Sad, just sad.
We are not surprised.
I think however they need to keep it to themselves. Not sure what we can do for them when they go into harms way.
How long are some men going to whine about this situation? I’ve heard this junk since I was in junior high. It’s getting very, very old and it changes absolutely nothing
Liberalism is always the opposite of what is portrayed. Therfore equal rights = unequal rights.
Perish the thought! Are you saying we were better off in the days when women couldn't vote? I suppose you liked the Jim Crow laws as well./s
I once heard Bill Maher respond to a similarly reasonable argument with 'ask the blacks & jews if they want to return to the 1950s.'
Of course I agree with everything the author wrote.
I gave up chivalry long ago. Women want not only to be equal to men; they want to be interchangeable. Why should I give up my seat on a subway or bus to a woman who is equal to me? Equality means equally competing for seats.
Furthermore, I stopped holding doors for women after a thousand times doing it and getting no acknowledgment whatsoever. They behaved as if they were entitled to being equal to me and also having a door held for them.
Sorry, sweetie, I don’t buy it. Equality means equal in everything.
The problem with women today is the women themselves and their attitudes.
Human value, and where it comes from is at root. If we are nothing but exalted animals, competing for limited resources, then, power over others alone would indicate value. Since men traditionally have had authority over women, in families, and society, logically (in the exalted animal scheme) women were made “less important” since they exercised less power over others, since they were not the primary leaders in authority. Feminism then makes sense...to compete and recover that loss of value, which equals power/authority, in an animalistic, godless world.
If however, God made us, and gave us all jobs to do—even while everyone has equal value—based on being made in God’s image—we each have discreet roles. Competition for power over others becomes silly in such a scheme, as greater authority equals greater responsibility—standing before God someday. In this world, leadership and power do NOT indicate value over and above others, and every person can be content in the station or role of life given them from above.
My mother once told me how lucky women were now that things were more equal.
I said to her that women now have earned the right to raise children on their own, work two jobs and still often live at the poverty line. Both sexes can now live in a state of constant anxiety about relationships and stability and role playing.
Thanks feminists. But, please don’t do me any more favors.
This paper examines the growth of government during this century as a result of giving women the right to vote. Using cross-sectional time-series data for 1870 to 1940, we examine state government expenditures and revenue as well as voting by U.S. House and Senate state delegations and the passage of a wide range of different state laws. Suffrage coincided with immediate increases in state government expenditures and revenue and more liberal voting patterns for federal representatives, and these effects continued growing over time as more women took advantage of the franchise. Contrary to many recent suggestions, the gender gap is not something that has arisen since the 1970s, and it helps explain why American government started growing when it did.
Thanks to feminism as it is and was formed by policymaking, favored constituents, working class women—separated from their once-protective families—are bought, sold and used like meat.