On average, perhaps. But parental care does not rule out partial group care. And I’m sure you’ll agree that some parents can do a better job than some groups.
Do we have any reason to believe this poster was produced by “the feminists?” The only identification on it is “Coastal Carolina University”, which no doubt employees a range of people. It looks to me like the work of an older person concerned about kids these days and “hookup culture.”
The poster is also eight years old, and the university long ago changed their approach.
I dunno, what is the percentage of campaign funding available?
:dubious:
Yes, you are correct, a woman does in fact carry the fetus.
Do women only carry female fetuses? Do they only live in households with other women? Can supporting them in anyway in this regard help males in the slightest?
What planet are you on where shared parenting responsibilities is some kind of impossible dream, while life when women did all the housework was a utopia? Its really not that hard. Both people work, both people do housework. Millions do it. It’s not some crazy struggle.
I have no idea what you are saying about rape and pregnancy, but I’ll assume you understand fear of getting pregnant is not the main reason why women don’t want to get raped.
I have heard from several feminists on my facebook page about this poster. Every one of them disapproved of it.
I did not know that!. This explains so much.
Where did you learn this?
But conflict over parenting is a major source of aggravation between spouses.
And no, pregnancy isn’t the main concern of a women as she faces assault. But tell me why fee is mainly a male activity? If equality between the sexes is possible, can men be conditioned so that the small percentage among them who experience sexual assault as a satisfactory sensation are somehow eliminated?
Biology is destiny, to some, hopefully small extent, no matter how much we work to mitigate it.
Historically, men have had enormous freedom to leave their wives and cheat on their wives, and also to kill their wives if the wives cheated.
Anglo-Saxon culture has regarded married women as something other than persons, instead an organ of their husbands, for most of its existence.
Women who stay home and care for children are often disadvantaged compared to their husbands, especially in the bourgeoisie.
So, yeah, feminism is reacting to some real problems. And now we have to work out the kinks. And posts like OP’s are a good way of pointing out how much work we need to do on that, even if he conveniently for his argument leaves out most of the historical big picture.
Do you think parents didn’t fight about child rearing before? Do you think it wasn’t hard? Do you think everyone was satisfied with their role?
Everyone enjoys money, but we manage to keep robbery under control. We have a justice system to manage people who can’t keep their criminal urges under control.
Biology exists, but if we can manage not to kill each other for our food stores all the time, I think we can manage not to run around raping each other.
While I support the the guy’s arrest, I don’t think this is an accurate summation. The bar was crowded. She squeezed herself in, as we all have done. There was even less space now and he was trying to do the same thing, engaging more with the girl to his left than the one on the right. The blonde then turns and immediately has a fist raised. He tries to hold her off then she punches him. I think she was probably a little drunk to do that, and that’s what escalated things. And then she throws the punch. So, up to this point, she’s the one I say deserves the blame. But there was no reason he had to clock her the way he did. She posed no threat to him.
That’s the thesis, or summary, of my argument. It’s not a “fact” that can be linked to a cite. The following paragraphs are the arguments that back up the thesis.
I’m not sure what you’re saying in the first sentence.
In the second, I think you may be saying feminists wouldn’t attack a men’s group for being unmanly (saying, they’re “neckbeard virgin losers living in their mothers’ basements” for example. I think you’d be wrong.
Or you could be saying that some feminists say men shouldn’t be manly, or they should be more like women. Or even that masculinity itself is inherently evil or wrong. If that’s what you’re saying, I’d agree.
I googled “Jake Josie drunk poster” and came up with this reddit answer, which was apparently posted today. They emailed the university itself to find out about it.
What’s hilarious/sad is how many of the other first page results are people extrapolating from this self-selected, non-random piece of “evidence” in order to make sweeping generalizations about an entire group of people. I guess that’s how lah-jick works on their planet. But of course, we in this thread need not look far for an essentially identical example of intellectual failure.
I agree mostly with LinusK and it isn’t because I don’t want equality or hate women or anything of the sort. I have two rather young daughters of my own that I would kill for and nobody is going to screw them over or discriminate against on my watch.
However, I do think that feminism has become hopelessly tainted by extremists just like the Republican party has and that is more of an under rather than an over-exaggeration. As an independent, the things I hear in the media about modern day feminism are no less absurd than anything coming out of Fox news or any ultra-conservative outlet. I am certainly not the only person that has noticed that including many sensible women.
I have suggested it before and even been taken seriously by a feminist blog that moderate and sensible feminists really need to think about dumping the extremists and the label “feminism” and start a brand new equality movement if that is their honest goal. Speaking as a man, the name “feminism” is off-putting for lots of reasons but, more importantly, it isn’t even accurate. It relies on stereotypical assumptions that don’t reflect reality. There are butch lesbians that call themselves feminists that embody more masculism than I ever will. It also puts feminism and masculism into direct conflict with one another like they are Yin and Yang but that is not true. There isn’t inherent feminine or masculine qualities to most behaviors and, even if there were, people of both sexes/genders differ within them on an overlapping scale.
If you want true support for a mainstream movement, you need to call it something like ‘sex and gender equality’ and include everyone. The current movement is way too extreme, divisive and self-contradictory to anyone that is not directly served by promoting an inflammatory agenda.
