View Poll Results: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

Voters
117. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, it was bad for America

    48 41.03%
  • No, it was good for America

    51 43.59%
  • A little bad and a little good. Overall it was neutral

    4 3.42%
  • A little bad and a little good. It changed a lot but not one way or the other.

    10 8.55%
  • Other...

    6 5.13%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 13 of 36 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 356

Thread: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

  1. #121
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    What were the major economic changes that occurred during that time (whatever that time is).
    World War 2.
    The growth of industry and wealth in the 1950s.
    The shift from manufacturing to technology/information from the 1960s to present.

    The info/tech economy didn't hit until 1997. Did you mean that you think our society has been in decline only since 1997?
    This is such a stupid response that I have difficulty responding. The women's movement actually began in the late 1880s. Since that time, the U.S. has had MULTIPLE economic shifts lasting for decades.

    No fault divorce laws have had an impact but the evidence I've seen so far concludes correlation and not causation. For instance, Tennessee, Alabama, Florida and Georgia have the most relaxed divorce laws and have the highest divorce rates in the country.
    I don't think you know what those terms mean.

    is that because of "no fault" divorce or do people simply get divorced without being asked for the cause? Just because you get a divorce and don't tell the state that your husband beats you doesn't mean he didn't.
    *sigh*

    http://www.library.ca.gov/crb/98/04/currentstate.pdf


    And, as a general response to your woefully uninformed posts:

    This isn't school. It's not the job of other posters to provide you with basic background information that you should know before addressing a subject.

    You have a responsibility to stop posting on subjects about which you clearly don't have the faintest idea. Instead of using big words that you can't even define, I'd advise that you spend some time reading and researching before posting.
    Last edited by Catz Part Deux; 05-13-10 at 10:36 AM.

  2. #122
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mell View Post
    Those who say the feminists have nothing to do with the worlds economic problems etc are right. Despite increasing womens rights, women have not yet had enough influence to create problems on this scale.



    So, we have a number of critics demanding that feminists justify and explain the validity of their methods. As Roosavelt put it ''it is not the citics who count...'' . So, the conclusion stands that the feminists, like everything else are not perfect, but there is no doubt that they have been effective, when we consider the advances in the womens rights situation in many countries. Critics should maybe put some of their energy into suggesting effective methods to move even further forward with the womens rights situation, or put a shoulder against the situation themselves by activating for womens rights. Assuming you agree that women should have rights that is.



    The knuckle draggers who don't agree that women should have rights are simply born on the wrong side of history. I don't suppose you will do the favour of piping down though...



    Yes, there are women who are also against the feminists, who they believe have ruined the romance that men would have showered on them, if it wasnt for the feminists... Well, there were always a majority of women who hide under the kitchen table, while others stand up for their rights, and then come out to accept those rights once those rights become normal. Not many women in the western world would step back to the types of rights they would have been entitled to, 200 years ago.

    Why? : In some times and places it has been/is dangerous for repressed groups to stand up for their righs, and sometimes these women have childrens welfare as well at their own to condider. This is the same for all oppressed groups, and not just women.

    In other cases, it is safe to stand up for their rights, but they can get a lot of mileage out of martyrdom, when they can blame either men or the feminists who they believe to be putting upon them. It is a weak position to take, but it is a sure and instant winner, because the simple goal of getting attention and sympathy for their plight is easy.
    I think the topic is "Overall, was feminism bad for America?"
    Not globally.

  3. #123
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mell View Post
    Those who say the feminists have nothing to do with the worlds economic problems etc are right. Despite increasing womens rights, women have not yet had enough influence to create problems on this scale.



    So, we have a number of critics demanding that feminists justify and explain the validity of their methods. As Roosavelt put it ''it is not the citics who count...'' . So, the conclusion stands that the feminists, like everything else are not perfect, but there is no doubt that they have been effective, when we consider the advances in the womens rights situation in many countries. Critics should maybe put some of their energy into suggesting effective methods to move even further forward with the womens rights situation, or put a shoulder against the situation themselves by activating for womens rights. Assuming you agree that women should have rights that is.



    The knuckle draggers who don't agree that women should have rights are simply born on the wrong side of history. I don't suppose you will do the favour of piping down though...



