tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post6459399018248379839..comments2023-09-18T04:52:34.622-07:00Comments on Shining Pearls of Something: sheroescentralsuzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07599102235797825599noreply@blogger.comBlogger103125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-14075041025158844702012-12-16T08:50:50.633-08:002012-12-16T08:50:50.633-08:00When resources are plentiful, raising another man&...When resources are plentiful, raising another man's children isn't a problem, and most men are perfectly willing to do it. I'm referring again to instinct, an instinct women share. Our brains evolved at a time when one's next meal was ALWAYS in question; we feed our own children first.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06896718673192738974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-49554753452160010222012-12-16T01:27:14.829-08:002012-12-16T01:27:14.829-08:00Yeah, so he gets food, he gets shelter, and he can...Yeah, so he gets food, he gets shelter, and he can reproduce perfectly well (or, rather, perform the actions that are likely to lead to reproduction unless the partner is uterus-less or on birth control). Why can't there be another child there? A child in the home does not mean that there is no chance for another child. Any and all non-single-children are proof of that. He's willing to work to support his kids, but not another man's, because he wants to reproduce?Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-70691452814598508172012-12-14T19:05:52.142-08:002012-12-14T19:05:52.142-08:00The first three priorities of any species are food...The first three priorities of any species are food, shelter, and reproduction. Why would we expect ourselves to abandon the reasons our species is not extinct? Why would we want to?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06896718673192738974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-57373118493770087972012-12-14T08:33:21.082-08:002012-12-14T08:33:21.082-08:00And if we managed to fix that issue (men not wanti...And if we managed to fix that issue (men not wanting to raise children that were fathered by someone else) then our society would be a lot better off. There are THOUSANDS of children in foster care who could use homes, but people would rather bring another kid, or two, or three into the world, because if they're gonna screw up a kid, by goodness, it's gonna be made out of their own genetic material! Seriously...adoption is not that big a deal, and that's what this equates to. If the kid is legally adopted as his own, then there's that kid to Carry On The Family Name, regardless of parentage. I guess, maybe because of being female, I dunno, that I can't understand what makes it such a big issue that the kid's DNA syncs up with his. It seems so stupid. If you raise the child, then that is your child, DNA be damned. Why can't society shift? If kids will be healthier fathered by the alpha male, and raised by the beta male, then what is the situation here? Woman marries beta male, they maybe go on to have children, or not, they have a perfectly healthy life together. You talk about human nature being yadda-yadda, how it worked in primitive society, and acknowledge that in primitive society, woman slept with whoever would give her the best babies, then stayed with whoever could be their father best. Why are we trying to change that part of society, but not the part where woman has the subordinate role?<br /><br />As long as she doesn't lie and tell him he's the father, I don't see the problem. Why not have the men use some of that reason and let them look at a kid, go "Oh, what a great kid", and raise them? It feels like the trope shouldn't be the evil stepmother, it should be the evil stepfather (but women are evil, so...) because he's marrying into a family and being handed a kid that is obviously not his that he is supposed to be a father for.Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-36429199899620770202012-12-11T19:26:24.633-08:002012-12-11T19:26:24.633-08:00Yes, women want Alpha sperm and Beta stability. S...Yes, women want Alpha sperm and Beta stability. Sucks to be a beta, doesn't it? Marry Sumdood's leftovers and raise Sumotherdood's children. Moral codes that tempered (but never contradicted) those instincts, rewarded beta's for their diligence in building civilization. That was the primary reason for demanding that women remained virgins until marriage. While a man could rarely supervise his wife's every move after the wedding, if she came to him as a virgin, he has a better chance of ensuring that at least "his" first child, was indeed his. Most men are willing to work their asses off to support their own kids. Someone else's? Meh, not so much. Look around. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06896718673192738974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-13302407456572880582012-12-11T19:07:26.730-08:002012-12-11T19:07:26.730-08:00Trust me, the Disney-princess-Beauty-and-the-Beast...Trust me, the Disney-princess-Beauty-and-the-Beast-change-the-bad-boy story bugs the heck out of me. The only thing I liked about Beauty and the Beast was a princess who had brown hair and read books and was exceedingly underwhelmed by the village annoyance who thought he was God's gift to women (Gaston, although I met several real-life Gastons who also think that the way to a girl's heart is to bug her...if she sounds annoyed, you're doing it right! Ugh. Can I file a complaint against guys who, without any teaching at all, think that they can change a lesbian or a wallflower into the exact opposite?). Also, the singing household appliances and fine china were great. The actual story, less so. The frog and prince story brings up memories of The Princess and the Frog, which annoyed me and quite frankly frightened me at times. Seriously? Mega-creepy-voodoo-guy in a children's animated movie? Gotta be kidding.