Strength and Honor: Triumphing over Feminism

[Mink57]

But not equally in the fields mentioned. As Pearl says, if you want equality GO BE EQUAL.

Whether or not women are in the same fields as men at the same rate isn't the issue. After all, most men aren't in traditionally held 'women's jobs' at the same rate as women. The issue of Feminism was that feminists wanted the same opportunities as men, at the same rate of pay for the same job as men, at the same level of respect as men.

In other words, if a woman wants to be a coal miner, she should have that opportunity, and not have the door slammed in her face, or laughed at, because she's a woman. If she happens to be hired as a coal miner, pay her the same as you would pay a man for the same job. Give her the same opportunities to advance into leadership positions as a man would get. And give her the same level of respect that a man would get. No teasing her, bullying her or even sexually harassing her.

 

[Mink57]

Seeking an exception does not make the rule. Pearls profound point was not about fertility but sacrifice; a wife ought to sacrifice her happiness for her husband, first, and the new family they create by the act of getting married with him as the head of the family.

Actually, if the husband IS the 'head of the family', then HE should be sacrificing HIS happiness for his wife's FIRST, BEFORE she sacrifices her happiness for his. Unfortunately, too many men want to be the 'boss' instead of a LEADER. There IS a HUGE difference.

(Though it need not be said, I’ll say it anyway. He, likewise, is expected to sacrifice for her happiness). And both are expected to sacrifice for any children that come along.

Need not be said? Then, why do so many men DO what I wrote above?

Obviously, your self-glorifying IDOL, the evil ideology of feminism, sought to destroy marriage - AND HAS in the West.

No, not 'destroy' marriage. Personally, I have no problem with marriage. I don't even have an issue with traditional marriage, as long as it's FAIR to BOTH the husband and wife, and both the husband and wife want and agree with ALL points about it.

 

[Mink57]

Yea, because that is the part that feminists have destroyed in practice via "No fault divorce."

Or that men have destroyed by being able to divorce their wives for ANY REASON under the sun.

 

[Mink57]

Or that men have destroyed by being able to divorce their wives for ANY REASON under the sun.

You keep forgetting about the Golden Rule. That is, "DO UNTO OTHERS." Yes, I'm paraphrasing, but Jesus NEVER said that 'Do Unto Others' meant EXCEPT for women...or wives.

Don't divorce WOMEN, if men don't want women to divorce MEN.
Don't CHEAT on women, if men don't want women to cheat on them.
Don't regulate women to the kitchen and child-bearing, if men don't want to be regulated to ONLY manual labor.

Do Unto Others means treat others the way YOU would want to be treated. It means, YOU TREAT THE OTHER PERSON THE WAY YOU'D WANT TO BE TREATED FIRST. That is, you GIVE respect BEFORE you GET respect. You GIVE love, before you GET love.

Why is that so hard to figure out?

 

[Wrangler]

This film clip has nothing to do with women wanting men to pay child support who are not even the father.

Oops! Sorry about that. Fixed the link.

 

[Wrangler]

Whether or not women are in the same fields as men at the same rate isn't the issue.

Yes, it is the issue. You cannot claim equality and not be equal.

 

[Wrangler]

Here's a statistic about men bailing before women do:

A 2009 study published in the journal Cancer

Cancer allows you to make general statements? Wow.

 

[Wrangler]

Why are you labeling ALL feminists in with those 'few' who are RADICAL feminists?

Are you admitting RADICAL feminism is evil? General observations never need to claim ALL to be generally true.

 

[Wrangler]

Actually, if the husband IS the 'head of the family', then HE should be sacrificing HIS happiness for his wife's FIRST, BEFORE she sacrifices her happiness for his. Unfortunately, too many men want to be the 'boss' instead of a LEADER. There IS a HUGE difference.

I think you missed the point. The issue of putting your spouse first does not depend on which spouse does it first. And it is a deflection from women's inability to keep their commitments as measured by who initiates divorce.

 

[Mink57]

I think you missed the point. The issue of putting your spouse first does not depend on which spouse does it first. And it is a deflection from women's inability to keep their commitments as measured by who initiates divorce.

Interesting...
...and very wrong.

The person who initiates divorce, is not necessarily the one who is breaking their commitment(s). The number one OR two reason for divorce is ADULTERY. Infidelity. Unfaithfulness. After all, FORSAKING ALL OTHERS is IN the vows!

Until 'death do us part' is NOT a 'vow' UNTO itself. If that was true, then you may as well toss all the OTHER vows out the window. Same with, "for BETTER or for WORSE". Yeah, that's like saying," So, I cheated on you. You're SUPPOSED to stay married to me, 'for better or for WORSE.' Cheating on you is 'WORSE'."

No. Thank. You. Too many people take advantage of the whole "for better or for worse" vow.

 

[Mink57]

Are you admitting RADICAL feminism is evil? General observations never need to claim ALL to be generally true.

RADICAL feminism isn't good. Neither is RADICAL Patriarchy. I think you mentioned (I think it was you; forgive me if I'm wrong) something about women possibly having a tough time being in Heaven and under the 'rule' of Jesus. But I also think it was pointed out that women wouldn't have much of an issue with Jesus being at the helm...