    Yes, there are women who are also against the feminists, who they believe have ruined the romance that men would have showered on them, if it wasnt for the feminists... Well, there were always a majority of women who hide under the kitchen table, while others stand up for their rights, and then come out to accept those rights once those rights become normal. Not many women in the western world would step back to the types of rights they would have been entitled to, 200 years ago.

    Why? : In some times and places it has been/is dangerous for repressed groups to stand up for their righs, and sometimes these women have childrens welfare as well at their own to condider. This is the same for all oppressed groups, and not just women.

    In other cases, it is safe to stand up for their rights, but they can get a lot of mileage out of martyrdom, when they can blame either men or the feminists who they believe to be putting upon them. It is a weak position to take, but it is a sure and instant winner, because the simple goal of getting attention and sympathy for their plight is easy.
    You underestimate the power of sex.

  4. #124
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mell View Post
    For those who have not got my 10 years of gender phschology reading behind them, there is no gender link to how emotional an individual is.

    It is about time that certain people stopped talking crap. These types of threads tend to have pages of it.

    Here is the real deal as far as gender and emotions is concerned. Further reseach is advisable, as the below is just a very brief summary.
    There is no gender link to how emotional an individual is. The gender difference is in how women and men process emotions. Since, power systems are out of balance in favour of men, it would be wise for women who want to get ahead to be aware of this, because the ways in which they process their emotions will be greatly misunderstood in the work place by male managers.
    You're right in that there is currently no gender link on how emotional someone is however, you missed an aspect. It's not just how we process emotions differently but also how we express (or don't) them. Women more readily express their emotions openly giving the impression of being more emotional.

  5. #125
    Guru
    Skateguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston/Heights
    Last Seen
    02-07-12 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,571

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by reefedjib View Post
    Cause we'll screw anything!
    The crack of dawn gives me wood these days.
    "Don't be particular bout nothin, but the company you keep"

  6. #126
    Guru
    Skateguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston/Heights
    Last Seen
    02-07-12 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,571

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mell View Post
    For those who have not got my 10 years of gender phschology reading behind them, there is no gender link to how emotional an individual is.

    It is about time that certain people stopped talking crap. These types of threads tend to have pages of it.

    Here is the real deal as far as gender and emotions is concerned. Further reseach is advisable, as the below is just a very brief summary.
    There is no gender link to how emotional an individual is. The gender difference is in how women and men process emotions. Since, power systems are out of balance in favour of men, it would be wise for women who want to get ahead to be aware of this, because the ways in which they process their emotions will be greatly misunderstood in the work place by male managers.
    Your emotional response proves my point.
    "Don't be particular bout nothin, but the company you keep"

  7. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz Part Deux View Post
    World War 2.
    The growth of industry and wealth in the 1950s.
    The shift from manufacturing to technology/information from the 1960s to present.
    WWII - "When the United States entered the war, 12 million women (one quarter of the workforce) were already working and by the end of the war, the number was up to 18 million (one third of the workforce). While ultimately 3 million women worked in war plants, the majority of women who worked during World War II worked in traditionally female occupations, like the service sector. The number of women in skilled jobs was actually few. Most women worked in tedious and poorly paid jobs in order to free men to take better paying jobs or to join the service. The only area that there was a true mixing of the sexes was in semiskilled and unskilled blue-collar work in factories (Campbell 100). Traditionally female clerical positions were able to maintain their numbers and recruit new women. These jobs were attractive because the hours were shorter, were white-collar, had better job security, had competitive wages, and were less physically strenuous and dirty. The demand for clerical workers was so great that it exceeded the supply (Anderson 32)."

    "After the war, the cultural division of labor by sex reasserted itself. Many women remained in the workforce but employers forced them back into lower-paying female jobs. Most women were laid off and told to go back to their homes."


    So, no sea change in women worker after WWII. So let's continue the timeline, basically unchanged. Then bring up the 1950s.

    1950s - "In 1950 about one in three women participated in the labor force. By 1998, nearly three of every five women of working age were in the labor force. Among women age 16 and over, the labor force participation rate was 33.9 percent in 1950, compared with 59.8 percent in 1998.

    63.3 percent of women age 16 to 24 worked in 1998 versus 43.9 percent in 1950.

