Posted on 01/07/2018 9:12:15 AM PST by rktman
“Crazy, stupid and angry is no way to go through life.”
Let the democrats suffer.
I’ve had three different women supervisors over my career...2 in the Air Force and 1 in federal government who also was black. I couldn’t have been happier and more at ease. BUT they were all old school like myself and came from 40’s and 50’s mindset...when America was still America. The feminist crap which started in late 60’s early 70’s ruined that.
“And there you have it, folks. Feminism was never meant to make women happy!”
Feminism, race, “working people”, class warfare, moslem importation, queerdom etc are all part of cynical democrat attempts to divide and conquer.
The angry unstable liberal hag that was kicked off the plane after the Trump inauguration is the poster child for feminism.
LOL!
Great
from what i read online and hear in person, it is that they usually choose to hang out with bad-boy alpha males, and then wonder why the alpha males always seem to lie and cheat on them for the next (and newer) model coming down the line.
the more fortunate find a beta male with money stupid enough to marry them and give them access to the checking account. then they divorce them, set themselves up in a beachfront condo with a couple of cats, and take it upon themselves to badmouth men as a full-time pastime while (apparently) collecting alimony in perpetuity.
Same here. Three teenage sons. They all talk about having wives eventually, but the pitfalls are many. Luckily, we have some examples of rabid feminists in our family who have screwed the husbands over, so they are on sharp lookout to avoid the likeness thereof. I have cautioned them to not marry a liberal, not to even date one with contraception not being 100% effective. A liberal wife, current or ex, will very likely turn their kids into people they don’t respect or even recognize and she will make sure that it is out of their control to change that.
I sometimes remind them of a quote from a Charlton Heston commencement speech a few years ago, “Choose your life’s mate carefully. From this one decision will come 90% of your happiness or misery”
your sons can always choose asian born asian women.
imho, chances are against them if they choose american women. the expected value is (imho) grossly negative in many dimensions.
a rational decision, therefore, is to avoid all american women in favor of asian born asian women.
Dating means having sex?
If that's the case, a lot of moral young women will flee in terror at the idea of sex being a mandatory part of dating.
True feminists were the women, all through history who went out, in the face of whatever was or whatever came...and DID. These latter feminists are the ones who, if I may be forgiven, didn’t have the BALLS of the former. These latter feminists needed a mob and uncle to beat everyone over the head.
“Feminism did allow women like me to go to college...”
Thats odd...there were tons of women (and blacks) in college when I was there in the 50’s...long before feminism. And I’m reasonably certain the same was true for many years before that.
Abortion and contraceptive rights were the solution to right the convoluted notion of a biological injustice wrought upon women by the laws of nature and of nature's God.
However, as it is mostly the case with leftist solutions, the solution brings about a far worst outcome than the perceived problem. That would be the destruction of the family, the very identity of men and women, the principles and values that are essential to a civil society. . .in other words. . .HELL ON EARTH!!!. . .and the final irony. . .the "liberation" of women was a ruse that gave men the advantage to procure sex without commitment. . while women could only grow old to be abandoned, without husband, children or extended family.
I knew someone like you would take that out of context. Did nothing else I wrote make an impression? Do you just cruise through comments looking for bits to criticize while ignoring the content as a whole? I don’t know why I even bother posting thoughtful comments on Free Republic. People like you are just looking to read an intent into it that was not meant and then accuse someone of immorality and try to damage their reputation.
NO. Dating does not have to mean sex. Not on the first date, not on the second date, not on the tenth date, not ever. But anyone with 2/3rd of a brain knows... Oh never mind. I am wasting my time with you.
Of course you’re right. That’s why I keep my mouth shut. Don’t feel like being called an asshole by a moron in my own family.
Number 11 on the Frankfurt School 11 point plan for cultural subversion...
http://tapnewswire.com/2012/06/11-recommendations-of-frankfurt-school/
/.02
In the 1830s-1850s there is a state-by-state march to allow married women to own (but not control) property, or to control it, but only if their husband is incapacitated.
1860s-1870s, married women being granted "Separate economy," (as in, being allowed to keep what she earns.)
Throughout the whole page, unmarried women seem almost non-existent, except when it comes to laws about birth control. I don't know if this means that women had rights until they got married, and then forfeited all authority to their husband, or if they were legal children under the authority of their father until they were married, and that's why there's such a blank where they are concerned.
1850 is the first place I see a provision for unmarried women, allowing them to own land in Oregon. Actually, it's the only one I can find on that page, though The Guardian (lefty Brit rag) says the US Homestead act of 1862 "made it easier" for women (even single women) to buy land.
Of course, there's a big difference between legally allowed to and cannot be prohibited from ... and I think this is the crux of the matter. It's not that the government necessarily prohibited women from doing certain things (although it did sometimes) but that men were free to be extremely uncooperative. Free to flatly refuse to let a woman open a bank account at their bank, let her into their universities, give her a loan to pay for said education, hire her at their companies... for instance:
1896, women allowed to practice law, but there was no protection against being barred from practicing law (not by the government, but by the schools and lawfirms) till 1971.
Most rights seemed contingent upon a male authority:1948, women could be bartenders if and only if their husband or father owned the bar.
Here is where it starts to change:
1963, Equal Pay Act
1964, Civil Rights Act
1968 Fair Housing Act
1972 women can't be denied federal aid for school
1973 military benefits must be equal
1974 Equal Credit (women can't be barred from applying for credit)
1978 Navy women allowed on ships (this matters to me because I enlisted in 1985)
1980- sexual discrimination prohibited in universities
1981 - sexual harassment is discrimination
Yeah, I have to say, without feminism, those changes in the 1960s-1970s about being able to have a line of credit, equal access to aid for school, right to rent an apartment, equal pay... I was born in 1965. I was directly affected by laws that prohibited discrimination against me as an unmarried woman.
Thanks, Apl.
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.