tuscl

Traditional Gender Roles are a Good Thing and Should be Brought Back

CC99
Say yes to the sex industry!
Sunday, November 24, 2019 11:17 AM
How much sense does it make to create an economy where families are expected to have two incomes? How much does it benefit the average person to have so many families on two incomes that wages slowly decrease due to the expectation that there will be two incomes, to the point where trying to support a family on one income is much more difficult to do? Does this benefit women? Not according to science. Even Slate, a very liberal website, has data that shows that housewives are happier than working women... [view link] In addition, the gap between men's happiness and women's happiness is significantly larger in progressive, feminist countries than it is in traditional ones. The countries with the smallest gap between men and women's happiness were Tunisia, Japan, China, Peru, and Mexico. The countries where women were least happy in compared to men was Iceland, Finland, Luxembourg, Austria, and the Netherlands. [view link] I one time told a girl that the characteristics I look for in a potential wife are traits that show she will be a good mother to my children. Her response was "I think I'm gonna barf." Well, I'm sorry you don't like it, but there's a logical reason for why men prefer traditionally feminine girls. Traditionally feminine girls are sweeter and more kind which means they are going to provide a warmer household for your kids to grow up in and for you to come back home to. Traditionally feminine women are more loyal and less likely to cheat on you. Traditionally feminine women respect men more and don't see men as their competition. Traditionally feminine women are less likely to divorce you. Science proves again and again that the healthiest environment for children to grow up in, is a two parent household where they are raised by their biological parents, who are married. I can also deduce it likely that children grow up better if the mother is not stressed out by a full time working schedule. Children grow up better when their mother is around to take care of them. So why is it considered "sexist" to advocate for a system that clearly works better for children and by all objective measurements, makes women's lives better too?

70 comments

  • RandomMember
    •
    5 years ago
    @CC The paragraph about career women being less feminine, not as sweet, inferior as a parent, and more likely to cheat on you is...bizarre. You'll probably change your mind as you get older.
  • gawker
    •
    5 years ago
    I have two daughters who both are well educated successful career women. They both have stay at home husbands who have chosen to be with the pre-school kids. Do you think this works?
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @Gawker it is functional but not optimal. @RandomMember the stress of a full time job makes it much more difficult to do so. It's going to be harder on average to devote time to your kids if you work full time.
  • nicespice
    •
    5 years ago
    Hmm, whatever your personal viewpoints are, is just simply what it is. But when you simultaneously have another opinion, I think it’s a good idea to do some self reflecting on your values. —>“November 20, 2019 @skibum I have absolutely no desire to ever work even close to 60+ hours. That sounds like my definition of hell. I value my free time a lot. I don't want to have the majority of my waking hours consumed by work obligations. The way I see it. If you don't have the time to enjoy your money you might as well not have it.”
  • Fun_Loving_Fella
    •
    5 years ago
    You’re saying that more women working has caused wages to go down. How do you know that it’s not that lower wages have created the need for more women to work?
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @NiceSpice I don't need to make a huge amount of money. I'm not really trying to make as much money as possible but rather enough money to provide a nice life for everyone in my family. The way my future looks working those kind of hours will be unnecessary to make sufficient income. That kind of helps my point though that we should have an economy where one parent working or at least only one parent working full time should be enough rather than having an expectation that both parents work full time. @FLF Because lower wages happened after second wave feminism, not before it.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    Did they go somewhere? Last I checked, men still can't bear kids or breastfeed them either. There are plenty of women who still want to be with their children during the formative years and plenty of men who have found them. It's all a matter of finding the right partner.
  • Fun_Loving_Fella
    •
    5 years ago
    I don’t know what caused lower wages, but I’m skeptical about this theory that second wave feminism was the cause.
