• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Traditionalism vs. Feminism vs. Individualism

whateverdude said:
I mean, isn't that kind of what it is?
How much labor could possibly be generated from one home? It should not take you more than an hour to clean the entire house and cooking is not that hard either.
As far as kids are concerned... My mom was a stay-at-home mom, but I had privacy and I wasn't around her 24/7, so I'd imagine that unless you have some form of OCD, staying at home means a lot of free time.
And honestly, I don't think it's healthy to spend all that free time with the kid. Just like I'm not too fond of the whole "family night" tradition where everyone unpluggs and play some gay little board game.
I think even stay-at-home moms need to leave their kids alone and let them play video games alone in their room for several hours.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you're a kid who wants his mom to leave him alone so he can eat his Cheetos and play his video games in the privacy of her own basement.
 
Josie said:
Sounds like you're a kid who wants his mom to leave him alone so he can eat his Cheetos and play his video games in the privacy of her own basement.
Click to expand...

Well, as a kid of course.
What would anyone possibly want more as a kid than that?

That's what every child wants more than anything else
 
soylentgreen said:
The traditional role did make slaves of women, forcing them to be responsible for all house work and care of children. That they wanted equality in this work is not unreasonable.
Your use of the word force is questionable. They make a reasonable claim and because you do not like it then you call it being forced.

.
Click to expand...

I suppose it was more of social coercion than force, but the point stands regardless. The majority of men and women didn't agree with them when this whole thing began, so feminists used shaming tactics to get what they wanted. Once they got other women into the same mindset these women took the coercion into their relationships and essentially forced men into something they didn't want to do. At this point every woman in the country essentially agrees with them, so men really have no choice unless they just decide to not live with a woman. Which just so happens to be what more men are deciding to do.
 
Henrin said:
I suppose it was more of social coercion than force, but the point stands regardless. The majority of men and women didn't agree with them when this whole thing began, so feminists used shaming tactics to get what they wanted.
Click to expand...
In exactly the same way slaves used shame tactics to get their freedom. Your view of the majority of men and woman did not want it is the same as a king saying the majority do not want democracy. A very self serving viewpoint.
Once they got other women into the same mindset these women took the coercion into their relationships and essentially forced men into something they didn't want to do. At this point every woman in the country essentially agrees with them, so men really have no choice unless they just decide to not live with a woman. Which just so happens to be what more men are deciding to do.
Click to expand...

You actually believe this ****?

This is like listening to some inbred southern boy white cracker tell us that the niggers got a bit uppity and should be put back in their place.

Women fought for their right to be treated as people not your personal slave. if you cannot accept that then you really should take your advice and live without them.
 
soylentgreen said:
In exactly the same way slaves used shame tactics to get their freedom. Your view of the majority of men and woman did not want it is the same as a king saying the majority do not want democracy. A very self serving viewpoint.
Click to expand...

It was true for the time period. :shrug: Feminists that demanded the change were the minority and they wanted to force their views on everyone else. They could have just went off and found a man that agreed with them (there was plenty enough for them), but apparently that wasn't good enough and they instead decided to attack the values and opinions of the rest of the people.

You actually believe this ****?

This is like listening to some inbred southern boy white cracker tell us that the niggers got a bit uppity and should be put back in their place.

Women fought for their right to be treated as people not your personal slave. if you cannot accept that then you really should take your advice and live without them.
Click to expand...

They were never slaves, dude. Comparing a woman that does the majority of housework(they didn't do it all even then) to a slave is flat out retarded and insulting to slaves. Also, what in the **** does equal housework in a realtionship have to do with human rights?
 
Henrin said:
It was true for the time period. :shrug: Feminists that demanded the change were the minority and they wanted to force their views on everyone else. They could have just went off and found a man that agreed with them (there was plenty enough for them), but apparently that wasn't good enough and they instead decided to attack the values and opinions of the rest of the people.
Click to expand...
You mean things like the right to vote or own property or been seen as an equal in the eyes of the law.

They were never slaves, dude. Comparing a woman that does the majority of housework(they didn't do it all even then) to a slave is flat out retarded and insulting to slaves. Also, what in the **** does equal housework in a realtionship have to do with human rights?
Click to expand...
Not at all. The analogy fits well considering that a women had no real rights and was at the mercy of men. What is retarded here is your simplistic view that all they had to worry about was a little house work.

Face it henrin your view is nothing more than that of a selfish boy wanting a nurse maid to care for you at your whim. Grow up and face the fact that women are people not your convenience.
 
soylentgreen said:
You mean things like the right to vote or own property or been seen as an equal in the eyes of the law.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about any of those things. Do you have any other red herrings you would like to bring up?

