Posted on 10/04/2009 4:08:28 PM PDT by Niuhuru
Choice. This is the foundation of the feminist movement. The choice that women are not required being housewives, that they are allowed to choose careers, decide whether or not they want to marry, and the choice of whether or not to have sex with one or multiple partners even. Feminism was a way to enable women to enter the mainstream society and participate fully on their own terms. It has devolved though into an enabling philosophy for irresponsible women.
(Excerpt) Read more at businesslinkshere.com ...
ping
I think the whole thing is a crock. True I’m from another generation back but we kept a spotless house, prepared food for 3 meals a day from scratch, made our clothes and our daughter’s, did the laundry AND the ironing, shopped, balanced the household budget, ran a major department in a corporation, often traveled extensively, got our Master’s degree at night, never missed a child’s game or homework time and had a healthy sex life with ONE partner. We didn’t have time to watch TV or read a book and sleep was often limited - but it wasn’t that way forever, just until the kids got older. Most women today don’t know the meaning of the word multitask!
Say WHAAAT??????
Ailce Winters desperately needs an editor. Whether she has anything worthwhile to say is moot: I couldn’t get past the first paragraph.
Radicals get big egos and can’t stop after getting their way, even female radicals. “Compromising” with them just gives them confidence. Offer them everything and they’ll act insulted and demand more. It’s the same anywhere in the world. Steinem, Arafat, “Debito”, they’re all the same.
FTR, “Debito” is a foreigner in Japan. He was making a valid point about equal access to hot springs (onsen). He made his point. He got his way. Hurray. Yet he didn’t stop. He is now ruining foreigners’ reputations by trying to make Japan as PC-weenie as America and his ego won’t let him stop.
It wasn't a way to enter the MAINSTREAM SOCIETY, the mainstream wasn't like that until they changed it to their own terms.
They hate it when ladies like you, Sarah Palin and millions more live lives that show their protestations are really just so much whining by another liberal group of professional victims.
There are two kinds of people in America -
Those that say CAN DO!!!
Those who have a prepared list of reasons why they can’t do something and a second list of people to blame it on.
.
Wow!
A normal series of threads today!
Some nuggets of good thought in there but the whole thing was rambling, repetitive, disorganized and far too long.
She could have said everything that she wanted to say, much more effectively in one third the space.
[A normal series of threads today!]
Did you mean ‘normal’?
It’s not the Friday night blahhhhs, lol.
Just another babe who can’t get laid ay 2AM and doesn’t want to wind up in Denny’s for breakfast next night she tries.
I wouldn’t undo the women’s movement. Like Capitalism, it either sells or it doesn’t. It either has a buyer or it dies. Thank God women got the vote.....and after ex-slaves, I might add — high time — thank God we got birth control and access to higher education. The majority didn’t want it. We got it, and it was good. Now the wacko’s are pushing it too far and even women aren’t buying. Capitalism at work. It works. Leave it alone.
Choose to kill, good rationalization ladies.
Elitist commies never cared about women in the first place or minorities for that matter...it was power and big government they were after.
A nice piece. I’m not sure what other posters are complaining about.
The feminist dilution of the meaning of rape is an example of a corrosive tactic used by the left to undermine objective thought. (Orwell was prescient about the abuse of language as a means of suppressing dissent.) The tactic is simple: take an emotionally-charged morally-laden word (racist or rape are good examples) which denotes something rightly condemned by all people of good-will, and give it a new, broader meaning, leaving the emotional charge of its historical meaning untouched. (In the feverswamps of the academic left, “racist” has been redefined in such a way that all white folk (and only white folk) are involuntarily “racists”.)
I am also entirely in agreement that we as a society, led by feminists, have gone down the wrong path in dealing with people who voluntarily impair their mental and moral faculties: rather than giving folks who intentionally got themselves blotto a pass and declaring them incapable of giving consent, anyone who willfully becomes intoxicated should be considered entirely responsible for their actions while drunk, stoned or whatever, as if those actions were intentional.
The best social structure for women begins with the recognition that women fit very well on a complex bell shaped curve, but that their position on the bell shaped curve changes over time. That is, “most” women, “most” of the time have similar goals. This is just common sense.
So society needs to socially provide for what “most” women want, and to secondarily provide for what the minorities of women want, that is, the non-conformists.
For example, in old China, there was a tradition of the “Amah”. Single women who were not marriageable for any number of reasons, who would be “adopted” in a way, by a non-related family. Treated like a beloved Aunt by the family, they would do light housework and cooking, work as a nanny, take care of the elderly, and things like that for room, board and a stipend.
It gave not marriageable women a respectable alternative to prostitution, which they would continue for life, following the rules that they would not marry or have children. They were not a servant as such, and were regarded as being of a similar class as the family.
On the other side of the curve are women who pursue far more adventurous roles, again very different from what “most” women want. But instead of needing a social position created by society, what they need most is to not be subdued or restricted by society.
Importantly, though, once they have this freedom, it does not mean they have license to demand accommodation by society as well. For example, while women can serve effectively in the military, they have been denied combat roles they want, not because of incapability, but because they interfere with male performance solely by dint of being there.
That is, the vast majority of combat personnel are, and will remain male. If the presence of a female in danger brings forth an instinctual response in males that interferes with their performance, it is not they who need to change and adapt. This is because the military mission is far more important than self-actualization.
Perhaps the most important thing that women need today is to regain control of their sexuality. By this, I don’t mean abortion, but to again know that the abject propaganda that society forces on children about their sexuality creates a negative and destructive view of sexuality.
Just as the unnatural “Barbie” body image is only now being overcome even in a modest way, the hyper-sexuality idea forced on girls and women can be extremely harmful both physically and psychologically. Instead, society needs to put its foot down and demand that the mass media stop trying to persuade us all that hyper-sexuality is the norm.
By removing much of the coercive element from sex, women will be able to return to “sexual equanimity”, which is having the sex they want to have, not “demanded of them” and not “expected of them”, or “forced on them.”
And there is a lot of empowerment in that.
so true
Anything said about being drugged and rape-raped by a perverted “Artiste’” being wrong? No I guess not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.