  • nicespice
    •
    5 years ago
    Traditionally feminine women like to spend money on things so they can have pretty outfits and pretty homes and social things like dinner parties. 🤷🏻‍♀️
  • Jascoi
    •
    5 years ago
    I wish my wife had fessed up to the judge that she made some income too. winds up costing me a lot of money because of her failure to be honest in court.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    ===> "Traditionally feminine women like to spend money on things so they can have pretty outfits and pretty homes and social things like dinner parties. " Always interesting to see one person from a highly stereotyped group applying the same type of broad brush thinking to categorize another group. 😉
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @NiceSpice She will definitely have enough money for that kind of thing. As well as cool vacations. I have three career paths available for me in the future. All of which look to make pretty decent amounts of money for lower-middle amounts of work. @RickDugan You're not wrong. But a lot of people these days claim that they are sexist. Right now we're having a pretty calm discussion but I made a similar post on another forum and got blasted for it. Which doesn't make sense to me because the biggest result of them is that women have significantly less stress and get to spend more time around their children.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    ^ CC, over 25% of mothers currently stay at home. Also, in a recent Gallup poll, over 50% of those who do work outside the house say that they would stay at home if they could. So the moral of the story is that you should pick your other forums better. In my day-to-day life, I move around in a world where this model is quite normal.
  • 48-Cowboy
    •
    5 years ago
    Grow some balls and eat some beans CC9o
  • nicespice
    •
    5 years ago
    “Always interesting to see one person from a highly stereotyped group applying the same type of broad brush thinking to categorize another group. 😉” Why does that affect me? I’m not the one complaining about how dancers are stereotyped. I will confess, however, to a little bit of trolling. And sure I used the 1950s bored housewife stereotype. But that stereotype came about thanks to the rise of kitchen appliances and other things that reduced the time it took for homemakers to do their jobs. Something which hasn’t gone away. Not that the value of one’s time has to be measured in dollars, but for most people some form of employment helps out with that process of being satisfied with something. The value for an *individual woman* taking care of a child versus employment for is something I won’t comment on and imo best worked out between her and the father. But there was a legitimate reason for the changes in the workforce historically, and is what it is. And no amount of crying about how society should kick women out of the workforce and procreate with an upstanding man like CC is going to make things better, even in a scenario where all that was implemented.
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @NiceSpice There's also way more entertainment options available nowadays than there was at the time it happened though. There's so many entertainment options available nowadays that boredom seems unlikely. My mom has certainly never been bored with all the books she reads and video games she plays. At this point, if you have internet access, you have access to almost every book, TV show, and game that's ever been made and its only a click away. If you want to socialize with other people there's lots of clubs for that you can find through the internet. Neither my mother who's been a stay at home housewife for close to twenty years nor my recently retired father has had any trouble entertaining themselves without a job.
  • twentyfive
    •
    5 years ago
    ^ Yet you still make contrarian arguments with as much nonsense as possible, grow up !
  • Fun_Loving_Fella
    •
    5 years ago
    I don’t get this entertainment angle. So women should stay home because now they won’t be bored? How about women who want to stay home can find a way to make that possible, and women who want to work can work? You’re a man who doesn’t want to work a lot, so you’ve got it all figured out. You’re going to get a job that pays a lot to do very little. Good for you.
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @FLF I mean we're not going to force people to do anything, but there's definitely a large segment of the population who have grown up being told it is sexist. Housewives are frequently attacked by people who essentially claim that doing things like that is the female version of being a cuck. Thus leading some women to not want to be a housewife out of a feeling that it isn't a respectable way of life or that they are betraying women by doing so. I'm saying that logically speaking, there's no reason for this perception given that the housewife lifestyle or at least, working part time and not full time is what the vast majority of women actually want due to the much lower levels of stress that these lifestyles entail.
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @TwentyFive I have a tendency to be suspicious of popular opinion. Make of that what you will. I have a feeling its never going to change though, cause I've been a contrarian my entire life.
  • Fun_Loving_Fella
    •
    5 years ago
    I agree that if a woman wants to stay home, she should be allowed to. If a man wants to say home he should be allowed to. Either way they’ve got to find a way to make ends meet. I think the criticism of stay at home moms is more of a reaction to people who want that to be their only option.
  • Fun_Loving_Fella
    •
    5 years ago
    > I have a tendency to be suspicious of popular opinion. Whether or not an idea is popular is lousy criteria to go off of when forming your own opinion.
