why do feminists deliberately forget the events on the titanic?

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by UnbrokeN, Jan 30, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. x - calibur

    x - calibur Guest


    interesting to see the breakdown behind your views

    yea in general, women in the west have had a much better time. women really were considered property and abused in many nonwestern cultures.

    even in the west, more social limits and less freedoms have fallen on them.

    in know as you go farther back in the past, women getting full educations was unrealistic. but after the turn of the 20th century, things were changing. the invention of many different labor saving devices meant that housekeeping was much less time consuming. freetime was increasing for everyone, including women.

    the womens lib movement was needed to secure things like the right to vote, and to help women get the same pay and recognition for the same work.. and to have more equal oppurtunities.

    now its true that the family should be protected because it is the foundation of society. giving women more options and more freedom will increase things like divorce and so on. however, theyre people too, and should be able to choose thier own lives. i dont think that even has to be in opposition to family.... if you think about it, if women have more choices in when they have a family, or who they have it with, etc, it could be a good thing for the family. in past times, a woman (and therefore her kids) might be trapped in a bad situation with a dude, but have no power to change it. whereas now, it doesnt have to be that way.

    self-determinance will often lead to a better outcome. people dont need to be bound into taking care of family, i think thats something that they will do on thier own.

    instead of restricting women, more incentives to stay married with kids would be a good thing.


    overall, the recent social changes in our society have been for the better.

    believe me, im aware of feminisms flaws. it was a movement that was needed, not something thats 100% true or consistent.
    test
  2. varentao

    varentao New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Messages:
    765
    Look, very simple.

    Yes, women weren't treated like total shite (generally speaking). But they didn't have as many rights as men. That's a FACT.

    Now them being treated in such a 'honourable' manner like being allowed on the boat whilst men weren't is actually an EFFECT of their lack of rights. It's a bit like they were treated like children (hence 'only women and children are allowed on the escape boats' or the saying 'women and children first').

    Now some may have had a say. Some may have had influence and treated more as equals. But they are the exceptions to the rule.

    I don't know how you can't get this.
    test
  3. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,569
    the same was the case with men tho...workers, soldiers..they were treated liek TOOls, property...wasted...you see it works both ways--and two wrongs dont make it right..im not saiyng that it was a perfect time..im only trying to make people see that it wasnt only women who had it hard back then...

    yes- times were definately changing. no denying that here. also the state grew a lot bigger and more powerful than before, so it was only natural for women to be allowed to vote, as they started contributing a lot more to the working world during industrialisation. but before that The Vote was seen as a male privilege, because after all it was usually the man who was going to work and who was going to be effected by the decisions made by politicans. that was the reason why women coudlnt vote: they had no business with it. and most werent intrested in voting at all..if you study the history, you wont see many women protesting their right to vote back then. with industrialisation that changed and thus women earned their right to vote. point blank.

    how do you expect women to get same pay if they statistically arent working as many hours as men do? and considering them taking off time from work when becoming pregnant, or simply avoiding more dangerous jobs who re automatically higher paid. the gender pay gap is just another mythe
    build up by the feminists to stirr up hatred. dont continue to be a pawn to these lies!
    yes but not every man is a psychopath as you see in movies..the overwhelming majority of divorces are initiated out of minor reasons. domestic violence sure happens, but both genders are affected by it. the laws as they are significantly disadvantaging men when it comes to divorces, even if the woman initiates them. they lose everything. these are unfair and one sided laws that need to be corrected and yes, there need to be more incentatives to protect and hold marriage and family life together rather than to destroy it by making is so easy for women to opt out of marriage. by that, they are taking the responsibility away from the woman , after all a woman should know who shes getting married with and having children with and know under what circumstances she will live. she must be held responsible for her actions as well as the man. there needs to be a change...




    Right on!
    test
  4. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,569

    you dont get it yet..just what rights are you referring to? a juristic ''right' or a traditional right. you have to understand that back then the state wasnt as big as it is now. it didint affect everyday life to the degree you might think. legal ''rights'' werent really spread through at all..basically no one had all these particular ''rights'' you know today, besides those in the Constitution. people were living a lot more based on ''traditions''and cultural habits. there was no such thing as ''less rights'' for women, it was simply a cultural tradition for women to be submissive and family orientated.
    test
  5. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    here's the thing...

    groups of oppressed men (lower class, minorities) have, at most points in history, still had a hold on women...
    test
  6. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    You missed my satirical point entirely.
    congratulations, You have a learning disability.
    test
  7. varentao

    varentao New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Messages:
    765
    Buh?

    Yer bang on and have made my point for me. It was a cultural way of things that was imbedded and seen as natural amongst the majority of the world. That's the point that's being made. And therefore they had little rights. And were not equal to men.