...as long as Jesus was FAIR. And in 'our' minds, Jesus WAS fair. Jesus NEVER said, "RULE over your wife! Keep her doing housework and ONLY raising kids. Don't let your wives out of the house to work!"

 

[Mink57]

Cancer allows you to make general statements? Wow.

The article wasn't only about cancer, and *I* wasn't making "general statements." If you want to blame someone, blame the people who wrote the article. I'm just the messenger.

 

[Mink57]

Oops! Sorry about that. Fixed the link.

Looked at the links on this forum. Still don't see the changes.
Could you please post a new link here? Would appreciate it.

 

[Wrangler]

The person who initiates divorce, is not necessarily the one who is breaking their commitment(s).

LOL. No, it IS necessarily breaking your commitment to initiate divorce. You're too funny.

 

[Wrangler]

RADICAL feminism isn't good.

Why is radical feminism not good?

I think you mentioned (I think it was you; forgive me if I'm wrong) something about women possibly having a tough time being in Heaven and under the 'rule' of Jesus.

No, that was not me. I must have missed that post. Was it in this thread?

 

[Wynona]

In other words, if a woman wants to be a coal miner, she should have that opportunity, and not have the door slammed in her face, or laughed at, because she's a woman.

I'm not sure you need feminism for this.

In the past, women did work heavy labor jobs if their husbands needed it to survive. They worked these horrible cotton mills during the Industrial Revolution, for example. Small children did too.

But the fact that men did not see this as ideal was not them feeling smug and superior towards women What man feels great about their wife having to work in a coal mine out of necessity? Coal mines and work are a hardship for survival. I don't fault the patriarchal men for seeing the home as a better place to be for their wives and daughters than a coal mine.

Patriarchy can be abused just like any other powrr structure. Ive seen women abuse their family matriarch status as well. But most people throughout history were not invested in keeping women down to laugh at them. They were simply trying to survive.

A wife working out in the fields or a coal mine was a sign of hardship for a family, not a symbolic victory for women.

There is a price to pay for women desiring the same respect men get. Are we willing to become expendable and expected to sacrifice as readily as they are? A woman can pay the price for that and truly work hard. But it's a higher price than a man would pay because *women are fundamentally built different than men* It will never be the same price.

Should they be allowed to? They have done in the past and continue to. The only difference now is that were living in a time where being at home and raising kids is considered less important than things men have traditionally done in the grand scheme of things. This is absolutely horrible for society, for humanity.

Children need homes to thrive. We can arguably live without coal miners before we can live without mothers.

Saying women should not just be raising babies and managing homes is like saying Bill Gates should not just settle for being a millionaire CEO.

We are so obsessed with power and being seen with status that we devalue a cornerstone of society---the home. Mainly because most people will never see the work there. But the results of this unseen work are so incredibly needed today.

 

[Wrangler]

In other words, if a woman wants to be a coal miner, she should have that opportunity, and not have the door slammed in her face, or laughed at, because she's a woman.

Here is where feminisim is evil, turning freedom to choose into an end rather than a means. Dr Laura pointed out in The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands, that historically men working out of the home is not a choice but an obligation.

That's why what Pearl said is so profound. If you want to be equal, go be equal. Do it. Be an equal contributor to society's infrastructure, regardless of whether you want to or not. Then your obligation will be equal to men's. OR stop speaking on THE PERVERSION OF EQUALITY as if it is all about whim, what one wants ... as I sit in the stands of the Olympics I assert I am equal to the goal medalist and demand a gold medal without actually performing at an equal level, etc.

This is inequality. Feminists want to be given opportunities to have as you wrote. Men make opportunities. This inolves risk and responsibility, that feminists do not embrace equally. Feminists want an equal quantity of CEO's to be women but are silent on this equality in prison populations. One way equality is no kind of equality.

 

[Wrangler]

The number one OR two reason for divorce is ADULTERY. Infidelity.

And studies show women commit more adultery than men now. Women are more likely to cheat than men – here’s why

However, you are mistaken about the reasons for divorce. #1 is money. #2 is parenting. My 1st marriage sucommbed to reason #2.

 

[Wrangler]

No. Thank. You. Too many people take advantage of the whole "for better or for worse" vow.

Once again, proving the evil of feminism via lack of ability to keep a commitment. No wonder men don't want to marry anymore.

Feminist ideology has turned the bedrock of society, the marriage vow into a joke. It's a contract that can end at any time for any reason and most times, it is the women who takes half the guys stuff. Women who are not feminists are also hurt by the evils of feminism because they struggle to find a man willing to commit to this faux marriage with "no fault" divorce.

 

[Wrangler]

"If you want better men, be better women" said this woman in the vid. A man saved a woman from drowning. She planned to sue him for touching her without her consent. You can't make this stuff up! Stories like this explain why men increasingly avoid women, especially when they present as the 'damsel in distress.'

This woman's ego is so god-like, she didn't feel obligated to ask men for help even when she feared she was about to be raped or murdered. She just expected them to help.

After years of men helping and then mocked on Tic Toc vids, no one who is rational should feel entitled to a man's labor. I thought feminists didn't need men? What happened to that?

This feminist vid also hatefully says men are useless.