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @FLF My estimations are that if money and social factors were not at play, 30-40 of women would be stay at home moms with no employment, 50-60% would work part time, and 10% would work full time. I mainly think it is a bad idea for two parents to work full time. It is a lousy criteria but people like me serve a purpose of making sure that group-think doesn't get out of control if we enter a certain group. Its not going to be accurate every time, but we do serve a purpose. Sometimes people like me can poke holes into things that nobody thought of. If I say something is stupid and claim you're only agreeing with it because you're following the herd, and you decide that a popular idea really is the right one, then you've listened to criticism, gotten the opposing view, and thus have a better informed decision. But it would be stupid to place me in a position of agreeing with the majority which my mental state is not designed for.
  • Fun_Loving_Fella
    •
    5 years ago
    You should work on your mental state so that you’re able to agree with reality instead of disagreeing with the majority. Those two things are not always mutually exclusive, and by acting like they are you lose most of your credibility. Also... > My estimations are that if money and social factors were not at play, 30-40 of women would be stay at home moms with no employment, 50-60% would work part time, and 10% would work full time. Pulling stats out of thin air doesn’t help your credibility either. If you can show your work I’d be interested to see how you got those numbers.
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    A poll by Washington Post found that "part time work" was the most popular option among women. [view link] In Japan where housewife role is considered more of a respectable job, 34% of women polled said they wanted to be housewives. Given that less Japanese men were actually cited as wanting their wife to be a housewife who stays at home all day than women were cited saying they wanted to be one, it seems to me that we're getting more of an accurate picture here. [view link] This tells me the majority of women probably don't want to be unemployed housewives but that a significant minority would if it was more respected. Thus the 30-40% number. The 50-60% number comes from the Washington Post article saying that its the most popular option among women. They gave 50% so I expanded the possibility a little further. I suppose it could be amended that the number likely to want to work full time is between 10-15%. Or perhaps even 10-20%, but I doubt that it would be higher than 20%. And I also doubt it would be below 10%. If a woman really wants to work full time though and its really important to her, the dad should either work part time or stay at home because two parents working full time is a bad idea.
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    I can agree with reality in plenty of cases but I am designed mentally to look for holes in popular opinions. And this is for the better that I look for those holes because someone has to. If nobody is designed to think that way, we're fucked.
  • rockie
    •
    5 years ago
    Men have the capacity to offer the same love and support to their children as women. It’s all a matter of the individual person choosing to do so, despite societies biases. The warm and nurturing support system in my household growing up was more my father than my mother. My children were lucky enough to have two working parents, who shared all aspects of child rearing and at least one of us was there for them at all times and every event of their childhood. Not all women are predisposed to be the loving nurturer (after birth) and not all men are as incapable nurturers as many choose to believe.
  • rockie
    •
    5 years ago
    The most objectionable aspect of the OP’s original post is the suggestion that child rearing is not stressful in the traditional one income family dynamic (yesterday, today, or tomorrow). There are some people that do a phenomenal job in all aspects of the endeavor and therefore it is not a burden to them.
  • gSteph
    •
    5 years ago
    'I think I'm gonna barf' is often shorthand for 'I disagree with many of your assumptions that lead to that premise' Unless it's shorthand for 'why you sayin that, we just met'
  • pistola
    •
    5 years ago
    "I one time told a girl that the characteristics I look for in a potential wife are traits that show she will be a good mother to my children. Her response was "I think I'm gonna barf."" - No wonder you have issues getting laid. This is about the most beta cuck dumb ass thing to say. Do you think a woman gets her vagina waxed, her eyes plucked, her nails done, her asshole bleached, spends too much money on mac cosmetics, wears uncomfortable high heels so her ass sticks out, etc. to be told she might make a good mother? No! She wants to be told she looks like a sfone cold fox and that ass is making your dick hard. What a soy boy beta cuck comment. Never speak those words again.