I’m not quite sure whether you’re agreeing or disagreeing with me about evolution. My claim is that humans evolved as a social species, meaning both that we lived in groups, and that individuals within the group depended on each other - not just for survival, but also for successful reproduction. Humans are exceptional, because of our babies are unusually helpless for an unusually long period of time, and because childbirth is more difficult and more dangerous for women than for females of other species. A woman who’s about to give birth, or has recently given birth, is simultaneously both more helpless and in need of more resources and protection than anyone else. Unless a group - tribe, clan, or whatever - provides the help she needs, that group is not likely to reproduce successfully.
To put it differently, if you’re a man, and you’re part of a group that doesn’t take care of its women, it really doesn’t matter how often you have sex, or how strong or fast you are: your group is not going to make it. Your children are going to die, which means they won’t have children of their own.
I don’t know that you’re right about feminists not being taken seriously outside academia. Domestic violence is an example that comes to mind. Feminists were convinced that police were not arresting enough (male) abusers, so they pushed for mandatory arrest policies, and increased punishments for “family violence” crimes.
Only, they didn’t quite get what they wished for. Where before the police would walk away when they figured out it was the woman doing the hitting (or throwing or slapping or pushing or whatever), they started arresting them, instead. Arrests of women for domestic violence went from something close to zero to about 1/3 (where I live).
Now, that’s not what the feminists were after. So they started again.
[Bolding mine.]
So instead of mandating arrests, they now want police to decide who the “primary aggressor” was.
This is, I think, a not-so-subtle way of telling police, “Hey, arrest the GUY.”
What’s amazing about it is that even while acknowledging that women are just as likely to resort to violence as men, they still want only men to go to jail for it. Not women.
Yes, I made 911 call once after my ex-wife kicked me hard breaking two ribs when I was sleeping on the couch. She took off before I could even wake up and get my breath back. The police responded and said they would call an ambulance but there was nothing else they could do even though I requested that they file domestic violence charges against her. I just had to go to the doctor the next day to get an x-ray and lie about how I got the injuries ( I fell off a bike Doc). That was the worst injury she ever caused me but punches to the face and full force slaps were frequent. I never hit her at all and she knew that I wouldn’t.
You simply can’t report such things as a man and no one will listen or respond if you do even if you sustain injuries that require medical care. In my experience, women are more likely to hit men violently than vice versa just because they know that they can get away with it. If a woman is very high-spirited and aggressive, she basically has a full license to abuse her man in any way she chooses and the law will turn a blind eye to it as long as it is done in private.
I can’t really argue with anything you’ve said. I will add this: breast cancer is the worst kind of cancer because… brain cancer is so much fun?
The point I’m trying to make is that feminism is not about equality: it’s about privilege. And that feminism is not against patriarchy: it’s pro-patriarchy, whenever it serves its purposes. It’s about freedom without accountability, with healthy dose of male-bashing thrown in.
Case in point: not enough women in stem fields. (There are also not enough women in logging, construction, mining, fishing, and other dangerous low-paid low-glamour jobs - but forget about that.)
It can’t be that women just don’t like STEM fields (which is perfectly rational to me: I don’t like them either). There must be some other culprit… patriarchy. Patriarchy is somehow invisibly controlling them to keep them out of science and math. (But not, presumably, out of construction, sanitation, or mining… because those fields suck. Despite the fact society would grind to a halt without them.)
The weird thing that going on here is that feminists is not respecting women’s choices. They’re objectifying women: turning them into objects that are acted upon, rather than subjects who make their own decisions based on their own priorities and interests.
They don’t like the outcome, so they find something or someone (men) to blame for choices women are making.
Honestly, I read the OP twice, and it’s a confusing mess to me. I basically get that you think that feminism is bad. That women are the weaker gender. And, I think, that we want our cake and to eat it too, as the saying goes.
Saying that feminism is bad is like saying Christianity or Islam is bad. It’s a large, ever-changing, dynamic organism, made up of many groups, none of whom are exactly the same. You’re tarring it for the actions of a minority or subsection. As, I believe, Iyandii indicated up thread, at its heart feminism is about equality. For all genders.
I’m not sure why the relative strength of women enters into your argument. I would just say that if a woman wants to mine coal, she ought to be able to, if she can pass the physical tests needed. By the same token, if a man wants to be a, well, I struggle for an occupation a man can’t have, er , be a secretary, then I support that too.
I think you wrapped with women want everything. They want to choose whether to work or not. How to address this part… Here’s the thing. My impulse is to tell you that any rational adult wants that choice. If I won the lottery tomorrow, providing it was sufficient size to see me to retirement, I would certainly hand in my resignation. I bet most adults would, men and women. But I don’t expect anyone to take care of me. And looking around me I really don’t see many single income families, except at the executive level of business. I think that single income families are trending downwards, at least in the US.
Overall, feminism has been such a positive force for change, and there’s still so much work to do that’s it hard for me to get worked up about whether people don’t like the recent societal focus sexual assault and rape, which I think was also pulled in to the OP. I’ve started teaching my 11 year old daughter (actually started years ago) about where it’s safe to walk, and not to go next to vans in parking lots, not to talk to men about puppies, and all of that great stuff we get to inoculate our daughters with. So as far as that little corner of the OP goes, get over it. I can only hope this increased discussion and focus helps make the world a safer place.
To answer your question about what I think about your premise - not sure I understood it, but I consider myself a feminist. Apparently we disagree.
Breast cancer is the cancer that is most likely to cause you to lose a parent while you are young.
Do you think it’s a conspiracy that a very common (12% of women), fairly deadly cancer that often hits adults in their prime is pretty scary for people?