<br /><br />The study specifically said that the masculinity didn't equate to attractiveness. An ugly lumberjack counts as plenty masculine. <br /><br />But these women are trying not to marry these ultra-masculine men, because they view them as more likely to cheat. So they marry the men that are less masculine, the "betas" as you put it, because they see them as more trustworthy. I remember once I saw an article that women have an increased "gaydar" for gay men after they become pregnant, and the theory is that it's because once they're pregnant, they want to find a man who won't take stupid risks with his life or cheat or whatever, and the more masculine a man appears, the more likely he is to do those things and leave her alone.Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-45698144309945200562012-12-10T20:38:33.751-08:002012-12-10T20:38:33.751-08:00That's old news. Masculine men are desirable;...That's old news. Masculine men are desirable; they have many opportunities to cheat. Doesn't make it right, but it brings up two questions:<br /><br />How likely is a man to cheat when his woman acts like she really, truly values his masculinity, instead of vying with him for power within the relationship? (And if he's that hot, he does have more power, aka sex rank.)<br /><br />Why do women marry these men in the first place? Did "somebody" teach women that they could "change" such men? (You know, like a fairytale frog-and-prince story?) Did "somebody" teach women to expect men to suppress their masculinity, even when those men's masculinity is so strong that they are among the few men rewarded for it? (cuz they're hawt?) "Somebody" forgot to tell women a thing or two about human nature.<br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06896718673192738974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-17274175822574022472012-12-10T19:19:20.907-08:002012-12-10T19:19:20.907-08:00Trust me, I realize that everything I said used &q...Trust me, I realize that everything I said used "feel". Like I said...the problem is that you and I have different notions. You look at your evidence and see a compelling argument for one side...I look at the same evidence and see a problem, and a compelling argument for the other side. The evidence is the same, but the interpretation differs, and until my own base assumptions and interpretation changes, you can toss all the evidence at me that you want.<br /><br />Decided to pop by cause I thought this was cool...don't know if it's a blog entry or just a weird study, but perhaps it explains a bit of why women are trying to emasculate the men and end up marrying betas.<br /><br />http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/05/us-faithfulness-faces-women-idUSBRE8B405D20121205<br /><br />Basically, the more masculine a man appeared, the higher a woman rated him on his likeliness of cheating. And the real kicker is, they were right. There was a noticeable correlation between the men they thought cheated and the men who reported actually cheating.Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-84172491969091581002012-12-07T01:28:49.971-08:002012-12-07T01:28:49.971-08:00"The reason my evidence won't convince yo..."The reason my evidence won't convince you is because I say that I feel like I'm second class and that my uterus is the only important part of me, and you say that this is what the primitive society model is meant to be."<br /><br />By this standard, men have two important parts: their penises and their muscles. Do you think men have always been emotionally validated by being diminished to that?<br /><br />"I am a feminist because I don't think that I've found a good enough reason why girls are useless.."<br /><br />It is feminism that told you that girls were treated as useless. Women have always worked. Before the industrial revolution, men and women did a great deal of their work together, cooperatively, including raising children. Industrial jobs took men out of the home. This put a greater burden childrearing burden on women; at the same time it put a greater earning burden on men - their wives were not working beside them. The division of labor caused by industrialization isn't ideally suited to human nature, but on the bright side, it led to greater prosperity - and a bigger population. Feminism wants to pretend that women are the primary victims of the industrial division of labor, because women didn't get to do the "fulfilling" jobs. But feminism has never fought to ensure that more women could dig coal and be maimed by machinery. Feminism has always fought for women to be allowed to have the safe and fun jobs.<br /> <br />Have you ever learned about the "scientific process?" It is essentially this: propose a theory, then attempt to disprove it. If you can't disprove it, it is likely true. Keep it in mind throughout your life, and never trust that anything you are taught has been held up to this standard. Including what I've told you. If you're curious, do the research. Find the statistics, follow the money.<br /><br />And Merry Christmas to you and your family.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06896718673192738974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-29424027066763122732012-12-07T01:03:01.853-08:002012-12-07T01:03:01.853-08:00"We no longer have cavemen bashing their woma..."We no longer have cavemen bashing their woman over the head with a convenient club, for example."<br /><br />The fact that you believe we HAD such men (more than we do now) is just one tiny piece of evidence that you (and all of society) have been brainwashed. Society didn't have that pervasive attitude about men until recently. Society didn't smugly assume that it is civilization that turned men into decent human beings. We understood that men have ALWAYS used reason to manage their instincts. But until recently, society had more sense than to assume we could or should DENY our instincts.