stop blocking the threads

[julie]

Men don't have to be the breadwinner.

That is truly a statement from a privileged person. Men have to at least be the breadwinner for themselves. The alternative, I guess, is jail. Was your reflex thought that people can just live off their husband or society? Men are in a different situation. Really.

Point taken.

[Mr. X]

Men don't have to have shitty jobs. Men don't have to be the breadwinner. Men don't have to get married nor take care of kids. These are optional.

Is a woman's identity as a woman dependant on being a bread winner? Is who she is as a woman dependant on whether she takes care of her business or is a father? How many times have you heard women cheered for not getting married yet men are ridiculed and told they are afraid of commitment for not getting married? How man times have you heard men called less than men if they do not support the family? How many men get respect as the guy who stays at home and takes care of the kids while the wife works?

One of the social rules men need to break is the rule that their identity as men is tied to the approval of women and the need to uphold manly roles. Take success for example. A man's identity as a man is tied to his success. Part of his male identity is how he performs. Women are not tied to this. A woman can go out, try and fail and she isn't less than a woman for failing. She always will get a man. But if men fail, they are losers, their identity as men is destroyed.

So women always ahve the luxary of trying and failing. Men don't have that safety net. So they can't just up and decide not to do those things above. If they don't do those things they are deadbeats, losers, cowards, wimps, man-children, irresponsible, afraid of commitment and worse of all... they aren't real men.

[foldedintobeauty]

bullshit................"doing something to make thier lives easier so they can be better fuckin mothers".

How ever did those ladies do it BEFORE their lives were "made easier"?

Electric lights
TV
Radio
Dishwashers
Clothing stores
Automobiles-with auto trannys and power stearing
Oil/gas/electric heat
Spinning wheels
Looms-with treadles
Running water
Indoor plumbing
Public schools
Post-Crusades chivalry
Grocery stores
Pre-spun yarn by the skein
Washers
Driers
Fabric by the bolt
Vacuum cleaners
Disposable diapers
School lunch program
Pre-made clothes
Permanent press fabric
Refrigeration
Air conditioning
Credit cards
Day spas
Beauty salons
Taser/tupperware/avon/sex toy parties
Pharmacology-on demand
Emergency rooms
No-fault Divorce
Orders of protection-on demand
WIC
Early childhood (up to 36mos."programs"
Mandatory kindergarten and pre-kindergarten.
Mandatory public school until 18
(these last two recently in NH where public school administration obviously sucks)
NO home schooling.(in Ca.) THAT ought to take a load off.
Canned meat
Frozen peas
TV dinners
Microwave dinners
Abortion on demand

Yep, maybe NOW all mothers, lives are easy enough, with enough free time to raise children.




 

they usually died during childbirth

[gwallan]

they usually died during childbirth

Which, of course, is another womens problem fixed by men.

Notably, and regardless of death during childbirth, the number of women who have actually reproduced throughout history is double that of men.

So the corollary to your comment would be that men usually died, or were killed, without having had children at all.

[julie]

In the sixties in Australia one average income could support a family. Now it requires more than two. We were well on the way to creating a society where even that one breadwinner wouldn't have to work full time. What changed? Think supply and demand.

Greed happened. (guess)

the biggest invention of the 1960's was the computer
Jane Goodall studied wildlife for many years of her life.  She was one of the first scientist to reveal the similarities between humans and the chimpanzees.
Medical technology was also on an unbelievable rise.  Christian Barnard performed the first human heart transplant on a patient whom was suffering from heart diesease.
The 60's were a time of total change, success, and turmoil!  Changes socially, politically, and changes that would effect the lives of Americans today occurred.  Riots in American cities, on college campus, antiwar protestors, hippie looks, many famous singing groups, wild fads and fashions, and entertainment were changing in this "psychedelic" decade. From the first man to orbit the moon, John Glenn, to president John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert Kennedy, Reverend Martin Luther King and Malcolm X all being assassinated, and Vietnam War
The children of the 60's believed that all men and all women are equal in every way and that we would all profit greatly, particularly in a moral and spiritual sense, when the views and beliefs of women were encouraged to become a large part of all national debates.

Just to add ....

