Double Income Inflation

[Elizabeth]

Well this topic has got so much attention and so much emotion goingwithout its own thread that I thought that I would start a new thread. As a long-term feminist (who doesn't quite know how I have 'taken the good and left out the bad' but there you go) this is a serious issue.

Has capitalism simply subsumed feminist ideals so that instead of women being equal, we are all less equal than the pigs in power?

Discuss. (and Chuzzie I want something from you!!!)

[ʎqɐqɹǝʞɐɥs]

Well this topic has got so much attention and so much emotion goingwithout its own thread that I thought that I would start a new thread. As a long-term feminist (who doesn't quite know how I have 'taken the good and left out the bad' but there you go) this is a serious issue.

Has capitalism simply subsumed feminist ideals so that instead of women being equal, we are all less equal than the pigs in power?

Discuss. (and Chuzzie I want something from you!!!)

Did you campaign for equality in getting your mitts on your state pension at the age of 65 to be in align with men? No, well thats one thing you forgot to 'equal'.

[Elizabeth]

Did you campaign for equality in getting your mitts on your state pension at the age of 65 to be in align with men? No, well thats one thing you forgot to 'equal'.

As I said to you on the other thread shaker mate, I would be well prepared to march for the blokes if they decided to go for equal rights and a 60 retirement age.

For history's sake, this used not the be an advantages at all. The disadvantage we got from being 2nd Class citizens was that women used to HAVE to retire at 60, they didn't have the option - that was the change. I remember they tried to retire my mum at 60 in the late 70s when the law had changed but not the regulations under it, and she had to fight it.

But I have told you. If you want to protest I will stand with you, I will march with you. In this instance I will even march BEHIND you. Its fair, its just and equal rights and an equal retirement age for all. Thats what I understand feminism to be. Equalitarianism applied to women... and I do believe that the femocrats and the dictatorial career imposers got it wrong - and well I remember them, and they were an autocratic, complacent, self-serving middle-class pains in the butt! and had nothing to do with the REAL feminism IMHO I probably have a bigger bone to pick with those femo-bitches than you do!!! Trust me.

But my point is. That gathering equality has in fact been subverted by capitalism to turn us all into serfs and neither men nor women are better off and now were ALL going to have to retire at 67

[OnlyMe]

Elizabeth,

If by equality you mean looking after the home, taking the kids to school, picking them up, cooking the food and doing everything that was done before AND holding down a job during the day and being a breadwinner without whose earnings the familiy finances would fold then yes, I'd agree for many (maybe even the majority of women) have indeed found equality.

Are you sure the head of the women's lobbyist trend isn't a bloke in drag?

PS I'm a bloke.

Edited November 27, 2005 by OnlyMe

[Starcrossed]

I feel we no longer have an awareness of the limitations that were placed on women in the past. They would only have access to wealth if they married well or inherited.

They did not have the opportunity to achieve through their own intelligence and efforts.

That was not a society to be proud of.

However, there may have been some 'unintended consequences' of the changes we have seen since the 60s. This often happens with middle-class movements for change - that the end result does not always match the theory. It was portrayed in 70s feminism that the main problem was patriarchy and once that was broken down society would be transformed. It did not predict the 'ephemeral' consequences of women achieving greater freedom - that women would not always behave in the responsible and liberated way that was predicted by the theory- that they would become more violent and more driven by alcohol for instance.

Add to that your point, Elizabeth, about being subliminated by capitalism - that must play a part. We live in a consumption and appearance-driven society. So the old battle between feminists that demanded that women not be obsessed by their appearance and the feminists that said women had a right to dress and act how they like seems to have been won by the 'free-market' feminists. Women are a commodity even as they express themselves and it all gets rather confused in terms of cause and effect.

Of course, another 'equality' is that men also worry about their appearance more than they ever did.

Oh dear, I had better stop otherwise I'll go on all night.

[Warwickshire Lad]

Has capitalism simply subsumed feminist ideals so that instead of women being equal, we are all less equal than the pigs in power?

HPI has effectively transferred away wealth from young to old, and has increased the poverty gap.

It is probably already having impacts on birth rates. In the forthcoming bust, debt will break up families and cause divorce and suicide rates to soar.

This is all the exact opposite of what a Labour Government was meant to do. I'll never vote for them again because they've abandoned ordinary people.

None of this is a gender issue IMHO.