    I'm not arguing about the goverment not being all encompassing. That's a moot point. The bottom line - at the time, women were NOT equal to men. This was because of cultural dictates.

    Just because it was cultural, doesn't make it any less bad or affecting.

    Get it?
    test
  8. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,569
    you have to understand that it was impossible to have women equal to men... simply based upon our biological diffrences. it was impossible to have women work the same, often hazardous jobs as men. it was impossible to raise girl the way boys are raised. it is ridiculous. there is a reason why women are women, and men are men. why is that so hard to understand? the majority of women will always be attracted to men who are not only physically stronger than them, but also smarter than them. therefore women will always have this natural desire to be submissive.

    YOU cant change the women. nowadays girls are being raised to become the breadwinner one day. this aquivalent upbringing of girls and boys will have such a negative impact that we are already feeling now..equality between the genders = fight between the genders


    we are rivals now, dont you see it? we cannot be equal,since nature didint intend make us equal. equal= the same. but we're not, since we're not a unisex species. we werent meant to be rivals. but a permanent gender war is the logical consequence of liberal feminist inspired social engineering politics that have been taking place for almost 40 years now.
    test
  9. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    test
  10. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,569
    link aint working. but i get the idea...

    you have to feel me 'naz
    test
  11. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,569
    http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/features/n_9495/

    here, same topic

    quite intresting..just proves my point about the psychology behind that whole rivalry issue. its THE relationship killler. and as you can see, its not just a problem for the men. usually the woman loses respect for her partner and '' sexual appetite''.
    test
  12. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    and socialization has ZERO effect on such things as attractedness to particular traits, physical strength, mental ability, etc.

    is assume you personally are immune to these influences as well?



    nobody in the history of humankind has ever pushed for a "unisex" species...
    test
  13. varentao

    varentao New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Messages:
    765
    No one is arguing that there were necessities of biology involved. But the evolution of human kind (philosophically and technologically) meant we no longer needed/wanted inequality as we know it. And the example you gave, which was around the Victorian times, times were indeed achanging.

    Obviously man and woman aren't completely equal. That goes without saying. To dwell on such a point is ridiculous.
    test
  14. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,569
    not unisex in the literal way, rather feminists are convinced that women are equal to men in all aspects..that includes social behaviour and physical and intellectual abilities, features and strenghts, which obviously isnt true. so yes they are definately trying to wash away any gender inflicted social behaviour, hence their striving to achieve a female quota in all kinds of educational capacities or workplaces...give women the jobs, justified or not.

    we both know that the majority of women are attracted to men who make them feel protected, not the other way around. the same goes for physical strength,im not talking about women being attracted to bodybuilders, but most women want their man to be atleast stronger than herself...its an unconscious attraction,well its clear that men will remain the physical stronger part, so its just an example
    test
  15. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    fighting for equal consideration is not the same as pushing that women are biologically equal to men

    it's not, however, universal. it varies by time and place. the fact it's a "majority" of women and not "all" women is all the evidence needed show that there is a social aspect involved in attraction as well.
    test
  16. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,569
    maybe, maybe not
    test
  17. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    maybe, maybe not what?

    there's a social aspect involved in ALL of our social behavior. that's undeniable.

    let me ask you a question...how many times have you walked down the street or drove through town or went to the store while wearing absolutely nothing? butt-ass naked? not a shred of clothing?
    test
  18. KEALYBOY

    KEALYBOY Ignorant is a pedophile

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Messages:
    450
    Dumb fucking cunt, I hate whiney bitches, but it's the cotton wool, the over-protectiveness, the childlike treatment that women receive that stops them standing on their own two feet and opresses them.

    Like a fat spoilt child that's never made to get on in life on his own (case in point, user Ignorant), in trying to protect him you're only destroying his ability to stand up for himself.

    Women are wrapped in over-pampering and come to expect it from others, equate it with genuine concern, but it only hinders their progress.
    test
  19. x - calibur

    x - calibur Guest

    many people have faced many struggles.
    fact is, women have had thier own special problems that needed fixing


    i wouldnt go that far. even before the 20th century, women did play some important roles in society, although limited. still, tradition is strong.. it was industrialization and the increase of women in the workforce during WWII that really pushed the issue.

    women should be paid according to the value of thier work. that is all


    no not always the mans fault.
    however, more often than not, the woman and/or children are the victim. and theres the fact that children are usually better off with thier mother.

    what you see as lopsidedness in the laws, is really the laws addressing the most pressing and important things. i dont think that unfair situations for men should be completely ignored either.. the laws are far from perfect. still, the womans problems in the family situation will naturally come first
    test
  20. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,569
    for the longest time, my friend....for the longest time.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)