After World War II, an industrial push reinvigorated the economy. The world's first electronic digital computer, the 30-ton ENIAC, was introduced, and in what is now known as Silicon Valley, a three-bedroom home cost $10,000. At the start of the 1950s, TV sales topped 10 million, up from one million a year earlier. The pocket-size transistor radio was introduced, GM drove its 50-millionth car off the line, the Salk polio vaccine was discovered, and the Russians launched Sputnik.

I think that the work done during WWII by the Germans on the Jews had made remarkable progress scientifically especially since things were being tested on humans and not animals. I hate to think of this as a positive because I feel it was inhumane and cruel. But it had progressed our world to what it is today.

I think the 60's were the start of big corporations and that both men and women were being looked at something to use. That is why we are in the trouble we are in now.

Of course you are right. I am not sure why feminists were intrusive to men's groups? Maybe some form of fear of losing their power.

Maybe they fear their dishonesty being exposed.

You know it. 

[foldedintobeauty]

In the sixties in Australia one average income could support a family. Now it requires more than two. We were well on the way to creating a society where even that one breadwinner wouldn't have to work full time. What changed? Think supply and demand.

Greed happened. (guess)

the biggest invention of the 1960's was the computer
Jane Goodall studied wildlife for many years of her life.  She was one of the first scientist to reveal the similarities between humans and the chimpanzees.
Medical technology was also on an unbelievable rise.  Christian Barnard performed the first human heart transplant on a patient whom was suffering from heart diesease.
The 60's were a time of total change, success, and turmoil!  Changes socially, politically, and changes that would effect the lives of Americans today occurred.  Riots in American cities, on college campus, antiwar protestors, hippie looks, many famous singing groups, wild fads and fashions, and entertainment were changing in this "psychedelic" decade. From the first man to orbit the moon, John Glenn, to president John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert Kennedy, Reverend Martin Luther King and Malcolm X all being assassinated, and Vietnam War
The children of the 60's believed that all men and all women are equal in every way and that we would all profit greatly, particularly in a moral and spiritual sense, when the views and beliefs of women were encouraged to become a large part of all national debates.

Just to add ....

After World War II, an industrial push reinvigorated the economy. The world's first electronic digital computer, the 30-ton ENIAC, was introduced, and in what is now known as Silicon Valley, a three-bedroom home cost $10,000. At the start of the 1950s, TV sales topped 10 million, up from one million a year earlier. The pocket-size transistor radio was introduced, GM drove its 50-millionth car off the line, the Salk polio vaccine was discovered, and the Russians launched Sputnik.

I think that the work done during WWII by the Germans on the Jews had made remarkable progress scientifically especially since things were being tested on humans and not animals. I hate to think of this as a positive because I feel it was inhumane and cruel. But it had progressed our world to what it is today.

I think the 60's were the start of big corporations and that both men and women were being looked at something to use. That is why we are in the trouble we are in now.
 

ITA!!

yes, the world did learn a lot from the german's experimentations on the jews. pretty sickening the CIA used a lot of their info, too. even more sickening is american companies funded and did business with the nazis.

[julie]

Men don't have to have shitty jobs. Men don't have to be the breadwinner. Men don't have to get married nor take care of kids. These are optional.

Is a woman's identity as a woman dependant on being a bread winner? Is who she is as a woman dependant on whether she takes care of her business or is a father? How many times have you heard women cheered for not getting married yet men are ridiculed and told they are afraid of commitment for not getting married? How man times have you heard men called less than men if they do not support the family? How many men get respect as the guy who stays at home and takes care of the kids while the wife works?

One of the social rules men need to break is the rule that their identity as men is tied to the approval of women and the need to uphold manly roles. Take success for example. A man's identity as a man is tied to his success. Part of his male identity is how he performs. Women are not tied to this. A woman can go out, try and fail and she isn't less than a woman for failing. She always will get a man. But if men fail, they are losers, their identity as men is destroyed.

So women always ahve the luxary of trying and failing. Men don't have that safety net. So they can't just up and decide not to do those things above. If they don't do those things they are deadbeats, losers, cowards, wimps, man-children, irresponsible, afraid of commitment and worse of all... they aren't real men.

One day women won't have that safety net either. But that is irrelevant to this.

Personally, I think that it is really important for men to have special privilege now. I think there should be a movement, "Boys can do anything" just as there was a movement "Girls can do anything"

I think men have been forgotten about and that it would have been better off to have had a movement "Children can do anything" rather than having one gender receive this treatment.

