families and individuals who arent and they probably have no idea they were socially engineered by ideas and suggestions to self destruct.I don't know man, I'd say I'm enjoying life pretty well. Don't know where you are bringing the victimization from.
There are things we can do to support, restore and preserve families - women, children, and MEN. Lots of things. We choose to do the opposite. Then some people blame feminism. That’s the low fruit on the tree and has been purposely served up to you as a scapegoat so you don’t look at what is actually going on.Im glad your enjoying life, because there are allot of broken families and individuals who arent and they probably have no idea they were socially engineered by ideas and suggestions to self destruct.