[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
All is Vanity See other All is Vanity Articles Title: The Coming Collapse of Sex Roles 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 Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 17.
#1. To: Turtle (#0)
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.
Say what?
The premise that feminism arose out of boredom and not oppression. Neither was the actual premise for the rising of the movement. The argument builds on what de women supposedly wanted. In truth, it was a few women carefully scripted and given media access to voice their opinions to bring about that other 50% of the tax base that was desired. It was all about as liberating as the liberation of Iraq, Cyni.
ha ha. great posts.
There are no replies to Comment # 17. End Trace Mode for Comment # 17.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||