You know, you don't need political approval to make a movement like this. You don't need the approval of anyone.

[Tigerman]

ok so anyway julie, damn, you write way too much for me to read right now, but you said something i've been wanting to say for the last few days now and haven't had a chance. the claim that women abuse children more than men would only be because women are usually the caregivers and it is a full-time job - no breaks, no naps, no downtime, no sleeping through the night. it's a full-time job 24/7 and for lower-income families, and single mother households it's even worse. so, maybe people should stop crying about women abusing children and start doing something to make their lives easier so they can be better fucking mothers. the end.

They would be better PARENTS if they had the fathers back in their and their childrens lives. Now don't you go hitting me with your own personal anecdotal stories about how this guy or that guy that you know or knew is or was a 'bastard' - YOUR personal circle is not the whole of society and it is on THAT scale that most of our discussions here take place. It is also on that scale that you need to look at what feminism together with a system operating with apparent misguided institutionalised 'chivalry' has done to heterosexual relationships especially the institution of marriage and the nuclear family - both of these are flawed of course... but in the absence of better alternatives it has been a socially INSANE thing to do to undermine the very structures which has helped keep our society in relative harmony and stability. Reform the family courts and the misuse of restraining orders, reform the way that custody issues are settled to give fathers a fairer deal (one or two rights wouldn't go amiss to help balance out the responsibilities for example!), Don't treat them as meal tickets for life irrespective of how they have behaved towards their husbands... and who knows men worth marrying might actually get tempted back into the 'game' once more. 

not just my circle, it's everywhere. you're on crack if you think fathers don't abandon their children or their families. just check out eliot spitzer. what a loser! there are thousands more just.like.him. now his daughters are going to be fucked for life on how they few men. they will never trust again until maybe one day they do. plenty of guys impregnate a girl or woman and then leave her to fend for herself...and you want to whine about mothers abusing their children and complain about letting fathers back into their children's lives? 'scuse me, but plenty choose not to be in their lives in the first place. yes, fathers make families so much better and children USUALLY grow up more well-rounded and all that jazz, but even when they ARE presently living with their family they're gonna be away so much that the mother is STILL going to be the no.1 child rearer!

Well Folded - as I have said before your little anecdotal stories about the dubious company YOU keep do not a societal trend make. When it comes to divorce for example it is women that are overwhelmingly making the filing and thus initiating a split in the family.
As for moms being 'no 1 child rearer' - it turns out that moms are no better at parenting when moms have most time with their children anyway - studies have shown that children raised by SINGLE dads fare better across a whole range of social positive indicators whereas the same cannot be said overall for the children of single mothers.
By the way - if it really IS your personal experience that fathers of your children are running away then have you ever considered that maybe it's not the children they are running away from? 

[julie]

Well Folded - as I have said before your little anecdotal stories about the dubious company YOU keep do not a societal trend make. When it comes to divorce for example it is women that are overwhelmingly making the filing and thus initiating a split in the family.
As for moms being 'no 1 child rearer' - it turns out that moms are no better at parenting when moms have most time with their children anyway - studies have shown that children raised by SINGLE dads fare better across a whole range of social positive indicators whereas the same cannot be said overall for the children of single mothers.
By the way - if it really IS your personal experience that fathers of your children are running away then have you ever considered that maybe it's not the children they are running away from? 

I do not wish to bring down any of your points but just want to make a point.

Single Parent Fathers do make better single parents on the whole. But there is reason for this.

In the most cases fathers are only given full time care of the children when the mothers are very unfit to take care of the children. It is as if you only get the best of dads getting the custody. It is very hard for them to get it.

I only make this point because I don't believe we are at a stage to judge who is the better parent. And I hope we never do. Or if we do (as feminists may want to take that on with some out of reality research) then I hope the majority of society ignores it.

[foldedintobeauty]

i think it's just a bunch of big cry babies in here who wish they could do what women can do: sustain pregnancies, give birth, breastfeed their offspring...all things they will never be able to do.