Not at all. The analogy fits well considering that a women had no real rights and was at the mercy of men. What is retarded here is your simplistic view that all they had to worry about was a little house work.
Click to expand...

She had no rights at the time when this equal work in the household fight began? Ummm...no. You should probably learn what time frame we are in and not expand the scope of the debate all the way back into the 19th century.

Face it henrin your view is nothing more than that of a selfish boy wanting a nurse maid to care for you at your whim. Grow up and face the fact that women are people not your convenience.
Click to expand...

:roll: I'm not one to give orders to women I'm with, but nice try.
 
The point here is that both traditional and modern family value people like to impose their views on others and both have a history of that kind of behavior through the years. Men feel obligated these days to do more around the house not because they feel it is the right thing to do, but because society has made it clear that men are sexist pigs if they don't. That isn't because society just naturallly progressed from traditional to a modern view point, but because leftists forced their views on the rest of society over the last several decades. If leftists didn't call men names for the last several decades then it is entirely possible they wouldn't have reached their goals.
 
Henrin said:
I wasn't talking about any of those things. Do you have any other red herrings you would like to bring up?
.
Click to expand...
I know you were not talking about those things. That is why your remarks are so ludicrous.
She had no rights at the time when this equal work in the household fight began? Ummm...no. You should probably learn what time frame we are in and not expand the scope of the debate all the way back into the 19th century.
Click to expand...
And you should take a holistic approach rather than pretend that a woman was ever treated as an equal.


:roll: I'm not one to give orders to women I'm with, but nice try
Click to expand...
I could not care less about you . What i refer to is the words you use here. And by that standard my comments still stand.
 
Feminism is finished and attained its goal. First-wave feminism obviously elevated women too personhood second wave feminism made them equal.

Third-wave feminism is just misandry and hatred of male sexuality.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Third-wave feminism is just misandry and hatred of male sexuality.
Click to expand...

It depends on whose definition we use. I believe that every man should consider man haters to be his Archenemy. And an enemy of my Archenemy is my friend.

But all men should be counted in feminism defined by Websters.
 
SCitizen said:
It depends on whose definition we use.
Click to expand...
I'm not using any esoteric definition. I'm using the common one.

I believe that every man should consider man haters to be his Archenemy. And an enemy of my Archenemy is my friend.

But all men should be counted in feminism defined by Websters.
Click to expand...
The dictionary says that egalitarian and feminist are the same thing. Though we see a huge division between feminists and egalitarianism. So i dont think the dictionary is descriptive in this instance.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Feminism is finished and attained its goal. First-wave feminism obviously elevated women too personhood second wave feminism made them equal.

Third-wave feminism is just misandry and hatred of male sexuality.
Click to expand...

That sounds like someone who has an issue with women. // this whole 'first wave/second wave/third wave' stuff is just bull. Also, women are still not being treated as equals in society. While things are better, there are still a lot of barriers in many careers. It might be much better, but there still is a lot of prejudice out there.. and discrimination.
 
RAMOSS said:
That sounds like someone who has an issue with women.
Click to expand...
That sounds like an ad hominem fallacy.

// this whole 'first wave/second wave/third wave' stuff is just bull.
Click to expand...
I disagree.
Also, women are still not being treated as equals in society.
Click to expand...
In a lot of ways they have more rights than men and ate treated better.
While things are better, there are still a lot of barriers in many careers.
Click to expand...
No there isn't.
It might be much better, but there still is a lot of prejudice out there.. and discrimination.
Click to expand...
Such as...
 
CLAX1911 said:
That sounds like an ad hominem fallacy.
Click to expand...

But, never the less, it is true.


I disagree. In a lot of ways they have more rights than men and ate treated better. No there isn't. Such as...[/QUOTE]

[/quote]

Having to deal with young ladies that are encountering that kind of discrimination, and seeing it first hand, I have to say, you are totally incorrect.
 
RAMOSS said:
But, never the less, it is true.


I disagree. In a lot of ways they have more rights than men and ate treated better. No there isn't. Such as..

Having to deal with young ladies that are encountering that kind of discrimination, and seeing it first hand, I have to say, you are totally incorrect..
Click to expand...




I agree, his comment is one of those cliches of which when put to the test have no real grounds. At best it is a case that they have different rights, but then so do men.

It is also a case of how many men cannot get their heads around the idea that feminism is for the most part concerning women and not men. His arguments of rights equality is a good example of how much men think that a women must always think about their relationship in this world revolves around men. He does not understand that women can and do think about what is a woman as a women, not an appendage to a man.

In nearly every post here where a man complains about feminism the underlying comment is that a feminist is thinking about men in a way they do not like. In other words it is not feminism it is a man crying out," me, me, me, take notice of me".
 