<br /><br />"That is what shapes my beliefs, just as what you see in the world shapes yours. And my evidence won't convince you, just as yours won't convince me. Things that hit me hard, that make me feel like I am nothing more than a second-class citizen and that I want to fight..."<br /><br />Another bit of evidence that you have been indoctrinated by feminism, is your belief that YOUR OBSERVATIONS, on which you base your beliefs, are a valid measure of objective truth. Objective truth requires looking beyond your own observations and considering verified facts. Feminism treats personal perception as fact. After spending your childhood in feminized public schools, you are an adult who still believes it.<br />Two years ago I would not have written this letter, because this is not how I interpreted my own observations. My opinions changed when I looked at OTHER PEOPLE'S observations, and more importantly, looked at the statistical and objective data. This is called critical thinking, and schools no longer teach it because facts sometimes hurt kids' feelings. Children feeling good about themselves is more important to our education system, than knowledge. Did you know that 40 years ago "education" majors were mostly for grade school teachers? Middle school and high school teachers majored in academic subjects, and then earned teaching certificates. And we were still leading the world academically.<br /><br />Have you noticed that you consistently defend your perspective with the words, "I feel?" You were raised to believe that what you "feel" is a legitimate basis for facts. It's not. Your emotions are a personal reaction to stimuli. As you receive more stimuli, your emotions will likely change. Feminism strictly limits the amount of stimuli to which you are exposed.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06896718673192738974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-54130552061791651642012-12-06T23:08:54.711-08:002012-12-06T23:08:54.711-08:00(I know he can function, because I've tried it...(I know he can function, because I've tried it when babysitting him so my parents could have an anniversary dinner. They left us money to walk to Walmart...two blocks away, which was awesome...and get food. I handed him five dollars and told him to get whatever food he wanted, but if it doesn't fill him up, no whining. If he's still hungry later, he can eat what's in the house. I gave myself the same limits, bought a couple of Lunchables and a four-pack of pudding. He saw the puddings and put back a couple of the microwave sandwich things he had grabbed to get a couple things of pudding. I checked to make sure he understood that this was his supper and he doesn't get to yell about wanting more if he's not happy with it, and he agreed, so we checked out and true to his word, he didn't yell about being hungry for the rest of the night, and even saved some of his puddings for our parents. He can work with a budget, he just hates it. But, again, so does my father, and well...he enlisted in the army, served for twenty years, met and married my mother, and fathered two children. He has a job, he's a brilliant cook, and on a good day, he's a great guy. A couple of my fondest memories were when my mom was on a brief business trip and my brother and I finally drove my dad nuts. He ordered us into the car and drove, silent. I was an overly anxious child, so I was planning how to get away when he stopped in the deserted field and pulled out the cleaver. We ended up at a pumpkin patch and wandered through the grass maze together and took a hay ride. Another time, we went to the Omaha Nebraska zoo, which was pretty amazing. The aquarium goes over your head...it's truly intimidating to have a shark swimming over you).<br /><br />Oh, dear. I just realized, I wrote another novel. I really am sorry!Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-49260073253832876292012-12-06T23:08:40.421-08:002012-12-06T23:08:40.421-08:00I hope you have a lovely Christmas, and good luck ...I hope you have a lovely Christmas, and good luck with presents...I just got my paycheck, so I've got mine ordered for direct family (parents and brother). My brother and dad are getting soaps, because I hope they'll use them (brother's is bacon-scented, father's is caffeinated) and my mother is getting a Pacman blanket. She used to love that game, and I think she'll like the nostalgia of it. Plus, a warm blanket is always nice. I've got multiple scarves to make, so my needles aren't going to get a rest for...well, probably the rest of the month. I'll probably swing by and say hello every now and again, because despite not agreeing with most of what you say, I don't have any particular enmity towards you, and I want to keep up with how Pooka is doing and the rest of the family. You're a fairly decent person, I love small dogs, and a joke about nuts made me chuckle. So I hope you have a nice day, week, month, and rest of the year, and wish you best of luck in your endeavors. Especially handling Christmas, because if you have anything in common with most of the people I know, this season is also known as the most stressful time of the year.<br />Related: Have you ever heard of Piers Anthony? He writes a series called "Xanth", and there are ghost horses in it (it's a straight-up fantasy, with awful puns, but it likes to poke fun at itself, and I enjoy it) and the ghost horses are actually called the Pooka. So the cute puppy's name made me smile.<br />Related: My brother and father are both able to be left at home alone. They just suck at entertaining themselves and whine about it constantly. The gap between what they can do and what they want to do is huge. When I go home, I'll be doing the laundry for the family again, because my brother knows how to operate a washer but won't, and my father does up what he needs and ignores everyone else. We're trying to convince my brother to join Job Corps. It'd give him money, which he so desires, and he's a chunky kid that developed muscles very quickly...he could definitely handle manual labor. He will, someday, be on his own. He doesn't need a home, or a caretaker. What he needs is to grow up, in a completely non-derogatory sense. Once he does that, once he has a job and responsibilities, he'll never be normal, but he can function. He's just completely beyond weird. Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-24061436041056947942012-12-06T23:07:29.065-08:002012-12-06T23:07:29.065-08:00And my current job, as a desk clerk at night. That...And my current job, as a desk clerk at night. That's what I'm doing right now, actually. Anyone working a desk clerk shift makes minimum wage, seven and a quarter per hour. I'm working my tail off right now, I want to buy a new LadyCup for myself for Christmas. <br />I am a feminist because I don't think that I've found a good enough reason why girls are useless, or have worth based solely on their ability to reproduce, especially these days, when we definitely don't need a bigger population. I don't like that a woman's worth is tied to her number of sexual partners or her virginity. And I'm annoyed that women are being denied control over their own bodies. Also, I'm still up in arms over the fact that being a woman means the words that are gender-specific to me are also non-gender-specific insults.<br /><br /><br />All that this boils down to is thank you for helping me to clarify my beliefs, and more specifically, WHY I believe that way, by tearing them apart. I truly appreciate it, because it made me look inside to try to understand what exactly made me feel this way. Thank you for arguing your point calmly and clearly, and I'm sorry for my rant the other day. Like I explained, a long day and familial pride are a difficult combination. I'm going to bow out of this, because I'm not one to run into a wall repeatedly...maybe once or twice, but no more than three times, certainly...and I don't believe that you are, either. I think you're genuinely trying to reach people. And so am I. But both of us are way too set in our beliefs. Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-32201413048688511112012-12-06T23:06:34.746-08:002012-12-06T23:06:34.746-08:00My evidence is what I see happen in the world. Tha...My evidence is what I see happen in the world. That is what shapes my beliefs, just as what you see in the world shapes yours. And my evidence won't convince you, just as yours won't convince me. Things that hit me hard, that make me feel like I am nothing more than a second-class citizen and that I want to fight, that I want to be treated with the same amount of respect that is automatically accorded to men based on their dominant status. The fact that my sex life is what gets fought over, because I have the capability to make babies. The reason my evidence won't convince you is because I say that I feel like I'm second class and that my uterus is the only important part of me, and you say that this is what the primitive society model is meant to be. My status is based on either my uterus or a truly amazing feat that will counterbalance my reluctance to put that uterus to work. I find this to be a bad thing. You don't. Our base assumptions differ, and neither one of us can convince the other, because of those base assumptions. You interpret evidence one way, and I interpret it another. <br /><br />When feminism blows up, I'll be sure to come back and apologize. Until then, I am a woman, and I'm going to keep fighting for people to assume that I am worthy of respect based on more than a functioning vagina. Maybe it's different when you've had children and are in a happy marriage with a man you've committed/submitted to. Maybe there's a different factor at play here...social class, or the type of men each of us know. Maybe, at 20, I'm just too young to understand the subtle intricacies of the argument, and I'll understand it when I get older. I don't know. I'm not going to theorize about why my hackles rise when I read your evidence, because after a certain point, I've matured to the point where I know exactly why I believe in feminism still, and I know that none of my emotions and instincts...huh...I'll grant you a point for the instincts argument...will change your mind. My mind and beliefs were shaped by my life, and they won't touch anyone but me. I am a feminist not because I'm talking about women needing jobs, or better paychecks, or anything of that sort. The only jobs I've ever had were door-to-door newspaper subscription salesgirl (And I do mean girl. I was about 13, and being a young girl who looks younger than she actually is and has a pretty smile got me plenty of sales. Plus the occasional random boy who would open his front door after I left and yell to me, two houses down, "YOU'RE HOT!!!!") for which I got a commission on my sales, and during which the girls usually did make more than the boys, because we had more girls than boys, and because girls are much better at smiling sweetly and looking innocent and adorable than boys are. I still have fond memories of that job. We worked in pairs, and I always paired up with one of my best friends. The camaraderie, the knowing you had a partner there who had your back...I love working with people I trust. There were days when we'd be working a skeevy-looking street, and without having to discuss it, we'd go to every house together, rather than each taking one side of the street. <br />Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-46568044076016180522012-12-06T23:04:59.221-08:002012-12-06T23:04:59.221-08:00Mmkay, real quick-