[Tigerman]

Well Folded - as I have said before your little anecdotal stories about the dubious company YOU keep do not a societal trend make. When it comes to divorce for example it is women that are overwhelmingly making the filing and thus initiating a split in the family.
As for moms being 'no 1 child rearer' - it turns out that moms are no better at parenting when moms have most time with their children anyway - studies have shown that children raised by SINGLE dads fare better across a whole range of social positive indicators whereas the same cannot be said overall for the children of single mothers.
By the way - if it really IS your personal experience that fathers of your children are running away then have you ever considered that maybe it's not the children they are running away from? 

I do not wish to bring down any of your points but just want to make a point.

Single Parent Fathers do make better single parents on the whole. But there is reason for this.

In the most cases fathers are only given full time care of the children when the mothers are very unfit to take care of the children. It is as if you only get the best of dads getting the custody. It is very hard for them to get it.

I only make this point because I don't believe we are at a stage to judge who is the better parent. And I hope we never do. Or if we do (as feminists may want to take that on with some out of reality research) then I hope the majority of society ignores it.

Your idea may have merit (re single dads) - I will have to do further research but in any case I am willing to concede that we should be seeking to institute BOTH parents having custody because overall that is best for children. I made the point I did because folded was making the mistake of dissing fathers again.

[foldedintobeauty]

Well Folded - as I have said before your little anecdotal stories about the dubious company YOU keep do not a societal trend make. When it comes to divorce for example it is women that are overwhelmingly making the filing and thus initiating a split in the family.
As for moms being 'no 1 child rearer' - it turns out that moms are no better at parenting when moms have most time with their children anyway - studies have shown that children raised by SINGLE dads fare better across a whole range of social positive indicators whereas the same cannot be said overall for the children of single mothers.
By the way - if it really IS your personal experience that fathers of your children are running away then have you ever considered that maybe it's not the children they are running away from? 

I do not wish to bring down any of your points but just want to make a point.

Single Parent Fathers do make better single parents on the whole. But there is reason for this.

In the most cases fathers are only given full time care of the children when the mothers are very unfit to take care of the children. It is as if you only get the best of dads getting the custody. It is very hard for them to get it.

I only make this point because I don't believe we are at a stage to judge who is the better parent. And I hope we never do. Or if we do (as feminists may want to take that on with some out of reality research) then I hope the majority of society ignores it.

Your idea may have merit (re single dads) - I will have to do further research but in any case I am willing to concede that we should be seeking to institute BOTH parents having custody because overall that is best for children. I made the point I did because folded was making the mistake of dissing fathers again.

i'm stating a fact. ur kind of sensitive to be saying i'm dissing fathers again. i'm dissing deadbeat loser men who don't have the right to call themselves the father of anyone. do you not think men actually walk away from their children?

[Tigerman]

i think it's just a bunch of big cry babies in here who wish they could do what women can do: sustain pregnancies, give birth, breastfeed their offspring...all things they will never be able to do.

Well thank you for that 'fascinating' glimpse into how your mind works, I'm rather amazed that you think such contents worth advertising but if you insist on shooting yourself in the foot who am I to complain! *lol*

[julie]

i'm stating a fact. ur kind of sensitive to be saying i'm dissing fathers again. i'm dissing deadbeat loser men who don't have the right to call themselves the father of anyone. do you not think men actually walk away from their children?

But why are you doing this?

And yes 100% I think men should call themselves fathers if they have in the past walked away from the children. Just as I feel the same way about mothers.

A child only has one biological father and one biological mother. Granted it is hard on one parent when the other parent hasn't been in the picture for a while and decides to come in and be a parent. But that is what you have to allow to happen if you love your child more than yourself. That is what putting the interest of the child first is all about.

No-one is truly a deadbeat. Everyone has great points and bad points.

[gwallan]

I do not wish to bring down any of your points but just want to make a point.

Single Parent Fathers do make better single parents on the whole. But there is reason for this.

In the most cases fathers are only given full time care of the children when the mothers are very unfit to take care of the children. It is as if you only get the best of dads getting the custody. It is very hard for them to get it.

I only make this point because I don't believe we are at a stage to judge who is the better parent. And I hope we never do. Or if we do (as feminists may want to take that on with some out of reality research) then I hope the majority of society ignores it.

Absolutely. I have put the same case myself numerous times. A father can be a perfect saint and the mother the next best thing to Atilla the Hun and she'll still get custody.

At the same time I would also point out that from the perspective of their child victims it's still abuse. And it's still women committing said abuse.