[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The Attack on the USS Liberty (June 8, 1967) - Speech by Survivor Phillip Tourney At the Revisionist History of War Conference (Video)

‘I Smell CIA/Deep State All Over This’ — RFK Jr. VP Nicole Shanahan Blasts Sanctuary Cities,

we see peaceful protests launching in Los Angeles” - Democrat Senator Cory Booke

We have no legal framework for designating domestic terror organizations

Los Angeles Braces For Another Day Of Chaos As Newsom Pits Marxist Color Revolution Against Trump Admin

Methylene Blue Benefits

Another Mossad War Crime

80 served arrest warrants at 'cartel afterparty' in South Carolina

When Ideas Become Too Dangerous To Platform

The silent bloodbath that's tearing through the middle-class

Kiev Postponed Exchange With Russia, Leaves Bodies Of 6,000 Slain Ukrainian Troops In Trucks

Iranian Intelligence Stole Trove Of Sensitive Israeli Nuclear Files

In the USA, the identity of Musk's abuser, who gave him a black eye, was revealed

Return of 6,000 Soldiers' Bodies Will Cost Ukraine Extra $2.1Bln

Palantir's Secret War: Inside the Plot to Cripple WikiLeaks

Digital Prison in the Making?

In France we're horrified by spending money on Ukraine

Russia has patented technology for launching drones from the space station

Kill ICE: Foreign Flags And Fires Sweep LA

6,000-year-old skeletons with never-before-seen DNA rewrites human history

First Close Look at China’s Ultra-Long Range Sixth Generation J-36Jet

I'm Caitlin Clark, and I refuse to return to the WNBA

Border Czar Tom Homan: “We Are Going to Bring National Guard in Tonight” to Los Angeles

These Are The U.S. States With The Most Drug Use

Chabria: ICE arrested a California union leader. Does Trump understand what that means?Anita Chabria

White House Staffer Responsible for ‘Fanning Flames’ Between Trump and Musk ID’d

Texas Yanks Major Perk From Illegal Aliens - After Pioneering It 24 Years Ago

Dozens detained during Los Angeles ICE raids

Russian army suffers massive losses as Kremlin feigns interest in peace talks — ISW

Russia’s Defense Collapse Exposed by Ukraine Strike


All is Vanity
See other All is Vanity Articles

Title: The Coming Collapse of Sex Roles
Source: UncleBob's Treehouse
URL Source: http://uncabob.blogspot.com/
Published: Jan 30, 2011
Author: Bob Wallace
Post Date: 2011-01-30 14:16:00 by Turtle
Keywords: None
Views: 906
Comments: 33

There is a bit of a problem with sex roles these days, and I don’t think they can continue on the course they’re on.

My view is that feminism was not a response to oppression, but boredom. Men’s inventions had made life so much easier that the more intelligent women, many of them not being able to overcome the challenge of leisure, became bored and wanted to move into the traditionally male fields.

One of the problems is that they did not want to become coal miners or loggers or steel mill workers or garbage men. They didn’t want any hot, dangerous, dirty, sweaty jobs. They wanted to move into relatively easy, indoor, well-paying work.

Since they were now working full-time, they wanted men to share housework. This does seem fair, but what these women were saying is, “I want access to the more pleasant male role, but I want men to help with the less-pleasant female role.” But men changed and accepted this.

But at the same time, men were not allowed access to the more pleasant female role, such as staying home with the kids. Almost all women would be outraged if they made a very high salary and their husbands expected their wives to support them.

See what I’m saying? Women wanted access to the good part of being a male, but not the bad part. They wanted men to accept the unpleasant parts of the female role but not the pleasant parts. So where exactly did men benefit in all of this?

And at the same time, hallucinations about “patriarchy” and “male oppression” became the accepted reality. Men, who are responsible for civilization and technology, became the Bad Guys. Women, who as Camille Paglia so famously noted, would be unable to advance civilization beyond the level of grass huts, became the Good Guys.

Again, where exactly did men benefit from all of this?

Worse, Affirmative Action, which means “White Men Need Not Apply,” has enshrined quotas into law and prevented qualified men from being hired in the numbers they should be hired.

So what happened is women with advanced degrees and making good salaries looked around and found there was a shortage of men they thought were suitable. So, without husband, home and children, they became hostile and bitter – and I have seen many of them.