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @Pistola That's not the reason why she was offended. She was offended by me saying I have a preference for girls that have traditionally feminine traits of motherhood. Anything that smacks of traditionalism offends a lot of young women. I think what you described falls under the category of wifely duties lmao. @Gsteph Yeah I don't really care if it bothered her. If hearing somebody think differently from her bothers her that much then she needs to learn to not be that way.
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @Heaving If I could I'd marry Ako from Kiss x Sis. She's truly the perfect girl :). Assuming her affections are turned onto me of course.
  • nicespice
    •
    5 years ago
    ^ And of course she’s a 16 year old. 🙃
  • gSteph
    •
    5 years ago
    wifely duties ? she needs to learn to not be that way ? Hope that works out for you 🙂
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    For women to be employed doing bull shit, just to pay the bills, is wasteful, just like it is for men to be employed doing bull shit, just to pay the bills. But this is what Neo-Liberalism / Libertarianism demand, full compliance with all social expectations. But for women and men to be engaged in work which uses their skills and agrees with their values, is wonderful. WOMEN ARE NOT GOING BACK TO DOMESTICITY! Like they use to say, "You are one man away from destitution. And the middle-class family only exists to exploit and abuse children. The middle-class lives in bad faith. [view link] And then of course in my organization, besides bonobo level sex saturation, women who want to will be doing all the things that the men are doing. And some women and men we will make into serial entrepreneurs, their day job money paying for it, their companies where they hold all the equity and control. Women spilled blood to obtain emancipation from domesticity. Extremely good, as is the book: [view link] SJG Guess Who - Undone [view link]
  • skibum609
    •
    5 years ago
    The middle class lives in bad faith? God you are literally the dumbest fuck on earth. Fucking sociopath.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    Doesn't admit to itself that it has choices and that it makes its own values. Merely a reactionary cultural identity. Women get hurt, men get hurt, most of all, children are completely exploited. SJG
  • skibum609
    •
    5 years ago
    Said the "man"who lives to exploit children - SJG the king of the trannie front room make out session.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    ^^^^^^^ You are totally full of shit, skibum. Your daily ration is ready: [view link] SJG
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    Akashi-san is a good choice. That's the exact reason why I liked Tatami Galaxy as well. Watashi's experience seemed to eerily mirror my own at college.
  • Fun_Loving_Fella
    •
    5 years ago
    > she needs to learn to not be that way. 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 Yeah, she’s the one who has ways that she needs to learn not to be. It’s always other people, not you.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    In my view, most young women will claim to be feminists. But the vast majority have no idea what feminism has ever been about. They are just part of the herd, and they say a lot of stuff just because it makes them sound good. Nevertheless I do strongly support feminism and want there to be more of it, not less. Interesting group which I do support: [view link] And I also support the Russian girls, "Pussy Riot". SJG
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    It seems that for whatever reasons, CC99 has decided to adopt a reactionary identity. Such is the power of right wing hate media. SJG
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @SJG It wasn't the right wing media. It was the left that caused it. I only started watching Fox News after I was convinced the SJW ideology was dangerous. The SJW ideology is extremely tribalistic and seeks to destroy everyone that opposes it. Even people who are not SJWs can act like them in instances where they consider a person's opinions to be "offensive." I don't think you understand how dangerous this ideology is to you, even as someone who agrees with them on many things. The reason why I keep bringing up the short skirts and makeup argument is because you also hold opinions that SJW types will consider offensive. And if you give them enough power, they will want to destroy your life for those opinions. The right does not have the power or will at this current moment to do that. When they do, you will see me ranting against them as much as I am opposed to SJWs right now. There are opinions on both the left and right that I hold dear to my heart. On the right, preserving traditional notions of love, marriage, and the family is most important to me. On the left, I don't know if you're aware of this, but I believe in completely equal moral value between animals and humans. Not equality in the sense that we allow cows to run for president. But I believe that any creature that feels pain, suffering, and pleasure deserves to be treated with the same moral value as any other. I don't think we should see lower intelligence or less developed brains as an excuse to abuse them. Its why I