You're arguing against me ...Mmkay, real quick-<br /><br />You're arguing against me with the assumption that I have been taught all of this, indoctrinated to believe this, and that's why I believe the way I do. If the brainwashing is broken, I'll see the light. You have good points, but there are many things you've said that I disagree with, and will probably continue to disagree with, because I came to those conclusions on my own. Nobody told them to me. There was no secret indoctrination ritual. I grew up with plenty of male friends, and due to a lack of romantic attraction, I'm more comfortable hanging out with men than women. <br /><br />No Women's Studies class. I've met a few very nice people who teach Gender and Women's Studies at my college, but I've never taken one of their classes, nor do I plan to.<br />I don't think you hate women, or feminists. It's feminism you hate, and that's a rather obvious argument and not really an insult, to you.<br />Also don't think you're bitter, a loser, or a failure. That's likely because I read through a bunch of this blog and I can't properly bash someone or de-humanize them after they post about their pets. <br />I wouldn't phrase it as "when men controlled women", because to me, that feels like BDSM or an RC car. I would phrase it as ye olden times. <br />Not All Men Are Like That?? Like what? Seriously, all of the initial-only arguments elude me, and explaining doesn't help. The only time I said anything about men was when I said not all of them are rapists, and from what you just finished saying, that's me considering the majority, not ignoring them.<br />The thing is, they are. I don't feel that people are slaves to their genetics and impulses, and I do feel that those same things can change. We no longer have cavemen bashing their woman over the head with a convenient club, for example.Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-289776804348533892012-12-06T14:35:35.994-08:002012-12-06T14:35:35.994-08:00.....Everything I have discussed here, addresses t........Everything I have discussed here, addresses these issues and more. It is the exact opposite of everything you have ever been taught. And there is far more proof for my assertions, than there is for NEARLY ANYTHING feminism asserts. The facts exist. You have two choices: you can continue to say the same things over and over again, and you can continue to try to prove them by using anecdotal evidence, or you can look beyond your own experience and begin to consider that the evidence against feminism is FACT BASED, not anecdotal. <br />There is a short list of arguments feminists use, and I've heard them all.<br />"You just hate women"<br />"You're bitter/a loser/a failure."<br />"You just want to go back to when men controlled women."<br />NAWALT. (Ignore the majority.)<br />NAMALT. (Ignore the majority.) <br />NAFALT. (Ignore the majority.)<br />"Things are different now." <br /><br />Emotional appeals are not going convince me that overwhelming evidence is wrong. Bring me a preponderance of evidence.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06896718673192738974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-61658798552161692352012-12-06T14:35:00.073-08:002012-12-06T14:35:00.073-08:00"Mentally disabled" is only rarely "..."Mentally disabled" is only rarely "retarded." If a chronological adult cannot function normally without constant supervision, it'a a disability. It doesn't make them stupid or useless or non-functional. <br /><br />"Just as not all men are rapists, not all women are manipulative witches."<br /><br />Yes this is true. What you're missing is one of the primary points of my original post: Feminist laws and social customs ENCOURAGE all women to be manipulative witches, and feminist laws and customs PUNISH men who are perceived to have the potential to be rapists. And it's women whose "perceptions" measure that potential.<br /><br />And as is human nature, when bad behavior is permitted, it increases. There are women who would NEVER take advantage, manipulate, or be mean. But most people will do what they can get away with, if they have something to gain from it. The result of feminism is countless innocent men in prison (or even "just" expelled from school on a false accusations) being remove from their children's lives for no reason (except as coercion to hand over more money) and losing jobs or promotions to women who are less qualified than them. It is also countless women who make false accusations, because they can get away with it, hold their children hostage to get "revenge" or more money from their exes, because they can get away with it, and take jobs for which they were unqualified until the qualification standard were lowered, because they can get away with it. Feminism encourages women to manipulate the government, employers, and individual men, in order to gain what they have not earned. Feminism rewards anti-social behavior in women, and punishes men for that behavior by requiring them to pay a price for it.<br />Just one example that I won't go into in detail because it's truly exhaustive: VAWA-financed rape culture. You know that famous statistic -1 in 4 women will be raped? It was debunked, and the author of the "study" on which it was based, admitted she was wrong. More men are raped EVERY day than women. But women's far of rape is big business. The Violence Against Women Act dishes out billions of tax dollars every year on programs that encourage women to fear rape. This manufactured fear justifies the existence of those programs. VAWA also gives money to states for jailing and prosecuting "domestic abusers." The incentive is there, and women take advantage of it every day.<br /><br />Until a few decades ago, it wasn't like this. Men and women were not enemies. Men cooperated with women and women cooperated with men. Both sexes compromised in order to get along. Both sexes policed themselves and each other, to build the stability that makes prosperity possible. (Did you know that in the past men would print and post handbills publicly shaming wifebeaters, and the men in a community would band together and literally run a wifebeater out of town? Do they teach that in Women's Studies classes?) Then the feminists came along and whispered in women's ears, "You can take more than you give if you can convince everyone that you are victims, deserving of special privileges." In order to convince society that women deserve special treatment, feminism had to demonize men as the Evil Oppressors.