User Tag List

Page 93 of 162 FirstFirst ... 43839192939495103143 ... LastLast
Results 921 to 930 of 1614

Thread: 3rd wave feminism

  1. #921
    Superwoman Array Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,318

    Default

    In India construction is typical women's work. Just saying...






    Also, as others have already pointed out, field work on farms has historically
    been and in many parts of the world still is a job for the entire family, men and women.



    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  2. #922
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Only because laws, rules, and customs denied her this chance.
    Yes and it would of been completely stupid for women at the time to do so and most women at the time would agree as well. Would you have worked full time hours at coal mine steel mill and construction? with little to no safety regulations? due to the lack of technology most of the jobs at the time were labor intensive. This is also why many of the women in third world countries still stay at home as well. Women in society were valued for their reproductive ability and in order for a society to flourish they were protected and secluded from high risk high intensive labor jobs. Feminism is completely toxic it pays no mention to these important facts.
    Eh, the Karen Straughan style of rationalizing historical gender roles as a balance of rights & responsibility is almost as bad as feminists historical revisionism. While it hasn't gone as far as analyzing social dynamics by giving social constructs grandiose mystical powers (Yet), it largely ignores the variable of personal agency and the resulting ability to influence the distribution of rights & responsibility to began with. The degree to which the MRA is willing to copy the very sort of radical feminists rethorics they complain about is something to keep an eye for - If it evolves in the same direction it has the risk of creating the same level of alienating fanaticism, and if it is ever going to become a counter balance to organizations like NOW, With the added limitations it faces (Men aren't inclined to whiteknight other men), this pitfall needs to be avoided.

  3. #923
    Tempbanned Array
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    In those days, even housework was labor intensive,
    Yes which is the reason why women stayed at home to take care of those tasks, there weren't washing machines and dish washers at the time someone needed to do these things thank you for proving my point of the limitations of technology.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    as was the agricultural work that farm women did, and later the factory work they did after the industrial revolution. This last was particularly lacking in safety measures. There were also jobs in medicine, law, clerical work, teaching, crafts, and commerce that were no more labor intensive than the average housewife's day. These were mostly off-limits to women, however, regardless of ability and interest.
    You seem to not get the idea of what you are saying, all these jobs were a lot less labour intensive than the jobs at the start of the industrial revolution you can't compare factory work to construction or the military and working 80 hours a week paving roads full of toxic fumes, where were the women then?. What does safety measures have to do with patriarchy? The industrial revolution was the start of modern society, it had to do with lack of understanding and experience in these types of fields it was one big architectural experiment at the time. Jobs in medicine and law were extremely rare and most them you could have pursuit on it your own without the need of any schooling at time, this what many doctors did at the time yet no women did this I wonder why? hmmmmmm.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Medicine provides an especially interesting case. Centuries ago, most babies were delivered by midwives. If you are looking for an occupation that should be filled by women, this is it. With the advent of "modern" medicine, male doctors took over this activity from the midwives. Eventually women were prohibited both from practicing as midwives, or joining the ranks of doctors. Some of these rules persist to this day. The result was a medicalization of the natural process of childbirth from which western society at least is still trying to recover. But that is another topic.
    Yes and without dishwashers and washing machines and all forms of modern technology that of which was invented by men it would be impossible for a women at the time to take care of her child and work in these high end positions, which is part of the reason today women still do not work as many "white collar" jobs as men. Even when they do they work less hours than men and then complain about a "gender wage gap".

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Suffice it to say, women have never been strangers to hard work or danger. The only question is whether they were allowed to compete for jobs on their own merits, and be fairly compensated once employed.
    Bullshit women have always been strangers to hard work and danger in comparison to men and you have no evidence to back this up. This is part of the reason why feminism exists today, many are entitled ungrateful about how society worked in the past, many don't seem to take into account how technology has allowed them to go from a stay at home wife to a doctor or engineer. All throughout the history dating back to hunter gatherers women were taken care of and protected by men so they can raise children and populate the tribe.

  4. #924
    Tempbanned Array
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    In India construction is typical women's work. Just saying...






    Also, as others have already pointed out, field work on farms has historically
    been and in many parts of the world still is a job for the entire family, men and women.



    You are showing pictures of Africans there. There's like 2 Indians in the picture LOL

  5. #925
    Tempbanned Array
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Eh, the Karen Straughan style of rationalizing historical gender roles as a balance of rights & responsibility is almost as bad as feminists historical revisionism. While it hasn't gone as far as analyzing social dynamics by giving social constructs grandiose mystical powers (Yet), it largely ignores the variable of personal agency and the resulting ability to influence the distribution of rights & responsibility to began with. The degree to which the MRA is willing to copy the very sort of radical feminists rethorics they complain about is something to keep an eye for - If it evolves in the same direction it has the risk of creating the same level of alienating fanaticism, and if it is ever going to become a counter balance to organizations like NOW, With the added limitations it faces (Men aren't inclined to whiteknight other men), this pitfall needs to be avoided.
    Our modern day capitalistic mentality has convinced us to believe that ownership of private property or the ability or to go school at the begging of the industrial revolution was a at utter most importance. We fail to recognize that many people during this period were middle class working citizens looking to merely survive who put forth their priorities of raising a family over their own personal gain of wealth.