committed myself to vegetarianism at an incredibly young age and have never looked back. One belief I hold dear, however, that will switch depending on which side of the political spectrum I think is threatening it most, is the idea that your opinions should not be used against you as a person. People should be allowed to toy around with ideas, debate them, and discuss the merits and downfalls even of things that are insane and radical without having people hate them and try to destroy their lives. If a person cannot debate something without trying to destroy the character of the person arguing against them, trying to make them suffer real life consequences for their beliefs or hurt them in order to make them stop believing it, then it shows how insecure that person is in their beliefs. I believe on some level you agree with this as well. Which is why I think your continued support of SJWism simply comes from not understanding the way they really are.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    "SJW ideology is extremely tribalistic and seeks to destroy everyone that opposes it." I won't deny that there is some truth to this. Some liberals are moralistic, just like some feminists. Frederick Engels thought Capitalism was immoral. But Karl Marx no, he knew that the deprivations of Capitalism were what would bring about Communism. Simone de Beauvoir was not moralistic. Deleuze and Guattari were influenced by Feminism, but they are also following Nietzsche. They are not moralistic. Foucault was not moralistic. Most people who call themselves Feminists, or who call themselves Liberals, they have no idea what they are talking about. Jean Baudrillard said that Marx was wrong to base his ideas on ownership of the means of production. [view link] [view link] Rather, it seems that what the Right controls are these reactionary identity schemes. You should know this, as you are nearing graduation from a very good school. But there seem to be holes in what you are learning. Vast Left critiques and re-writes of Marx and Engels. Most of what you seem to be calling SJW's are simply people who don't want denigrating speech in the work place or in commercial advertising. Certainly the 1st Amendment has never meant that such speech has to be allowed in either such venue. I would never want to issue such speech in such a venue. Here on TUSCL it is saturated with it, by a large number of posters. But I do not agree with it and would not tolerate it in a more public venue. FOX news is pretty much all hate speech against "liberals" and against "feminists" As pure news, FOX has never had any merit whatsoever. That Roger Ailes got his start in lizard brain political advertising, he is a real creep. SJG
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    I want to tell the story here of my relations with a young woman back when I was in college. This was in my last year. Though actually I had seen the same woman and found her to be a problem back in my first year. So in this last year, I had been seeing her, and she was fucking with my head. She made up this test and tried to administer it to me, "To see how confident I was". Then when we were in a restaurant the issue of what to order or when to leave came up, and so I asked her what she wanted to do. She said, "Don't do that. I like really confident men." Well, I was not interested in bossing her around or in putting on any show, or in doing any play acting either. I was just trying to make my way in life, getting through college. Later this woman wanted us to have lunch at the Student Center. It sounded fishy. I got it out of her that she was just going to tell me that we were through. She just wanted to use that as her stage. So I told her, "That would be a waste of time and money". She did not like that. This young woman had one summer worked in a Denny's type restaurant. So she was experienced with older men, and probably with their advances. She may have even had guys trying to get her into P4P. Women grow up faster. They have tits, guys go after them. For a young man it is not all the simple. I found this woman to be a pain in the ass. No telling her this, but she was an idiot too. But is this feminism, is that a problem? I would say that the problem is that it is not enough feminism, it is more a reactionary adaptation of feminism. Before feminism, women did not have "relationships", they sought husbands. They did not want to be called Old Maids, they did not want to be Spinsters. Until very recent times, always seen as father and spinster daughter. [view link] A young woman knew she just has to take the best she can get. Not like that today. They don't have to be married. And best not to do it too soon. So like in this magazine article I read, I think National Lampoon. They were making fun of the "Cosmo Girl". She thinks 100% in stereotypes. And so men are always, "Business Executives" or they are "Lumberjacks". This girl was like that, making "confidence" into a moral issue. And she was being a real shit. Confidence comes naturally from rising to challenges and delivering well. It is not an act. I was not a Business Executive or a Lumberjack, I was just like she, a College Student. So feminism has given her some freedom, but I was not one who wanted to take that freedom from her. I just expected her to behave like a decent human being. What