<br />Every tenet of feminism is a lie:<br />"Women are just as professionally capable as men." <br />Well, yeah, a tiny minority of women are.<br />"Patriarchy is a system built by men to benefit men at the expense of women."<br />No. It's not. It is a system built by the wealthy to benefit the wealthy, at the expense of MOST men, which protects MOST women, because a man with a family to support is unlikely to rebel against the powers that be.<br />"Gender is a social construct."<br />Bullshit. At least 90% of the population has male or female sex-specific mental characteristics (including drives and aptitudes) with SOME variations.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06896718673192738974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-38179684250172124912012-12-06T13:07:17.309-08:002012-12-06T13:07:17.309-08:00Anywho, I was explaining there, it may have gotten...Anywho, I was explaining there, it may have gotten lost, how my mother gets drama in her life without manufacturing it. My dad cannot function on a budget. He does not comprehend that we have limited funds and it would be good if we paid what must be paid first. The problem is that he is a dominant man, but he's not very good at life. I mentioned that he's basically got the same condition as my brother. How many young children do you know who understand money? Right. My dad spends money on whatever shiny thing happens to be there. My mom has no wedding ring, that got pawned years ago. A ring my father bought her in Kuwait, with her name written on it in both English and Kuwaiti, went a few years ago. The only jewelry she has left are things of no value. When her things ran out, my dad started sulking before finally taking his gun and fishing poles to the pawn shop. My mother has finally gotten to a point where she takes my father's bank card away from him before he gets paid. When she does so, we magically have enough money for food, rent, and bills. It feels like your argument puts all of the weight of the marriage on the wife...I've read where you said if the husband is abusive or cheating, then she chose the wrong man. And also where that wife's infidelity is more harmful than the husband's. That all of the children's happiness depends on their parents being around, so mom cannot get a divorce. I automatically bristle at this, because I've seen a marriage where the weight of everything staying together is on the wife, and it's horrible. If the husband was assigned responsibility other than financial support, perhaps it would force my father to assume some of that responsibility.Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-73874287404052644372012-12-06T12:49:40.878-08:002012-12-06T12:49:40.878-08:00I think the big reason why women are cheered for b...I think the big reason why women are cheered for being cruel to men is the rebound effect, or rebel effect, whatever you want to call it. When a woman posts on Facebook (seen this before, on Sheroes, where many of us bashed it...not gonna forum-search, cause I'm tired) "Yes, my man has supper on the table waiting for me when I get home! You women cooking for your husbands are pathetic!" it's because that husband is seen as such an outlier that she has to point it out. By the way, it seemed like a silly thing to cheer about, to me. My father is the cook, and has been for most of my life. My mom can follow directions on a box...my dad can find all the random food we have sitting in the house and make something edible with it. He also makes the best Snickerdoodles and Deviled Eggs EVER. He made Deviled Eggs for Thanksgiving and omigosh it was so great. Heck, he's good at cookies in general. So the concept of a man cooking supper as a new thing confuses me, but if it weren't so strange to other people, they wouldn't feel the need to point it out and act like they conquered Mt. Husband. The Facebook update would be more like "Oh, thank God for my husband. I was exhausted today and came home and he had supper ready for me already. I love him so much!" It would be bragging about the husband, not about the perceived flaunting of social rules.<br /><br />Do you see how, if those social rules were gone, that woman's attention would've gone to the caring husband? And then, the days when the wife cooked supper, it'd be a kind gesture, not fulfilling the role they're assumed to have. Both sexes would be getting the appreciation for doing a given task, because it's not assumed to belong to either one. The man who watches his own children is often praised and referred to as "babysitting" his kids. If being the kid person isn't a woman-only club, then either both parents get lots of praise, or neither one does (which seems logical, since it's their own kids). <br /><br />Also, you generalize a LOT. Do you see this? I have debated logically for about a week. You agreed that I was being logical, bringing up points that you found interesting, etc.<br />One day, I post things that you don't like or find logical. Suddenly, all of my prior posts mean nothing. This is the quality of debate they have over at Sheroes? When you admitted that I was debating perfectly well until a day when I had six hours of sleep in 48 hours, was working a boring job and typing frantically to get the post out before my replacement got there, and perceived a slight to a family member of mine. I explain to everyone here at college that I love my family, and heaven help anyone who hurts them, but it's easier to love them from two hours away.<br />Well, I'm two hours away, and though you didn't mean it, your comment struck nerves that got tenderized during the years I've been defending that boy.Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-80367087722523509602012-12-06T12:34:49.185-08:002012-12-06T12:34:49.185-08:00I'm sorry if my recent comments are a problem....I'm sorry if my recent comments are a problem. I'm not going to apologize for them, but I will say that at 20 years old, and with a brother at 18, I've been dealing with people misinterpreting him as mentally disabled since I was about 8. It's probably a fair portion of why I was never the popular kid-I was the one pointing out that my brother had been put in the gifted program and placed at our county spelling bee...beating out the girl who is trying to confide in me that she thinks my brother "is retarded" "well sure, but he's also completely brilliant" "no, I mean stupid-retarded". He annoys me, majorly, but that doesn't mean I sit down and let his condition be misinterpreted by people. Especially when that condition is shared by my father, but my brother is the one who catches flak for doing the same things his dad does. I tend not to defend myself, but as much as I hate my brother on a daily basis, he is my little brother and I will defend him with my life. So when I was typing all of this, I was already pretty riled up. I also got annoyed that you're trying to put me in the mindset of the modern man, without assuming that anything might apply to the modern woman. You've mentioned here that men are catching on that women are manipulative witches. That point stands. It'd be like me starting a feminist site and writing a letter to men, explaining that women are being taught that rapists are everywhere and it's their responsibility to protect themselves from them. CONSTANT. VIGILANCE. (Harry Potter reference, whoo!!)<br />The way to stop women from assuming all men are rapists stands as well. Just as not all men are rapists, not all women are manipulative witches. The way to stop that generalization from happening is for that sex to stop the members of their society from engaging in it.Jessica Wattshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273051462714843418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-69285065825905573282012-12-06T11:47:56.992-08:002012-12-06T11:47:56.992-08:00You have completely lost me; I no longer know what...You have completely lost me; I no longer know what you're writing about. I do know you have clearly ignored most of what I wrote and you are now responding, somewhat incoherently, with standard feminist sound bites. You claimed to be capable of reasonable debate and rational discussion; I'm not seeing it in your recent comments. You bring up new-but-related "objections," showing that you haven't extrapolated the logic I have presented. Logic does that, you know. It applies across the board; it's not arbitrary or piecemeal. <br /><br />"That was your grandmother's reality." ??? No, that IS reality. Society has evolved a lot over the past 10,000 years. The human brain and the human body, have evolved VERY LITTLE, if any, during that same time period. And right up until about 50 years ago, inter-sex relations were pretty closely matched with human biology. Do you think feminists were the first people ever born who envisioned a "different" model? They weren't. However, like every other model of society that doesn't mesh with human nature, it fails. You might not think it's failing, because you personally benefit from it. But it can't sustain itself. Period. Chip away at inconsequential details around the edges all you want. You can't change facts, and it sounds like you have been taught by feminists to reject critical thinking and to ignore facts that fit into your narrative. <br /><br />I have given you a ton of information; if you explore it you will find that it's true. Do you think I haven't heard (for my whole life) the garbage feminists spout? Your assumptions are not new to me, because I once share a number of them. Then I grew up. You have been presented with facts. Do with them what you will, but if this is the level of debate you're so proud of at sheroescentral, I'm not impressed. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06896718673192738974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-10775798604418664132012-12-06T04:54:39.575-08:002012-12-06T04:54:39.575-08:00Imagine knowing every man you meet regards you as ...Imagine knowing every man you meet regards you as a manipulative bitch (apologies for language), even the ones who desire you. Imagine knowing that you are the butt of the joke...that when someone laughs about a lady, the underlying assumption that everyone understands is "this is funny because women are dumb". Imagine that when a portion of the population looks at you, they see an incubator and a couple baby bottles, or else a playground, with a big sign saying "Men Only". Imagine that that "feminist interpretation" is also what a vast majority of the population feels "submissive" means, and that there are plenty of people out there who will get offended that you aren't conforming to their idea of femininity. Imagine that your idea of feminine doesn't correspond perfectly with the world's idea of feminine. I feel feminine with short hair and no makeup and unpainted nails, with a dress that covers my bosom and bottom entirely because I'm still iffy about my own body. The accepted idea of feminine either involves pregnancy, or, with the stereotypical model version, long hair, makeup, a size zero body, and clothes that show it off. And you're the one that the world thinks needs to change. Imagine that if the family goes wrong, it's on your shoulders. As long as your husband gave the family money, then his part is done. If he turns out to be abusive, or cheating, then you chose him wrong (but you must still support him!). If he cheats, oh, that's rough. If you cheat, your family will implode. <br />In my family's situation, imagine that your husband is shit (again, sorry, language!) at budgets. Imagine the responsibility of making sure rent and bills are paid falls on your shoulders, because