  6. #926
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    Our modern day capitalistic mentality has convinced us to believe that ownership of private property or the ability or to go school at the begging of the industrial revolution was a at utter most importance. We fail to recognize that many people during this period were middle class working citizens looking to merely survive who put forth their priorities of raising a family over their own personal gain of wealth.
    Yes, they made the choice to get married & support their wife and kids, most took it, a few didn't and quite a few took to delaying it and try to accumulate more wealth or education while getting married at a later age. With a traditional mentality of getting valued for reproduction, women didn't get that option. While this tends to favor society, it doesn't translate as a balance of agency for both men and women. The translates to a much wider difference in agency when you account for the measure of draft & voting.

    I think there's a bigger point here - just because many strands of feminism try to rewrite & reinterpret history to fit their agenda doesn't mean the MRA needs to appose that by trying to do the exact same thing in the opposite direction. Beyond the problem of embellishment (Two piles of bullshit don't make the truth), it isn't the right way for the movement to go in: Historical revisionism is a great tool for maintaining your power over people once you have a sizable number - it creates a wedge issue which proves to the group of people who believe in it that everyone outside of it doesn't even know the world they live in. It is not a good tool for young movements who's main goal is to gain support. If people need to learn a new version of history in order to see value in the MRA they are just less likely to join it in the first place.

    Most women I know acknowledge that feminism had a value in the past but is now the irrelevant leftover fanatically trying to justify it's existence. That is the view the MRA should reinforce.

  7. #927
    Tempbanned Array
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Yes, they made the choice to get married & support their wife and kids, most took it, a few didn't and quite a few took to delaying it and try to accumulate more wealth or education while getting married at a later age. With a traditional mentality of getting valued for reproduction, women didn't get that option. While this tends to favor society, it doesn't translate as a balance of agency for both men and women. The translates to a much wider difference in agency when you account for the measure of draft & voting.

    I think there's a bigger point here - just because many strands of feminism try to rewrite & reinterpret history to fit their agenda doesn't mean the MRA needs to appose that by trying to do the exact same thing in the opposite direction. Beyond the problem of embellishment (Two piles of bullshit don't make the truth), it isn't the right way for the movement to go in: Historical revisionism is a great tool for maintaining your power over people once you have a sizable number - it creates a wedge issue which proves to the group of people who believe in it that everyone outside of it doesn't even know the world they live in. It is not a good tool for young movements who's main goal is to gain support. If people need to learn a new version of history in order to see value in the MRA they are just less likely to join it in the first place.

    Most women I know acknowledge that feminism had a value in the past but is now the irrelevant leftover fanatically trying to justify it's existence. That is the view the MRA should reinforce.
    How is Karen bullshit if she trying to point out a different perspective than that was taught by feminism? I don't agree that people should just accept a false version of history especially when they are trying to justify their means today. Another question I have is how is it a coincidence that over 3 million years of human evolution as a species only in last 50-60 years women in western society have suddenly became "un opressed". A women's well being all throughout history was always put first to a man's well being, even if she didn't get the right to vote.Doing otherwise would be completely destructive to the well being of the species. This is the point I am trying to make that voting and the ownership of private property or going to school for an education during the early 1900's wasn't nearly as important as it is today. The fact of the matter is when shit hits the fan society chooses women over men any day of the week. I think there is a lot of truth in this video.


  8. #928
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    How is Karen bullshit if she trying to point out a different perspective than that was taught by feminism?
    Because she is competing with them using the exact same methodology as they do.

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    I don't agree that people should just accept a false version of history especially when they are trying to justify their means today.
    I don't agree that any political movement has the credibility to rewrite history to begin with, period.
    The agenda of historians shouldn't be a matter of ideology, it should be to figure out wtf happened.

  9. #929
    Tempbanned Array
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Because she is competing with them using the exact same methodology as they do.
    Examples please, is she running around in the streets protesting anti feminism? does she go around calling feminists "not real women", like feminists today call men "not real men" for stating a point of view?.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    I don't agree that any political movement has the credibility to rewrite history to begin with, period.
    The agenda of historians shouldn't be a matter of ideology, it should be to figure out wtf happened.
    In what sense are they "rewriting history". History is a collection of stories/events not necessarily a collection of facts, especially facts which include evidence of science and evolutionary psychology.

  10. #930
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    Examples please, is she running around in the streets protesting anti feminism? does she go around calling feminists "not real women", like feminists today call men "not real men" for stating a point of view?
    I am not saying she uses ALL of the same methods, the day were the MRA starts gender study groups about The Matriarchy would be a very sad day indeed. I am saying she is using the same specific method of reinforcing a position about current politics through reinterpreting history to support her agenda in the very same breath that she complains about feminists doing that exact same thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    In what sense are they "rewriting history". History is a collection of stories not necessarily a collection of facts, especially facts which include evidence of evolutionary psychology.
    Yes, and there is room to reinterpret them. But doing so with an ideological agenda is a double edged sword that creates loyalty at the cost of alienation, which is fine for movements that have already peaked in size and are trying to maintain whoever they have left to hang around a little while longer (Like feminism), but is not for a group that is still trying to gain traction and grow (Like the MRA). Let the people come with the version of history they've learned in highschool.

Similar Threads

  1. A new INFJ *waves!*
    By moonlit_reveries in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 01:14 AM
  2. Feminism
    By GZA in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 07:31 PM
  3. The Ocean Waves: a NF introduction
    By music_educe in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 08:00 PM
  4. *waving*
    By Sandy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 08:29 PM
  5. Hello :D *waves*
    By Indranizia in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 04:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •