My Theory On Femininism

What about your dad?

dude

can i use that as a sig cause that's hilarious!

I was sort of being facetious, guyz.

have i made a sexual comment bout you yet?

My Dads worked at a computer place pretty much all my life. On avrage working from 6AM to 4PM.

As I got older I learned to like him less though.

Knock yourself out.

and lol

Sexual comment? No. Sexual picture? Yes.

oh good.. *crosses out from the list*
Any other girl members came about since i left?

Not that I know of. I can't say I remember Raie though. At least, I don't know what her original name was.

I've always been Raie. Also, Smoke can you please try not to derail the topic with your hormones? Thanks.

O DAT SMOK!

Anyway, I still don't see how you came to the conclusion that women are the reason why our economy is going down. Think the economy would be the same whether or not feminism occured.

Are you reading my posts? Are you actually thinking about what you're saying? You can learn these things from books and without getting a diploma for learning them, and you're only reinforcing my point by saying "I want more than just the knowledge." What do you want then? Recognition? Proof you have that knowledge? All these words are just glorified ways of saying you want attention for what you have -- a pat on the head and a "Good job, you're so smart" from the higher-ups when you're done with all that learning. You have yet to prove my claims on this wrong -- in fact, the only thing you seem to be doing is further emphasizing the factuality of my point.

Are you not capable of abstract, hypothetical thought? You keep saying diploma's are necessary for getting jobs, but what, then, would be the worth of such a thing if it was not the goal ore need of a woman to get a job? I can understand wanting to learn for the sake of learning, but if (in my hypothetical world I have created which you just can't seem to get our head around) women needed not to join the workforce, the purpose of a degree or diploma is moot. Like I said, it's like getting a degree in law so you can flip burgers at McDonalds.

And, yes, actually, it does make you an attention *****. Consider what you are saying literally here and take off your cultural blinders. Recognition, money, your notion of "making it as a lawyer" (all factors you present) -- these are all embodiments of attention from others (employers, professors, etc.). And your unnecessary, angry digression aside, you're only really proving my point. Diplomas are no more than things you can wave in people's faces to demand attention from them -- whether it be in the form of a job, money, or just recognition.

It's all still just attention.

I never said feminism didn't bring about some good changes. As I said in my OP, prior to the feminist movement, women were regularly abused, raped, etc., and that by no means is acceptable. Yes, I believe there was a necessity for change and equality, but demanding a place in the workforce is not equality -- it is merely sameness. Women didn't want to be equal, they wanted to be the same -- and the two words are different.

Women could've worked equally hard for similar ends in the household, but they opted not to. They could have survived and thrived by just havign the man at work, while they kept things in order at home, but they didn't want to.

For some odd reason, they framed household work as lower than actual work. They cried "inequality" in a situation that really wasn't unequal at all. They set up a problem that essentially never really existed.

No?

There will always be a conflict of what you want to do and what you have to do though. Is the workforce really any more diverse and special than working at home? Is it really more exciting? I think feminists over-glorify work -- making it seem like some sort of liberation with fantastical variety and a myriad of exciting options... but it's really not that way.

I think people who cry about how boring and awful are either brainwashed by the modern feminist propaganda that breathes so much life into our cultural, or else has a morbid, ignorant misconception of what the workforce is really like. I think capitalism and this notion of the American dream has made people think getting a job is all about choices and what you want -- but it's really no more fair or fun or exciting as working at home is.

Or at least that's how I see it. However, I think this discussion is a question of personal feelings and emotions, making it hard to integrate into a theory of cold, hard facts, y'know? It certainly isn't irrelevant, though.

This is exactly what I mean by being brainwashed by modern feminist propaganda.

The fact that any time you do a favour for your husband or children, or cook a meal, or clean a table, or do the laundry, it's OMFG SEXISM AND UR BEIN OPRRESSED ANS TREATED LIEK A SLAVE U NEED TO FITE FOR UR RIGHTS AGAINST THE EVIL MAELZ CUZ THEY PUTTIN U DOWN, GURRRL!!!1!

Yes, and human will, as I said above, is important. But we all must realize that in this capitalist greed machine we call the American workforce, you don't always get to do what you want. Yes, growing up looks peachy and happy and free when you're teenager bolted down by the "shackles" of high school, but as you grow up and expect those shackles to lighten, then never really do. They just get heavier and heavier. Responsibility and obligation begins to weigh down on will, and you start to realize all this bollocks you were taught about the American dream and doing not what you think you have to do, but what you want to do becomes a laughable farce.

But as I said earlier, will and wanting is kind of an emotional side of this whole debate that's hard to address in theory. One could easily say that if Mrs. A's hypothetical anti-feminist world existed, women wouldn't want to pursue jobs like lawyering and engineering, and so the point is moot. But I can't really prove that.

Plus, we're talking about the well-being of the economy, not what people want or feel.

It sure seems to make sense to everyone else; where're you going wrong, here?

Maybe you should read my posts, then, instead of beating me down with emotional retorts and trying to debase my theory with little more than feelings and will-power, hmm?

This post has been edited by Mrs. Aforcer on Feb 24 2009, 07:15 PM

Aw c'mon. That wasn't nice.
I know you're trying to make a point but ... oh well. No use trying.


Anyway, I have to agree with you actually (By what you said in the first post). Seems you thought this out quite a lot, you might be on to something. Too lazy to read through the rest of this thread and start an argument with somebody though, so I'll just leave it at that.

I'm not using emotion nor am I beating you down. And I have been reading your posts; are you reading mine? I have been stating that most people don't want to learn for learning's sake, they want knowledge to reach a goal. Geez, you're really on my ass today, aren't ya?

Sorry, I get flustered when people use emotions to debate instead of logic and play it off as intellectual.

Thanks, bro. I'd like to take, like, a female studies class, actually, and turn something like this in as a term paper just to troll the class.

It'd be amazing.

My god, I wasn't serious, no need to mutilate your grammar.

Sure, some people might want to be housewives, but I have no interest in taking care of other people, I'd much rather hire someone to do it for me. Nor do I have any real interest in wasting most of my life working 40 hours a week just so I can keep my mediocre, middle-class lifestyle.

Not to be rude, but this is a rather serious discussion. =P

And just a curious question: Do you plan on having kids?

I'm not on your case, I just want you to post in a constructive manner. And if you're not going to do that, your points are going to be questioned and picked apart by people who are being constructive.

I am reading your posts, and you continually prove my point with your posts, which leave me a bit miffed as to why you even bother posting.

And, for the record, a lot of people actually learn for the sake of learning. And when you say "goal," what do you mean, praytell?

Recognition? Acceptance? A job? A certain salary? Admittance to somewhere? Are hose all not forms of attention in some way or another. Additionally, such goals imply wouldn't exist in the abstract hypothetical model to explain my theory. Women would not need diplomas to achieve their means (i.e. goals), so such a point is moot. I don't know why you continue to beat a dead horse.

And, if you look at my exchange with Pieman earlier in the thread, you'll see such a desire fits right in with my model of an anti-feminist society. There will still be housekeepers for hire, and, for that matter, it's not like you're obligated to have children to take care of.

This post has been edited by Mrs. Aforcer on Feb 24 2009, 07:27 PM

I'm considering it at some point in the future. Of course I'm going to hire someone to take care of them instead of me, though. Why do you ask (if it's "YOU'LL HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF YOUR CHILDREN IF YOU HAVE THEM, SO YOU'D BETTER START LIKING THE IDEA NOW", don't even bother.)?

what if it's a ship full of retards

Wow, you must be planning to make a bunch of money then to afford, like, a 24-hour housekeeper/babysitter! Lucky you!