RAMOSS said:
But, never the less, it is true.
Click to expand...
Now you're clairvoyant?

Having to deal with young ladies that are encountering that kind of discrimination, and seeing it first hand, I have to say, you are totally incorrect.
Click to expand...
If I was you wouldn't have resorted to ad hominem, and then claim your projection onto me was true.

You would also be able to list examples.

It's difficult to enter into careers, especially prestigious ones. Show me how women are particularly discriminated against our you have no argument.
 
soylentgreen said:
I agree, his comment is one of those cliches of which when put to the test have no real grounds. At best it is a case that they have different rights, but then so do men.

It is also a case of how many men cannot get their heads around the idea that feminism is for the most part concerning women and not men. His arguments of rights equality is a good example of how much men think that a women must always think about their relationship in this world revolves around men. He does not understand that women can and do think about what is a woman as a women, not an appendage to a man.

In nearly every post here where a man complains about feminism the underlying comment is that a feminist is thinking about men in a way they do not like. In other words it is not feminism it is a man crying out," me, me, me, take notice of me".
Click to expand...

I was specifically talking about how women are treated in the work place in the USA. .. there are the theoritical rights, and then there are the way people are actually treated.

Theoretically, blacks and whites are equal under the law in the USA. Same as women and men. Practically, from the attitudes of people, and how they are actually treated, not so much.
 
soylentgreen said:
I agree, his comment is one of those cliches of which when put to the test have no real grounds. At best it is a case that they have different rights, but then so do men.

It is also a case of how many men cannot get their heads around the idea that feminism is for the most part concerning women and not men. His arguments of rights equality is a good example of how much men think that a women must always think about their relationship in this world revolves around men. He does not understand that women can and do think about what is a woman as a women, not an appendage to a man.

In nearly every post here where a man complains about feminism the underlying comment is that a feminist is thinking about men in a way they do not like. In other words it is not feminism it is a man crying out," me, me, me, take notice of me".
Click to expand...

Lol. Is that supposed to be ironic? If I think about women in a certain way I risk feminists calling me sexist or a few other names. Doubt it? Ok, run this little experiment the next time you find yourself talking to a feminist. Instead of presenting a view that matches her own present a traditional argument on the subject and argue it from the interest of men. What do you think will happen? Well, first of all, you disagreed with her, second you took up a position she thinks is sexist, and last you did it by arguing for men instead of women. Chances are she will call you a sexist for that argument.
 
RAMOSS said:
I was specifically talking about how women are treated in the work place in the USA. .. there are the theoritical rights, and then there are the way people are actually treated.

Theoretically, blacks and whites are equal under the law in the USA. Same as women and men. Practically, from the attitudes of people, and how they are actually treated, not so much.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But the emphasis is always being put on a rights issue when it is actually a matter of perception.
 
Henrin said:
Lol. Is that supposed to be ironic? If I think about women in a certain way I risk feminists calling me sexist or a few other names. Doubt it? Ok, run this little experiment the next time you find yourself talking to a feminist. Instead of presenting a view that matches her own present a traditional argument on the subject and argue it from the interest of men. What do you think will happen? Well, first of all, you disagreed with her, second you took up a position she thinks is sexist, and last you did it by arguing for men instead of women. Chances are she will call you a sexist for that argument.
Click to expand...

She probably would with you but then your incompetent and a sexist so she would be justified.

If i am arguing from the interest of men then your assuming that her own view must also be from the interest of men. You fail to understand that feminis is about women not the interest of men. but then you fail to understand that a woman can actually think of other things beside men.
 
soylentgreen said:
She probably would with you but then your incompetent and a sexist so she would be justified.

If i am arguing from the interest of men then your assuming that her own view must also be from the interest of men. You fail to understand that feminis is about women not the interest of men. but then you fail to understand that a woman can actually think of other things beside men.
Click to expand...

Dude, seriously? :lamo If you're going to call someone incompetent it might help if you don't show yourself as incompetent right after. I wasn't suggesting that the feminist can only see from the man's preservative, but in fact saying that the feminist can only stand hearing her own perspective.
 
soylentgreen said:
Agreed. But the emphasis is always being put on a rights issue when it is actually a matter of perception.
Click to expand...

When the 'rights' are not equally given, despite the law, then there is an issue. As long as the practice does not meet the ideal, then the issue still has to be presented.
 
RAMOSS said:
Having to deal with young ladies that are encountering that kind of discrimination, and seeing it first hand, I have to say, you are totally incorrect.
Click to expand...

Definitely both genders can be discriminated against -- indeed women are probably discriminated against in higher paying occupations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom