Coincidence of Womans Sufferage and Inflation

[I Art Laughing]

How is this thread about marriage?

Looking at the broader affects of feminism and its influence on our society and the damage it is causing in a scope greater than the direct family destruction it is causing are valid arguments.

Is the goal here to tip-toe around every occurrence of that pernicious form of humanism that affects marriage by hook or by crook? (Let's make 100 rules for why we can't discuss what is really wrong with our marriages).

The economy (and the destruction of it) is one of the reasons cited for women absolutely having to work. Be poor or embrace feminism and an egalitarian two-income household. (This is an often stated goal of many feminists under the flag of "freedom" for women. What? The freedom to have to earn a living rather than being a mother to her children?) *the goal is to make complementarian marriage either grossly unappealing or impossible

I could think of more consequences if you'd like.

When people posit feminism as the ideology that must not be challenged on a forum ostensibly about Christ should anyone be surprised that someone takes up the challenge? What humanistic doctrine will we next try to combine with Christ?

 

[ImaginaryDay]

I would suggest you read the links I posted to back up my position and quit casting barbs at the depths of my sources and intellect.
Your hyperbole is more telling than my opinion.

A man with an opinion is never at the mercy of a man with an experience. I suggest you hit the streets and get your hands dirty a bit in ministry with those you are throwing barbs at yourself (i.e. all those unproductive feminists who are just waiting on the government dole). In fact, that whole PREMISE is faulty. A true feminist would not have a sister waiting on ANYTHING, but would in fact empower them to get up and out, thereby working and eating, which is what you want in the FIRST place...

I really wonder what would happen to the male ego if we really understood what the Proverbs 31 woman was all about. Familiar with her? Far from being chastised by her husband for her success, he spoke HIGHLY of her and it reflected well on HIM. IMO, men need to get back to that kind of value for their wives and stop being so threatened when a wife wants to exercise a bit of freedom that doesn't hold to some 1950's leave-it-to-Beaver standard of morality. Sorry if the Roast Beef won't be waiting for you, but here's an idea-YOU cook it.

 

[I Art Laughing]

More personal attacks. You don't even know me. You have no idea what ministries I have spent my life on but suddenly you know that I don't have experience? My opinion MUST be uniformed if it disagrees with yours? Is that how it works?

As far as morality I don't hold the 1950's up as anything special, better than today (seeing as how millions of abortions weren't being committed for one) but certainly not up to God's high standards set forth in His Word.

Yeah, the Pro. 31 woman? You see a lot of that going on do you? You see a lot of "success"? If she is represented by 85% of purchases and a majority of the voters in this nation (which I don't think she is) how do you explain the total debt in this nation? I don't see the activities of the Pro. 31 woman at work, anywhere.

Also, is "free" birth control not the dole or is Fluke not a feminist? Where are the feminists telling this Georgetown graduate student to go out and get it herself? Where is the cohort of Pro. 31 women telling her "Not with my money"? Where is the Titus 2 woman explaining to this woman (attending a Catholic college) why it is a bad idea to go to Congress and proclaim her promiscuity to the nation and call her to repentance?

 

[Athene]

Looking at the broader affects of feminism and its influence on our society and the damage it is causing in a scope greater than the direct family destruction it is causing are valid arguments.

Is the goal here to tip-toe around every occurrence of that pernicious form of humanism that affects marriage by hook or by crook? (Let's make 100 rules for why we can't discuss what is really wrong with our marriages).

The economy (and the destruction of it) is one of the reasons cited for women absolutely having to work. Be poor or embrace feminism and an egalitarian two-income household. (This is an often stated goal of many feminists under the flag of "freedom" for women. What? The freedom to have to earn a living rather than being a mother to her children?) *the goal is to make complementarian marriage either grossly unappealing or impossible

I could think of more consequences if you'd like.

When people posit feminism as the ideology that must not be challenged on a forum ostensibly about Christ should anyone be surprised that someone takes up the challenge? What humanistic doctrine will we next try to combine with Christ?

When manufacturing moved out of peoples homes and stopped being small cottage industries, and instead became large factory based - the norm has been two income families, heck it was 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 income families depending on how many children were in the family.

Feminists have never campaigned for two income families because two income families existed before feminism existed as a movement. It's a myth that once upon a time we lived in this lovely suburban universe where dad went out to work and mother stayed at home looking pretty and baking, well, largely a myth because only the wealthy could do this. A housewife was a status symbol for a rich and powerful man, he was so wealthy that his wife didn't need to work, he could support his entire family on his own income. ''Be poor or have a 2 income family'' was the reality for millions of families before feminism, and still is afterwards.

 

[Athene]

IOW, blaming feminism for two income families is just nonsense, historical revisionist nonsense.

 

[dallasapple]

When manufacturing moved out of peoples homes and stopped being small cottage industries, and instead became large factory based - the norm has been two income families, heck it was 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 income families depending on how many children were in the family.

Feminists have never campaigned for two income families because two income families existed before feminism existed as a movement. It's a myth that once upon a time we lived in this lovely suburban universe where dad went out to work and mother stayed at home looking pretty and baking, well, largely a myth because only the wealthy could do this. A housewife was a status symbol for a rich and powerful man, he was so wealthy that his wife didn't need to work, he could support his entire family on his own income. ''Be poor or have a 2 income family'' was the reality for millions of families before feminism, and still is afterwards.

Yes I cant stand this myth..Just LOOK in the Bilbe..that was what 2,500 years ago?The awesome Proverbs 31 woman WORKED and earned money..AND took care of the domestic needs including managing the servents..

Women have always worked and like you mentioned depending on the size of the family the CHILDREN even had to go to work to help support the family..eventualy of course we set the laws so children couldnt be made to work before a certian age..but the idea that womens RIGHTS "caused" all families to have to have 2 incomes is absurd..

I just got through watching an interestign biograpgy some would think it was boring but a woman I guess near the London area ..must have been around turn of the century ..anyway she took an interest in photograghy(RARE for anyone back then but expecially a woman)..and that IN PART is one way she made money to help support her family and she was definately MARRIED and they had about 6 children..the oldest daughter went to work as a maid herself when they deemed her old enough at about 13 or 14 to help as well..and they were average people ..this wasnt some sort of absurd notion or only for the starving..they were "hand to mouth" so to speak but it was HER hands too that earned the bread and butter and at least for a time the older children..Anyway the mother it was interesting woud have been like our local "olan mills' LOL..In our towns today..familys came by to PAY her to take family portraits ....I guess thats why her story was biography worthy..it was unusual HOW she earned money not that she DID..she washed other peoples clothes was her main "job"..OH and she was offered a full time job by the man that she had a thing ging with on the photgraghy aspect..she turned him down adn said she couldnt ..she had to look after her children..so her work had to be somethign she could do at HOME..sounds VERY familiar...

Dallas

Dallas

 

[BigDaddy4]

This is just too funny. Women are the cause of inflation and national debt and whatever else is wrong in our country??

Nevermind that those involved in the recent economic crisis, no matter the area of cause or blame you believe in (legislation, housing, banking, Wall Street, etc.), are/were overwhelmingly male.

Nevermind that men use credit cards more than women.

Nevermind that the overwhelming majority of Executive Management at Fortune 500 companies are males.

Nevermind those who abandon their families for "greener pastures" are mostly men, leaving the women and children at or below poverty levels, which only increases their likelihood of being in debt.

While women may have the majority of the purchasing power, through household roles, inheritance, or whatever means, men are the majority in the legislation, regulation, and leaders of commerce. IOW, those that make the rules and carry them out.

And how are women responsible for that? Oh that's right, silly me. We foolishly gave them the right to vote almost a 100 years ago. Shoulda kept 'em in the kitchen where they belong, right?

Sounds kinda like Jane's thread of "IWM" except with an 'n' on the end. (For the slower minded "IWM" = "It Wasn't Me". Add an 'n' and it becomes "IWM" = "It Wasn't Men")

 

[I Art Laughing]

IOW, blaming feminism for two income families is just nonsense, historical revisionist nonsense.

So again, we should blind ourselves to the chorus of women proclaiming work=freedom? And that being financially dependent on your husband is a formula for servitude? We are also supposed to ignore derogatory comments like the one aimed at Ann Romney (She hasn't worked a day in her life) or the basis of this demeaning attitude. I'd prefer to believe in a "revised" history than be in a state of persistent cognitive dissonance and self-censorship.

I like how feminist can disavow any plank in their platform five minutes after vociferously explaining its central position to thwart the oppression of the patriarchy. The fluidity is astounding.

As far as revisionism, you are pointing to poor people working (and alluding to the child labor in poor families) while ignoring the formation of the middle-class and the reduction (for a period) of a need for two incomes. The erosion of the middle-class is being conveniently ignored by your argument, it is in affect gone. Instead what we have is two poor people working to maintain the facade of a middle-class life style. I have observed the diminishment of my buying power in my own adulthood, even though my household is making nearly 4 times what it was when we married we are able to buy far less.

So which is it? Given ideal circumstances where all of their needs are being met, would the feminist Christian women want to stay at home and depend on God's provision through their husbands, is that the ideal? Or do they insist upon having their own job in case either God or their husband fails to meet their standards? I would kind of like to know which circumstance is generally preferable. I have repeatedly seen women insist upon the latter so I have my suspicions.

Again, do Christian women generally prefer to stay at home and take care of her families (in ideal circumstances) OR do they prefer to find fulfillment in the workplace, all other things being equal? How about those with feminist ideals?

What is ideal?

 

[I Art Laughing]

This is just too funny. Women are the cause of inflation and national debt and whatever else is wrong in our country??

Nevermind that those involved in the recent economic crisis, no matter the area of cause or blame you believe in (legislation, housing, banking, Wall Street, etc.), are/were overwhelmingly male.

Nevermind that men use credit cards more than women.

Nevermind that the overwhelming majority of Executive Management at Fortune 500 companies are males.

Nevermind those who abandon their families for "greener pastures" are mostly men, leaving the women and children at or below poverty levels, which only increases their likelihood of being in debt.

While women may have the majority of the purchasing power, through household roles, inheritance, or whatever means, men are the majority in the legislation, regulation, and leaders of commerce. IOW, those that make the rules and carry them out.

And how are women responsible for that? Oh that's right, silly me. We foolishly gave them the right to vote almost a 100 years ago. Shoulda kept 'em in the kitchen where they belong, right?

Sounds kinda like Jane's thread of "IWM" except with an 'n' on the end. (For the slower minded "IWM" = "It Wasn't Me". Add an 'n' and it becomes "IWM" = "It Wasn't Men")

Care to trouble yourself to actually cite references or should we take your word for it?

 

[dallasapple]

This is just too funny. Women are the cause of inflation and national debt and whatever else is wrong in our country??

Women are apparrently the cause of why women have to work in todays day and age too didnt you get the memo?Unless they want to live in poverty..Feminism is the reason women work nowadays..apparrently in the past all women were "kept" very nicely and never were required to earn or help earn the familys income..thats a new thing.(that women brought on themselves by demanding equal pay and to get the same kinds of jobs men were allowed to have )All the women in hisotry who DID work?Must have been spinsters with cats for children..

Dallas

 

[I Art Laughing]

Women are apparrently the cause of why women have to work in todays day and age too didnt you get the memo?Unless they want to live in poverty..Feminism is the reason women work nowadays..apparrently in the past all women were "kept" very nicely and never were required to earn or help earn the familys income..thats a new thing.(that women brought on themselves by demanding equal pay and to get the same kinds of jobs men were allowed to have )All the women in hisotry who DID work?Must have been spinsters with cats for children..

Dallas

Because we all know that every woman has been raised to be good providers, sacrificing their labors to their families and society (even when they don't have families)? Is that it?

If men don't sacrifice their labor, health and well-being to their families and their society they are dead-beats, cowards, losers and no depth of derision could ever go deep enough to describe them. Receiving this charge is somehow a "privilege".

Is that what women are fighting to get a piece of?

I can see it now, "I sent my wife packing because she was financially abusing us and wasn't being a good provider. She refused to work harder to support the family and insisted on selfish wardrobe upgrades "for work". Clearly selfish and not concerned with the welfare of her family (what a deadbeat)."

 

[SearchingStudent]

Again, do Christian women generally prefer to stay at home and take care of her families (in ideal circumstances) OR do they prefer to find fulfillment in the workplace, all other things being equal? How about those with feminist ideals?

Considering I was a SAHM when my children were small and entered the workforce after my now X tossed us out like yesterday's garbage, it seemed that making a living was preferable to either welfare or homelessness.

Now, the kids are grown and gone. My husband is on full disability. Looks like it's up to me to maintain our home.

IF I still had small children, I'd want to be able to stay home. But, I don't. So, I won't.

But...to your way of thinking, I should stay home, be thankful for my husband's pittance of a disability check and slowly descend into poverty and homelessness...not to mention, we'd lose our medical coverage and I'm positive you see the current health care legislation as from the devil himself. Hey...it's all good...you want me to stay home and be the good little wifey while watching my husband slowly die from a painful disease that you would deny him treatment for.

That is NOT the life I have chosen. It will not be the life I will choose.

So glad my husband is infintely more enlightened. He's actually proud of my achievements.

 

[dallasapple]

Again, do Christian women generally prefer to stay at home and take care of her families (in ideal circumstances) OR do they prefer to find fulfillment in the workplace, all other things being equal?

In IDEAL circumstances..and in REALITY it isnt ONE or the OTHER..most women WANT and DO both..

Its entirely possible that you havent considered that women JUST like men dont VIEW that if they have children they have to PICK which one they want ..a career or children .and that BOTH are fullfilling in thier own ways ...as well as the fact RAISING children doesnt take the womans ENTIRE "work life" either..

Very few women actually stay home after children and NEVER work(earnign money) again..and even FEWER women NEVER have worked(earnign money) in their lifetime just get married start having babies stay home raise chldren cook and clean send the children off on thier own and "retire".. and thats not just in TODAYS society..

Dallas

 

[BigDaddy4]

Care to trouble yourself to actually cite references or should we take your word for it?

As I recall you telling me once, "do your own research, I don't have time to do it for you".

When you want to start providing references to the outragious claims and accusations you are making, then I will follow suit with my legitimate, believable claims that can be found by anyone who can use a search engine. I wouldn't want to deprive you of that pleasure.

 

[dallasapple]

Is that what women are fighting to get a piece of?

Women fought /fight to be able to have an interest..and be good at something OTHER than raisign children and to be able to GET PAID for it..Women HAVE ambitions other than gettign married and raisign children and the fight has been and is to be ALLOWED to go for it if they want to..Includign opting NOT EVER to get married and have chdilren and be dedicated to her career soley and whatever kind of personal life she ahs other than "marreid with children"..or not be HANDICAPPED because she is a female is she NEEDS to go to work..or because she wants to go to work.

its very simple..WOMEN were no more BORN to get married have children and that be the CENTER of her ENTIRE existence and where 100% of her energy goes her enitire life into any more than a MAN is..

Dallas

 

[I Art Laughing]

Considering I was a SAHM when my children were small and entered the workforce after my now X tossed us out like yesterday's garbage, it seemed that making a living was preferable to either welfare or homelessness.

Now, the kids are grown and gone. My husband is on full disability. Looks like it's up to me to maintain our home.

IF I still had small children, I'd want to be able to stay home. But, I don't. So, I won't.

But...to your way of thinking, I should stay home, be thankful for my husband's pittance of a disability check and slowly descend into poverty and homelessness...not to mention, we'd lose our medical coverage and I'm positive you see the current health care legislation as from the devil himself. Hey...it's all good...you want me to stay home and be the good little wifey while watching my husband slowly die from a painful disease that you would deny him treatment for.

That is NOT the life I have chosen. It will not be the life I will choose.

So glad my husband is infintely more enlightened. He's actually proud of my achievements.

You dodged the question. So you would prefer to stay at home and have your husband work over your present life?

There is nothing in your post but personal attacks and diversion.

 

[I Art Laughing]

As I recall you telling me once, "do your own research, I don't have time to do it for you".

When you want to start providing references to the outragious claims and accusations you are making, then I will follow suit with my legitimate, believable claims that can be found by anyone who can use a search engine. I wouldn't want to deprive you of that pleasure.

I have, repeatedly, you ignored them.

Do your own research, don't expect me to take your assertions at face value.

Who is voting with "their" dollars......(hint: fully 1/2 of the GDP in this nation is spent by women and they account for 85% of all purchases.)

 

[SearchingStudent]

Actually, no...I would not prefer to stay home now. I did that while I was unemployed. Found it unbelievably boring.

Sounds like you're all uptight over the fact that there's been inflation. It happens. It's been happening for the last however many hundreds of years.

Like it was said upthread, the heads of fortune 500 companies are overwhelmingly MALE. The heads of banks are overwhelmingly MALE. The Congress is overwhelmingly MALE. But, I guess in your universe they have no responsibility for any of the current economic mess. Its all our fault because we have the power.

Honestly it sounds like you are just bent out of shape because we DO have that kind of financial power and you don't. I will say it again, you have a remarkably mysogynist point of view and all you're doing is spewing sour grapes.

 

[I Art Laughing]

Women fought /fight to be able to have an interest..and be good at something OTHER than raisign children and to be able to GET PAID for it..Women HAVE ambitions other than gettign married and raisign children and the fight has been and is to be ALLOWED to go for it if they want to..Includign opting NOT EVER to get married and have chdilren and be dedicated to her career soley and whatever kind of personal life she ahs other than "marreid with children"..or not be HANDICAPPED because she is a female is she NEEDS to go to work..or because she wants to go to work.

its very simple..WOMEN were no more BORN to get married have children and that be the CENTER of her ENTIRE existence and where 100% of her energy goes her enitire life into any more than a MAN is..

Dallas

That is it Dallas. My case in point, "Women have ambition", and woe be to the ideology that would thwart the ambitions of women. Woe be to the religion that calls for sacrifice or suffering and self-denial. Woe be to the believer of a religion who would be so backward as to suggest that humans aren't the center of the universe and not God's in their own pantheon, that the world is not the amusement park for their vanity. Even suggesting such a thing makes you a horrific villain from a thankfully bygone era of the oppression of female ambition.

Forgive me as I chuckle (and then cringe) while considering a society built on greed and ambition (instead of self-sacrifice for the greater good) slouches towards its rightful destruction.

 

[I Art Laughing]

Actually, no...I would not prefer to stay home now. I did that while I was unemployed. Found it unbelievably boring.

Sounds like you're all uptight over the fact that there's been inflation. It happens. It's been happening for the last however many hundreds of years.

Like it was said upthread, the heads of fortune 500 companies are overwhelmingly MALE. The heads of banks are overwhelmingly MALE. The Congress is overwhelmingly MALE. But, I guess in your universe they have no responsibility for any of the current economic mess. Its all our fault because we have the power.

Honestly it sounds like you are just bent out of shape because we DO have that kind of financial power and you don't. I will say it again, you have a remarkably mysogynist point of view and all you're doing is spewing sour grapes.

Where has inflation been happening? Has this inflation been continuous or has it ever been controlled? Do you even understand the causes of inflation? Any idea what "quantitative easing" or monetization is? Cite references please.

Is it "sour grapes" when women complain about the supposed "wage gap"? Or do you fall on a convenient double standard here?

More personal attacks? How does that jibe with your faith?