left to your husband, you'll go out for supper every night, but you'll end up evicted. Imagine that your husband regularly tries to start fistfights over his son's behavior, blatantly favors his daughter over his son, and doesn't care how obvious this is or how hurtful to both children. Imagine you're seeing your own mother struggle with this, and maybe you'll understand why putting all the responsibility on the wife/mother bothers me so much. I am her child. I am her sole confidante. Maybe if the father is meant to have some responsibility beyond a job, that would be different.Jessica Wattsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-12859587365114118662012-12-06T04:33:27.059-08:002012-12-06T04:33:27.059-08:00Imagine knowing that, statistically, at least one ...Imagine knowing that, statistically, at least one of the men you walk past in a day has had sex with someone who didn't want it. Imagine being told that it is your responsibility to not be raped...that you are supposed to wear a burqa, and if that doesn't work, you apparently must fight him off. If you get pregnant, you have to give birth to that man's child, and allow him visitation rights, let him back into your life after he (at the very least) shredded your trust, assuming you knew him. If a man was walking around wearing a shirt that said "Kill me", and you took out your gun and shot him to death, would "Well, his clothes! He was asking for it!" be a valid excuse? Would that keep you out of jail? It works for the rapists. <br /><br />If men want women to stop looking at them as potential attackers, they need to stop the attackers. When a guy makes a joke about rape (what about that comedian who thinks it'd be hilarious if that one woman just got gang-raped, right there in the theatre?) then other guys need to stand up and say that this isn't right. Call the guy out on it. Once we've got men who are vocally saying that rape is not a joke, and they're calling out that guy who's talking about this chick last week that got so wasted, so he offered to take her to her apartment and then did whatever he wanted, then that problem will be solved, simple as that. <br /><br />Men challenge women in that marriage just as much, and you're telling me his buddies don't cheer him on when he tells them about telling his wife exactly what position she has in their relationship? Most of this argument relies on "but it's so much more traumatic for men than women!" but that's not what you focused on...all you spoke about was a partner in a marriage, and the other partner challenges your authority. Women in the marriage? According to this, women have no authority at all. I guess, technically, that does solve the "challenging of authority" problem, to simply say "You have no authority here. At all. If I want your opinion, I'll tell you what it is."Jessica Wattsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-37792251548394541052012-12-06T04:21:13.365-08:002012-12-06T04:21:13.365-08:00*roadblock*
Asperger's =/= mentally disabled.
...*roadblock*<br />Asperger's =/= mentally disabled.<br />Asperger's = Developmentally Disabled<br />Development gives the clue. He's perfectly healthy. And I'm sure I've mentioned this, but he is freaking brilliant. He is a genius by any IQ test he has been given. As in, IQ score in the 180s, genius. I'm fairly intelligent, my score is usually around 130, maybe 140, but I've never gotten near him. The two are very different.<br />Also, we've been told by multiple psychologists that my father likely has the same condition. Meaning a few things. One, again, my brother is not mentally disabled. He is perfectly capable of wooing a woman, marrying her, and fathering her children. Two, there would be a big difference between "secretly disappointed" and "threatening physical violence on his child". Not a spanking. A closed fist. And when I dared to say something he didn't like, that open hand was swung back and as I said, if it had landed, the last he would've seen of me would be me packing, because I would rather live on the street than with someone abusive.Jessica Wattsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3697201505856242009.post-44722955478388893552012-12-06T04:12:51.993-08:002012-12-06T04:12:51.993-08:00That is your grandma's reality. We are alive! ...That is your grandma's reality. We are alive! We change! We have a word for things that don't change...we call them DEAD! Our society is still alive, so it evolves throughout time. That is how society and time work. <br /><br />And you brought up my biggest problem with society. Women are not wombs with legs and built-in baby bottles! I am more than the fact that I can reproduce. I want to be protected because I am a human being, not because I have a vagina. There are a lot of political battles concerning that very thing. Abortion, contraception, and the like are being threatened. Why? The obvious answer, to me at least, is that a woman is nothing more than a baby machine. But, of course, if those women are having babies, they aren't continuing their education, getting into an excellent college, or being offered an amazing job. For that matter, Holly Housewife with three children under the age of four isn't gonna be going to the polls. For women to have any power in the world, we have to stop being looked at like baby factories and nothing more. This is particularly important to me because I've hit double jeopardy. I'm gay...no accidental condom-break pregnancy for me...plus, with my medical issues, a pregnancy likely wouldn't survive, it'd mess with my own body to a point where I'd be on bed rest for most of it, any child who did survive would have a 50/50 shot at being in chronic pain themselves, and if I were to be raped, and become pregnant, I would likely get an abortion. Being a biological mother is simply not going to happen for me. So with the mindset of a portion of the country, I am worse than useless.Jessica Wattsnoreply@blogger.com