Posted on 01/07/2018 9:12:15 AM PST by rktman
Ain’t feminism great? It’s opened so many doors for women. No longer held back by the male patriarchy, women are free to compete in the most cut-throat professions, to seek the most prestigious careers, to run for the highest political offices. Women today are far more educated, well-read, erudite and independent than their sad, sorry sisters of 50 years ago. Wonderful, isn’t it?
Feminists got what they wanted, but – and I know this comes as a shocking surprise – they aren’t happy.
Yet happiness, according to many progressive sources, was never a goal of feminism. Instead, feminism is meant to increase women’s “control, self-respect and privacy” and construct women as “healthy, independent and assertive.” Some saw women’s liberation as an “oppressed people raising their consciousness toward something that is the other side of anger, something bright and smooth and cool.” Feminism allows women to reach their “full potential.”
Dismissing as flawed a 2006 study that determined a “traditional” model (with primary male breadwinner) made women happier, Pamela Haag noted in the Huffington Post: “But, more to the point, the [study’s] headlines blame feminism for not achieving a goal that wasn’t feminism’s to begin with. It’s like saying pole vaulting has failed to solve the health-care crisis.”
And there you have it, folks. Feminism was never meant to make women happy!
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Glad it worked for you. Thanks for all the research.
"Long before feminism?" The First National Women's Rights Convention was in 1850. That was the first wave of feminism.
LOL!!! GOOD one!
I’m so sorry...I thought it was understood that we were talking about the Betty Friedan “Feminine Mystique” version of feminism forward....not the WCTU or suffragettes. I must have erred.I suck.
You are so right, of course. Ignoring them is usually the best policy.
1) The early "right to vote, work, have property, be educated" wave of the late 1800s, early 1900s.
2.) The 60s wave that was mostly about divorce and birth control. The no-fault divorce hit traditional women hard, you should remember. Women who were perfectly happy being wives and mothers suddenly got dumped in favor of trophy wives, and being that they had never worked, they landed in relative poverty. So this wave was very much about "not depending on men financially, because they could ditch you at any time." It was a reaction to something men did first. No one likes to hear this, but I think it is true. The no-fault divorce was a boon to men more than to women.
3.) This new wave of psycho-butch man-hating communists who do not represent anything but their own insanity. I have nothing to do with these nutcases.
That’s a good thing to pray for. You might also tear a page out of PDJTs playbook and encourage them to look for “the one” overseas. It’s like cars in the 1980s; when domestic quality suffers, imports are the way to go.
In its own way, feminism is a blessing for American men. Not because it does anything worthwhile for women or men. Oh no. Because it has helped young men recognize what a rotten deal awaits them, and provide them incentive to find something better.
20 years from now, this will all be a non issue. American men with potential will accommodate reality by either not getting involved with women at all (MGTOW) or by finding suitable women overseas. And American feminists will achieve their destiny of being bitter, unhappy, childless, and alone.
Politics is a scam and we’re suckers for playing.
You sound like good people!
Karma may be slow, but it usually get’s it’s due.
Politics is a scam and we’re suckers for playing.
The very first valedictorian at the University of Southern California was a female... in 1884.
Because the issue is never the issue. The issue is always THE REVOLUTION.
Two Godly women would be better ...
I would disagree a bit on the second phase; women typically initiate divorce. But I think you have the phases right. Something else to consider is that men have and will likely continue to come out the winner in all this. Feminism is a curse for women.
>>Because the issue is never the issue. The issue is always THE REVOLUTION.
Yes it is. But THE REVOLUTION is a sham. It is slavery and poverty for the masses who think they’re getting equality, freedom, and security. Then, its wealth and power for the elites who led the Dumb mAsses to believe that they were abolishing that.
I love to talk to young “Socialists” because eventually I ask them what their value to the state is, keeping in mind that they want to abolish management and all the things that are attached to capitalism. I ask them if they are a miner, a farmer, or an assembler? Can they fix things? Can they build something that helps the collective? Or do they just consume and complain? I remind them that I used to be an industrial electrician and those guys were pretty well taken care of in the Soviet Union. But the skills of a student agitator and young philosopher are the skills that get you shot after the revolution is complete.
It always has been.
The French Revolution wasn't about Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite. It was about POWER. The Russian Revolution wasn't about righting the wrongs of the corrupt Tsar. It was about POWER. Every other revolution has been similar.
The American "Revolution" wasn't a revolution. It was a secession.
“...giving their whole life to pointless drudgery in the name of a wondrous utopian ideal.”
You said it. That whole essay has to be the most depressing thing I’ve read in a long time. Makes one want to go eat their gun.
>>The American “Revolution” wasn’t a revolution.
It truly was a revolution because it was a revolution in thought. Self-governance that could work on a scalable level had never been done before. A nation of truly Protestant Puritan ethics had never been done before.
Every other revolution has just been a way for new people to take the power from the old people to control the same people as before.
I don’t agree with that. England was already well on the road to “self-governing”; Parliament was largely independent of the King. The American colonies finished the job for themselves. We seceded from the Empire. The Declaration of Independence does not express thoughts that were not already current in 1775. The forms of government in the States, in 1789 were not fundamentally different from their colonial predecessors.
In contrast, Revolutions (France, USSR, PRC, Third Reich, etc.) present a complete overthrow of the old order.
Partly about sticking up for other progressivist causes. Progs tend to have their one driving issue that they care about, and as long as it’s in the “network” they can count on support from other progs as long as they reflexively support the other.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.