    76.3 percent of women age 25 to 34 worked in 1998 versus 34.0 percent in 1950.

    77.1 percent of women age 35 to 44 worked in 1998 versus 39.1 percent in 1950.

    76.2 percent of women age 45 to 54 worked in 1998 versus 37.9 percent in 1950.

    51.2 percent of women age 55 to 64 worked in 1998 versus 27 percent in 1950.

    8.6 percent of women age 65+ worked in 1998 versus 9.7 percent in 1950.

    Source: U.S. Department of Labor: Changes in Women's Work Participation"


    So no sea change in women in the workforce in the 1950s. So, moving on...

    "In the third phase, labeled the "roots of the revolution" encompassing the time from 1950- mid to late 1970s, the movement began to approach the warning signs of a revolution. Women's expectations of future employment changed. Women began to see themselves going on to college and working through their marriages and even attending graduate school. Many however still had brief and intermittent work force participation. Women were still not looking for a 'career'. Although more women attended college, many attended merely because it was a good place to find a spouse. Nevertheless, Labor force participation by women still grew significantly.

    In the fourth phase, known as The Quiet Revolution began in the late 1970s and continues on today. Beginning in the 1970s women began to flood the colleges and grad schools. They began to enter profession like Medicine, Law, Dental and Business. More women were going to college and expected to be employed at the age of 35, as opposed to past generations that only worked intermittently due to marriage and childbirth. This increase in expectations of long-term gainful employment is reflected in the change of majors adopted by women from the 1970s on."


    This is such a stupid response that I have difficulty responding. The women's movement actually began in the late 1880s. Since that time, the U.S. has had MULTIPLE economic shifts lasting for decades.
    This is your response to my factual notation that the info/tech economy didn't start until 1997? And you call my response stupid?
    I don't think you know what those terms mean.
    Perhaps not, which terms in that quote are you referring to specifically?

    So California law wipes out my commentary about no fault divorce stats for southern states?
    What specifically am I supposed glean from that PDF, this?

    "Three years after Governor Brown urged reforming California’s fault-based divorce law,
    Governor Ronald Reagan signed the Family Law Act of 1969 into law, making California
    the first no-fault divorce state in the nation. Or, looked at by some in another way, “On
    September 5, 1969, with a stroke of his pen, California governor Ronald Reagan wiped
    out the moral basis for marriage in America.”

    OK, I'll agree with that!

    Seriously, I don't understand your rebuttal because it's so thin on the substance of your disagreement.

    And, as a general response to your woefully uninformed posts:

    This isn't school. It's not the job of other posters to provide you with basic background information that you should know before addressing a subject.

    You have a responsibility to stop posting on subjects about which you clearly don't have the faintest idea. Instead of using big words that you can't even define, I'd advise that you spend some time reading and researching before posting.
    You probably need to go check your blood pressure now because your response is entirely emotional. This is a debate forum so yes, it is sorta like "school", except we attempt to teach each other. I realize women are defensive about this subject but as I stated in my original post, I'm not sure of my position. You however are not enlightening me in the least and are in fact harming your position.

  8. #128
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    You're right in that there is currently no gender link on how emotional someone is however, you missed an aspect. It's not just how we process emotions differently but also how we express (or don't) them. Women more readily express their emotions openly giving the impression of being more emotional.
    Wrong. This is an ingrained stereotype. I call it volkswagen theory. You look for it, so you see it.

    People express emotions not on the basis of gender, but on the basis of personality type.

  9. #129
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz Part Deux View Post
    Wrong. This is an ingrained stereotype. I call it volkswagen theory. You look for it, so you see it.

    People express emotions not on the basis of gender, but on the basis of personality type.
    both, i think. society plays a huge role in how men express their emotions.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  10. #130
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Overall, was feminism bad for America?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz Part Deux View Post
    Wrong. This is an ingrained stereotype. I call it volkswagen theory. You look for it, so you see it.

    People express emotions not on the basis of gender, but on the basis of personality type.
    One note of contention here.
    Women, in general, make decisions more on the basis of short term safety and security than men do.
    Men do make use a similar decision making process but it is, usually, based on long term safety and security choices.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

Page 13 of 36 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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