Modern feminism: an evaluation

Aoxomoxoa said:
I am sorry Mott but as least in the UK, it is very easy for a woman to call the police and have a man evicted from his house. There need be no evidence other than the women's testimony, in part I think that is the reason why more men don't report violence apart from the humiliation and embarrassment factor.

I even gave you an article from the Guardian, which is the social workers bible in the UK, detailing how rife women's violence on men is.
Click to expand...

Well, Tom, maybe it is payback for all those years women had no rights...All those years of humiliation our predecessors had to endure.
 
Rana said:
Well, Tom, maybe it is payback for all those years women had no rights...All those years of humiliation our predecessors had to endure.
Click to expand...

I am all for equality but revenge dressed up as law is wrong. The law on rape was also changed by Labour so that women are granted automatically granted anonymity but men are not, which often leads to a defendant being castigated and maybe even losing his job, marriage etc., yet subsequently found innocent.
 
Last edited:
Rana said:
So, you honestly think the courts are giving out revenge?
Click to expand...

I don't know how they do things in the US but the Family Court system over here is more akin to a star chamber system of justice. It is shrouded in secrecy and is hopelessly biased against men. Again I've chosen an article from the left wing Guardian to illustrate the point. Please read it all as it is very revealing and objective about the system.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/sep/26/family-courts-fathers-custody
 
Last edited:
Aoxomoxoa said:
I don't know how they do things in the US but the Family Court system over here is more akin to a star chamber system of justice. It is shrouded in secrecy and is hopelessly biased against men. Again I've chosen an article from the left wing Guardian to illustrate the point. Please read it all as it is very revealing and objective about the system.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/sep/26/family-courts-fathers-custody
Click to expand...

In the past the courts tried to keep the children with the mothers because that is the way of patriarchal societies, we labeled woman the homemakers and men the bread winners. Society is changing and with this change more men are getting custody. I have had friends on both sides of the issue, one father received custody of his daughter, the other couple splts custody which is getting to be more of the trend these days.

I have lays been a big an of what is in the best Internet of the children, the adults need to keep this in mind. The children are usually the victims of bad divorces, the adults only thinking if themselves.
 
Rana said:
In the past the courts tried to keep the children with the mothers because that is the way of patriarchal societies, we labeled woman the homemakers and men the bread winners. Society is changing and with this change more men are getting custody. I have had friends on both sides of the issue, one father received custody of his daughter, the other couple splts custody which is getting to be more of the trend these days.

I have lays been a big an of what is in the best Internet of the children, the adults need to keep this in mind. The children are usually the victims of bad divorces, the adults only thinking if themselves.
Click to expand...

Again I can only speak for the UK but grandparents have no recognised legal right to access to their grandchildren. The article also says that 40% of men lose contact with their children within two years of divorce. How that is good for the children is beyond me.
 
Rana said:
Well, Tom, maybe it is payback for all those years women had no rights...All those years of humiliation our predecessors had to endure.
Click to expand...

You watch too many movies and think its real life......the truth is, "Little House on the Prairie" was more fact than fiction....there were many years that some men had little to no rights too.....anyway,

Normal, fair-minded people want and believe both sexes should be treated with equal dignity and equal rights.....equal pay for equal work (and I do mean EQUAL)....its a simple
matter of the living by the "golden rule".....

Hillary always claimed to be a feminist....
I was fascinated by Hillary Clintons fawning over the likes of Margret Sanger, saying things like,"I admire Margret Sanger enormously", comparing her to Thomas Jefferson and saying Her Life and Leadership Is The Most Transformational In the Entire History Of The United States.

Pretty damn glowing claims for a women that referred to blacks, immigrants and indigents as
"...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who never should have been born."

But the lefties just love Hillary as their own and she gets a pass while they target Limbaugh and Beck and Palin and Santorum for character assassination......

But thats equality in the eyes of some feminists......
 
bravo said:
You watch too many movies and think its real life......the truth is, "Little House on the Prairie" was more fact than fiction....there were many years that some men had little to no rights too.....anyway,

Normal, fair-minded people want and believe both sexes should be treated with equal dignity and equal rights.....equal pay for equal work (and I do mean EQUAL)....its a simple
matter of the living by the "golden rule".....

Hillary always claimed to be a feminist....K
I was fascinated by Hillary Clintons fawning over the likes of Margret Sanger, saying things like,"I admire Margret Sanger enormously", comparing her to Thomas Jefferson and saying Her Life and Leadership Is The Most Transformational In the Entire History Of The United States.

Pretty damn glowing claims for a women that referred to blacks, immigrants and indigents as
"...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who never should have been born."

But the lefties just love Hillary as their own and she gets a pass while they target Limbaugh and Beck and Palin and Santorum for character assassination......

But thats equality in the eyes of some feminists......
Click to expand...

I didn't watch "Little House on the Prairie"
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
I am sorry Mott but as least in the UK, it is very easy for a woman to call the police and have a man evicted from his house. There need be no evidence other than the women's testimony, in part I think that is the reason why more men don't report violence apart from the humiliation and embarrassment factor.

I even gave you an article from the Guardian, which is the social workers bible in the UK, detailing how rife women's violence on men is.
Click to expand...
I think you're missing my point Tom. I'm not arguing that women are not violent towards men. I've grown up around to many cornfed hillbilly's. What I'm saying is that male violence on women more often has far more consequences for the women than vice versa. This is not a double standard. Hell I could accidenlty trip and fall on my sweetheart and it would be all over for her cause she's such a tiny little thing.
 