[ʎqɐqɹǝʞɐɥs]

HPI has effectively transferred away wealth from young to old, and has increased the poverty gap.

It is probably already having impacts on birth rates. In the forthcoming bust, debt will break up families and cause divorce and suicide rates to soar.

This is all the exact opposite of what a Labour Government was meant to do. I'll never vote for them again because they've abandoned ordinary people.

None of this is a gender issue IMHO.

I guess one effect of feminism and/or house prices is this shocking article I read the other day : http://www.sundayherald.com/52801

Our future is really f***ed.

[New Darker Law]

Starcrossed

I wish you would go on, that was a very interesting post up until it abruptly ended.

Personally I think the whole equality debate is pretty pointless.

Nevermind women, if you take any two men, they are not equal. Not equal in intelligence, not equal in ability, not equal in opportunity. If you take a man and a women there are (obviously!) even more differences and inequalities.

It is a pointless arguement, men and women can never be equal any more than two men or two women can be equal.

NDL

[The Masked Tulip]

I think one issue is that femminists denigrated the role of Woman as Mother and Home-maker - two roles that are vitally important in Society and that all sensible Men recognise as important and which many of us will admit we need.

For years the femminist movement ridiculed and rubbished women who chose to stay at home as Wives, Mothers and Home-makers. Instead, so the femminist argument went, Women had to go out into the workplace and not only become as good as Men but to act like Men in order to prove their own worth. The positive and important traits of Womankind were dismissed as not being important and, as I have stated, ridiculed and belittled.

It is sad that women have done this to themselves but, as I stated in another thread, a new generation of 20-something Women seem to have seen through femminism for what it is - a bankrupt and bitter tirade at Men and, truth be told, at Women also.

Edited November 27, 2005 by The Masked Tulip

[Starcrossed]

Thanks, NDL.

I stopped the post abruptly because I tend to write spontanously and one point flows to another.

I did not want to do that for too long and become self-indulgent.

I suppose the main thrust of my point was that reality and ideology have an uneasy relationship at best. In the case of feminism, society absolutely had to change and I am glad it did. But wheels within wheels, a living society is dominated by complex interactions that can't be predicted by a single ideology.

These interactions are in turn motivated by complex, subtle personal psychologies. This is what interests me more than almost anything and is partly why I find HPC so enthralling - the debates on the board are often centred on housing but that in turn hinges on psychology.

Edited November 27, 2005 by Starcrossed

[MarkG]

Instead, so the femminist argument went, Women had to go out into the workplace and not only become as good as Men but to act like Men in order to prove their own worth.

Indeed: I've often found it funny that the most ardent feminists have spent years demanding that women stop being women and become fake men. They really must hate women.

[Elizabeth]

It is a pointless arguement, men and women can never be equal any more than two men or two women can be equal.

NDL. I think you are confusing equality of opportunity and to pursue within your ability and equality of rights under the law (in other words equality of treatment and freedom) with other types of equalities. Until the late 20th Century women's testimony only carried half the weight of that of a man. Bit like Sharia law really!

I think one issue is that femminists denigrated the role of Woman as Mother and Home-maker - two roles that are vitally important in Society and that all sensible Men recognise as important and which many of us will admit we need.

For years the femminist movement ridiculed and rubbished women who chose to stay at home as Wives, Mothers and Home-makers. Instead, so the femminist argument went, Women had to go out into the workplace and not only become as good as Men but to act like Men in order to prove their own worth. The positive and important traits of Womankind were dismissed as not being important and, as I have stated, ridiculed and belittled.

It is sad that women have done this to themselves but, as I stated in another thread, a new generation of 20-something Women seem to have seen through femminism for what it is - a bankrupt and bitter tirade at Men and, truth be told, at Women also.

Hmmm. Para 1 and 2 agree regarding the self-proclaimed "leaders" of feminsm (which is a totally ironical position to take, to the point of pythonesk) BUT IT WASN'T ME. Feminism is a broad church (think of it like the incredible range of christian ideologies and you might get close).

... on Para 3, this new generation. Is that the ones that are barfing in the street and getting raped while they are asleep in doorways? Whose taking advantage? IMHO men have used feminism to forget their manners and forget what it means to be men.

[Warwickshire Lad]

It is a pointless arguement, men and women can never be equal any more than two men or two women can be equal.

I like it when you put it like that.

Going back to the original post, though - if anything capitalism and the pursuit of personal wealth has done a lot to damage the family and relationships between men and women.

Just look at the hours some people are working these days just to keep on top of the mortgage.

Women are expected to "have it all" when it just isn't physically and emotionally possible to achieve it.

Men are having trouble figuring out what exactly their role is these days.

And who was the main architect of the situation we find ourselves in today ?

Margaret Thatcher has empowered many women but she's also damaged many of them too.

House price inflation also happens to be a function of human greed of both genders.

[Elizabeth]

And who was the main architect of the situation we find ourselves in today ?

Margaret Thatcher has empowered many women but she's also damaged many of them too.

Margaret Thatcher WAS NOT a feminist. She in fact despised feminists.

[Warwickshire Lad]

IMHO men have used feminism to forget their manners and forget what it means to be men.

When you make comments like that, you should be prepared give an example. I've got no idea what you're talking about.

Margaret Thatcher WAS NOT a feminist. She in fact despised feminists.

I agree, in fact I never said or implied that she was a feminist.

[MarkG]

IMHO men have used feminism to forget their manners

If women choose to use their right to be sluts, why should men not take advantage of it? Women have lost far more from feminism than they've gained, IMHO.

and forget what it means to be men.

What are we meant to do, when masculinity is denigrated at every opportunity? Just watch TV ads sometime.

Like many feminists, you seem to want it both ways: you want the right to do what you wish, while men are expected to behave the way you want them to behave. Ain't gonna happen.

[IPOD]

men have used feminism to forget their manners and forget what it means to be men.

LOL, that is so ironic coming from a UK woman today. If I want a barfing, swearing, loutish harridan with all the manners of a baboon and the wit of a slug I am spoilt for choice. If I want an intelligent, attractive, demure consort with a sparkling wit and sophistication to match I may as well be on a desert island.

Women, perhaps because of feminism, perhaps not, have interpreted equality to mean the LOWERING of themselves to the worst excesses that men ever stooped to, rather than the elevation of both sexes to the kind of civilised and co-operative society that I'm sure we would all like to see evolve. Playing the blame game in some kind of clichéd 70's "battle of the sexes" fashion only invokes derision and disgust.

[The Masked Tulip]

... on Para 3, this new generation. Is that the ones that are barfing in the street and getting raped while they are asleep in doorways? Whose taking advantage? IMHO men have used feminism to forget their manners and forget what it means to be men.

Hmm, for some reason I am reminded of members of the Animal Kingdom who once they run out of prey eventually turn on each other.

I think you have lost the argument when you make statements like that above - first of all femminism rubbished Motherhood and the valuable role that Women make as Home-makers, now you rubbish younger Women who have quite clearly decided that it - femminism - is a bankrupt tirade against Men AND Women and that they want none of it.

I am also reminded of a line that Spencer Tracy spoke in the film 'Inherit The Wind' about women getting the right to vote but then being annoyed when men no longer hold doors open for them. As Dr. Laura Schesslinger so rightly asked - What do women want? The answer - women do not know!

As for men forgetting to be Men - Hmm, isn't this what 40 years of femminism has tried to achieve? Did you not wish to emasculate Men whilst becoming the worst virtues of all Men in yourselves? Again, Schlessinger keenly observes that this is the normal cry of femminists - to denigrate Men always and at each and every opportunity - but you constantly fail to acknowledge the achievements of Masculinity throughout Mankind and the important roles that Men have both in Society and as Fathers and role-models. You rubbish Women for being Mothers and Home-makers - vitally important IMPO - and then you rubbish Men for being Fathers, role-models and leaders! Hmm, where would Mankind be today if it was not for the virtues in Men that explore, that fight and sacrifice?

Indeed: I've often found it funny that the most ardent feminists have spent years demanding that women stop being women and become fake men. They really must hate women.

Truth is they actually hate themselves. I know far too many women, most now in theirs 40s and 50s, who were diehard femminists in their 20s and 30s who are alone, single not out of choice, bitter and deeply unhappy.

[Starcrossed]

Women, perhaps because of feminism, perhaps not, have interpreted equality to mean the LOWERING of themselves to the worst excesses that men ever stooped to, rather than the elevation of both sexes to the kind of civilised and co-operative society that I'm sure we would all like to see evolve. Playing the blame game in some kind of clichéd 70's "battle of the sexes" fashion only invokes derision and disgust.

I agree, but men have also had a responsibility to 'raise' themselves too.

Absent fathers and the inability for a lot of men to take responsibility for their lives can't be blamed on women.

We must look to ourselves.

[The Masked Tulip]

Absent fathers and the inability for a lot of men to take responsibility for their lives can't be blamed on women.

I think, bearing in mind this has been a topic of the national Media in recent weeks which resulting in even Blair getting in on the act, that the issue of absent Fathers is one that has been greatly exaggerated by the anti-male femminist brigade, the CSA and others in the past 15 to 20 years.

In fact, it is now becoming clear that a great many men who wished to be good Fathers to their children were denied access to their children by the CSA, the anti-male 'men are always to blame' divorce courts and, once again, a pro femminist agenda.

[MarkG]

Absent fathers and the inability for a lot of men to take responsibility for their lives can't be blamed on women.

True, but many of the single mothers are that way because they spread their legs for anything in a pair of trousers. It's hardly surprising that men have no interest in a long-term relationship when they can't even be sure if the child is theirs (or that she won't be shagging his mates behind his back).

The simple fact is that men who act like gentlemen want women who act like ladies. If you act like a slut, don't complain when you're treated like one.

[Starcrossed]

I think, bearing in mind this has been a topic of the national Media in recent weeks which resulting in even Blair getting in on the act, that the issue of absent Fathers is one that has been greatly exaggerated by the anti-male femminist brigade, the CSA and others in the past 15 to 20 years.

In fact, it is now becoming clear that a great many men who wished to be good Fathers to their children were denied access to their children by the CSA, the anti-male 'men are always to blame' divorce courts and, once again, a pro femminist agenda.

What I have seen in my own life is the father of my two step-children being completely unable to even see his children because his life was so disorganised and selfish. He eventually drove his children away from himself - they had enough of being hurt and let down. There were absolutely no barriers from Mrs Starcrossed. In fact she stayed in London in order to keep the children close to him even when he was not doing his job as a father.

There are other examples I have seen of terrible fathers. They do so much damage.

I am sure that there are many cases of men unfairly denied access to their children, I don't argue that and it must be horrible for them. But as a man I feel particularly strongly that men in general need to be more responsible.

Edited November 27, 2005 by Starcrossed

[New Darker Law]

NDL. I think you are confusing equality of opportunity and to pursue within your ability and equality of rights under the law (in other words equality of treatment and freedom) with other types of equalities. Until the late 20th Century women's testimony only carried half the weight of that of a man. Bit like Sharia law really!

I don't think I am. To illustrate my point further, and using your analogy, you don't have to go much further back to find that the word of a Lord would have more weight than that of a common man. They are both men, yet they are not equal.

Most arguements that feminists (not sure if that is really the right word) put forward are completely parallel with the common man's struggle, only several decades behind.

NDL

[IPOD]

the father of my two step-children being completely unable to even see his children because his life was so disorganised and selfish.

OK, so one bloke wasn't there for his kids. There is such a thing as a bad mother as well you know, and "bad" parents in general, and you shouldn't tar all men with the same brush simply because your missus shacked up with a reprobate (exercising poor judgement-if he was such a "disorganised and selfish" person, why did she choose him to be the father of her children?).

There are other examples I have seen of terrible fathers. They do so much damage.

Oh, and terrible mothers don't? "Bad" parents (however you personally define "bad"; there is no universal definition and it would be foolish to imagine otherwise) of whatever gender make their childrens' lives hell.

[Starcrossed]

OK, so one bloke wasn't there for his kids. There is such a thing as a bad mother as well you know, and "bad" parents in general, and you shouldn't tar all men with the same brush simply because your missus shacked up with a reprobate (exercising poor judgement-if he was such a "disorganised and selfish" person, why did she choose him to be the father of her children?).

Oh, and terrible mothers don't? "Bad" parents (however you personally define "bad"; there is no universal definition and it would be foolish to imagine otherwise) of whatever gender make their childrens' lives hell.

I don't dispute that there are bad mothers, of course not, and I could rant about that for ages too. Maybe another time...

However, my starting point in any situation is to look at my own behaviour first - and by extrapolation, that of my gender.

With regard to Mrs Starcrossed, she was 19 and her husband was 31 when they met and she is the first to say that she was naive. She is a completely different person today.

Everybody makes mistakes - the trick is to learn from them.

Unfortunately the man in question did not.