I have also seen many of these women making good salaries still expect men to ask them out. I’ve met women who in their entire lives never asked any man they were interested in out for a cup of coffee.

Again, they didn’t want to shoulder any of the more unpleasant aspects of the male role. They didn’t want to risk rejection, and still don’t. However, it’s still okay for the man to risk it.

I’ve met women who married the wrong guy (who asked them out), got divorced, got drunk one night, and called some guy they knew years ago, wondering if he was available. Then they found he was happily married, with children, many years ago. Who’s to blame for this – him, or her?

Years ago I drove a taxi and got to know quite a few hookers. It was enlightening the things I saw. I’d take these girls to their customers and wait for them. A noticeable number of the guys didn’t do anything but watch some videos with the girls. They were paying for their company on a lonely Friday night.

Where is “patriarchy” and “male oppression” in something like that?

I can’t see these unnatural sex roles continuing. They’ll have to change; I just don’t know when. But sooner or later, they’ll change - once the heartbreak gets bad enough.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 10.

#1. To: Turtle (#0)

My view is that feminism was not a response to oppression, but boredom.

Feminism was a means to get income tax from half of the population that wasn't paying it. Men were duped and women were duped. Bonus, breaking up the family unit creates more government dependence. It was never about real benefits for men or for women, Turtle.

Based on the faulty premise to begin your argument, the rest is just a loosely knit bunch of assumptions and broad generalizations that ignore the true intent of the movement, the predictable results and the consequences for society.

abraxas  posted on  2011-01-30   14:22:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: abraxas (#1)

Feminism was a means to get income tax from half of the population that wasn't paying it.

Not exactly. Income tax withholding didn't start until 1943, as a "temporary" wartime measure. Tax revenues went from 686 million in '42 to 7.8 billion in '44 -- over eleven times higher. It had nothing to do with feminism.

There was no "conpiracy" to get women into the workforce. It was women being duped by lesbians and hideous Jew medusae like Betty Friedan.

Some men and women did predict what would happen. No one listened to them.

Turtle  posted on  2011-01-30   15:11:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 10.

#19. To: Turtle (#10)

Not exactly. Income tax withholding didn't start until 1943, as a "temporary" wartime measure

No, exactly. Sold as a "temporary measure" and one must be truly naive to believe it was ever meant to be that. You ignore women going to work for the war effort while the men were sent to combat, which conveniently falls into the time line. Imagine the coincidental odds of that? Ask yourself CUI BONO? Not de women and surely not the men.

This is divide and conquer 101, Turtle. Only you are left spewing the lame blame de women mantra while ignoring all the benefits and fantastic coincidences resulting for the sole benefit of GOVERNMENT and BIG BUSINESS.

Contrary to the carefully cultivated feminist image of "rebels" fighting the system that you like to cling to with all your might, feminists collaborated with government and big business to reduce workers' bargaining power, increase the income tax collected and increase GDP via slight of hand. These were paid whores for that cause, simple as that.

Through women entering the work force, worker bargaining power decreased. Doubling the workforce through women working decreased wages and bargaining power of existing workers (men, and eventually both, but what a BOON for big business and government). Employers got two workers from every household for the price of one, thanks to feminism....ignore that at your peril.

Oh, but the tax base increases MASSIVELY-who benefits? The government could not tax the labor of women working in the home and something had to be done to remedy that. Now women pay income tax and sales tax on all the additional expenses incurred via going to work, basically they contribute to the tax base in EVERYTHING. Hence, the illusion of the economy growing is secured at least for several decades. It's win, win, win for de government (but you can pretend this was all just a wonderful boon that resulted by pure coincidence).

Lastly, women entering the paid workforce creates the illusion of GDP growth and the government looks good in the short term. Two earners per household pushes up the price of real estate and everything else(bubbles)which make it look like it's really growing at least until the burst. Also covers the loss in purchasing power of the dollar with the Fed Res fiasco. Have you ever considered how much RE went up in cost after women entered the work force and two incomes could pay for the mortgages? You are naive to ignore it. Also, increases in real estate prices increases property tax revenues collected by the government.

You are really underestimating the inner workings of feminism by repeating the media talking points and ignoring the real benefits to big government and big business, which is really the only one to win in the end. Face it, you have been duped and as long as you continue spewing the same lame feminist mantra that was merely carefully crafted paid talking points, you will continue to fail to see the forest for the trees.

abraxas  posted on  2011-01-30 16:25:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 10.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]