Derp Derp said:
I think you're missing my point Tom. I'm not arguing that women are not violent towards men. I've grown up around to many cornfed hillbilly's. What I'm saying is that male violence on women more often has far more consequences for the women than vice versa. This is not a double standard. Hell I could accidenlty trip and fall on my sweetheart and it would be all over for her cause she's such a tiny little thing.
Click to expand...

Well I am saying that a woman can tell the police that she was battered etc. and more often that not she will be believed without any corroborating evidence. I have seen that happen myself on more than one occasion. I am not denying for one moment that there is terrible violence meted out by ignorant brutes. There have also been many cases where women have accused men of rape for revenge or some other motive. There was a famous case not long ago where this woman accused various men of rape and it took the police years to realise that she was profoundly disturbed.

http://news.oneindia.in/2011/01/18/...for-falsely-claiming-rapeagainst-aid0121.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/19/faalse-rape-claim-woman-jailed

http://falserapesociety.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/uk-court-says-man-falsely-accused-of.html
 
bravo said:
You watch too many movies and think its real life......the truth is, "Little House on the Prairie" was more fact than fiction....there were many years that some men had little to no rights too.....anyway,

Normal, fair-minded people want and believe both sexes should be treated with equal dignity and equal rights.....equal pay for equal work (and I do mean EQUAL)....its a simple
matter of the living by the "golden rule".....

Hillary always claimed to be a feminist....
I was fascinated by Hillary Clintons fawning over the likes of Margret Sanger, saying things like,"I admire Margret Sanger enormously", comparing her to Thomas Jefferson and saying Her Life and Leadership Is The Most Transformational In the Entire History Of The United States.

Pretty damn glowing claims for a women that referred to blacks, immigrants and indigents as
"...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who never should have been born."

But the lefties just love Hillary as their own and she gets a pass while they target Limbaugh and Beck and Palin and Santorum for character assassination......

But thats equality in the eyes of some feminists......
Click to expand...


Please, spare me the faux outrage. How many men claim their heroes are the founding fathers, yet look at that record of slave ownership.

...twelve of our presidents owned slaves and eight of them owned slaves while serving as president.

George Washington owned more than 200 slaves
Thomas Jefferson owned more than 100 slaves
James Madison owned and sold slaves all his life
James Monroe owned 30-40 slaves
Andrew Jackson owned about 160 slaves
Martin Van Buren owned at least one slave
William Henry Harrison had several slaves
John Tyler had slaves
James K. Polk had 15 slaves
Zachary Taylor owned more than 100 slaves
Andrew Johnson owned 8 slaves
Ulysses S. Grant freed his slaves
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Because it was a load of crap?
Click to expand...

LOL....I just had to ask. Actually it depicted, at least with a decent degree of accuracy, the life of people who settled in the plains. I suppose that is why my mom liked it so well since that is the way she grew up. I was 8, 9, 10, 11...when the shows came out and it was a weekly ritual to watch them with my mother. Someone got me some of the DVD's a few years ago and the other day I finally got one out to watch with my 8 year old. It was the opening episode and Charles got injured and couldn't pay (complete the work he promised) the guy for a loan he had taken out so the guy was trying to foreclose. The town came to Charles' aid and took care of the work for him so he got to keep the oxen and other stuff. I confused my boy because I teared up a bit at the end, partly because it reminds me of my own community (we have banded together to help the sick and injured on many, many occasions) and partly because of remembering the time I spent with my mother watching these shows.
 
Oh, and sorry for helping to hijack the thread. You guys can go back to the conversation on modern feminism. :)
 
leaningright said:
LOL....I just had to ask. Actually it depicted, at least with a decent degree of accuracy, the life of people who settled in the plains. I suppose that is why my mom liked it so well since that is the way she grew up. I was 8, 9, 10, 11...when the shows came out and it was a weekly ritual to watch them with my mother. Someone got me some of the DVD's a few years ago and the other day I finally got one out to watch with my 8 year old. It was the opening episode and Charles got injured and couldn't pay (complete the work he promised) the guy for a loan he had taken out so the guy was trying to foreclose. The town came to Charles' aid and took care of the work for him so he got to keep the oxen and other stuff. I confused my boy because I teared up a bit at the end, partly because it reminds me of my own community (we have banded together to help the sick and injured on many, many occasions) and partly because of remembering the time I spent with my mother watching these shows.
Click to expand...

I suppose Michael Landon's 70s bouffant hairstyle and the cheesy opening music didn't help much.
 
leaningright said:
LOL....I just had to ask. Actually it depicted, at least with a decent degree of accuracy, the life of people who settled in the plains. I suppose that is why my mom liked it so well since that is the way she grew up. I was 8, 9, 10, 11...when the shows came out and it was a weekly ritual to watch them with my mother. Someone got me some of the DVD's a few years ago and the other day I finally got one out to watch with my 8 year old. It was the opening episode and Charles got injured and couldn't pay (complete the work he promised) the guy for a loan he had taken out so the guy was trying to foreclose. The town came to Charles' aid and took care of the work for him so he got to keep the oxen and other stuff. I confused my boy because I teared up a bit at the end, partly because it reminds me of my own community (we have banded together to help the sick and injured on many, many occasions) and partly because of remembering the time I spent with my mother watching these shows.
Click to expand...

You are so sweet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top