does more aggressive feminism look like? joycejohnsonbooks [view link] Teaches English in NYC. People set her up to meet Jack Kerouac. He was a struggling writer. Usually broke. So Johnson wrote that she bought him diner, and that that was a new experience for her, buying a man diner. They had an on and off relationship for some time, and she has written about this. Feminism tries to release everyone from established gender roles and norms. My girls was not thinking anything like this. Kerouac had a hard time in those years. Hard to get anything published. Finally Town ant the City. Provided some income for a brief while, but not much. Only many years into this with On the Road, did he finally come to have regular money. My girl was a conformist, and enforcer of conformism. A real feminist would not think like that. In my experience generally women will try to steer you into more conformist and money based rolls. If you want to do things which have value in and of themselves, to live more like an artist, you have to stand up to them. And actually, feminism is your ally. SJG
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    ^I don't think feminism directly tells women to create confidence tests or shit-tests. However, imagine this exact same scenario. But let's take us back to the 1950s. Let's say you are 21 years old, and she is 19. I don't know if that's how old you guys were but let's just go with it for now. In the 1950s, the average woman married at the age of 20. A 19 year old girl would've known several friends who were married already. if a woman didn't marry by the time she was 25, she was considered a spinster. Given the above factors, how do you think that might've changed this girl's behavior in the restaurant?
  • mark94
    •
    5 years ago
    There’s a much more practical argument for one of the spouses staying home. Between the added income tax, child care expense, and other work related expense ( commuting, work clothes, etc ), a second income often brings only a small increase in net take home pay. If one spouse is making $80,000 while the other is making $40,000, the true value of that $40,000 might be less than $10,000. That person’s time would be better spent managing the family’s budget and looking for ways to cut expenses ( such as cooking at home rather than restaurants ).
  • Fun_Loving_Fella
    •
    5 years ago
    Sorry DC, but nowadays you typically have to find a girl who actually likes you instead of just getting to have one simply by virtue of being male.
  • Aspen_Holiday
    •
    5 years ago
    I think several woman would be open to the idea in the right situation. I wouldn’t be opposed to it so long as my partner could provide the standard of living I am used to. And I would never give up my ‘hobby’ job as it keeps me happy. And involves children and animals so theoretically kids could tag along. One of my employees regularly brings her kids. With that said, despite my degree, gaps in resumes look bad. I wouldn’t want to be in a situation where a relationship went bad and I was stuck because alone I would struggle financially due to lack of recent experience in my field. So I would have a stipulation in the pre-nup in regards to how long they would be required to provide alimony based off how long I was out of work to fulfill the duties of being a housewife. And as far as getting married without one, absolutely not. My parents said to ALWAYS get one. That way should you get divorced, the terms of that divorce were set when everyone was in a good place mentally and the terms of your divorce wouldn’t default to the laws in the state you reside.
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    ^And? Your point is?
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    ^That was meant for FLF
  • CC99
    •
    5 years ago
    @Aspen_Holiday That all sounds like it would be reasonable to me.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    CC99 wrote " ^I don't think feminism directly tells women to create confidence tests or shit-tests. However, imagine this exact same scenario. But let's take us back to the 1950s. Let's say you are 21 years old, and she is 19. I don't know if that's how old you guys were but let's just go with it for now. In the 1950s, the average woman married at the age of 20. A 19 year old girl would've known several friends who were married already. if a woman didn't marry by the time she was 25, she was considered a spinster. Given the above factors, how do you think that might've changed this girl's behavior in the restaurant? " And then FunLoving wrote: "Sorry DC, but nowadays you typically have to find a girl who actually likes you instead of just getting to have one simply by virtue of being male." Mark this down, because I am in agreement with FunLoving, and I think CC99 has just got this entire matter completely wrong! Aspen, Feminist leaders used to say, "You are one man away from destitution", encouraging women to feel free to pursue careers. Mark94, telling a woman to pursue a career, just for the money, is as dumb as telling a man to pursue a career just for the money. We cannot live like that, certainly not now, if we ever could. CC99, about the girl in the restaurant, women used to marry younger. But I do not want to return to that or ever try to push that on them. I was very young and very inexperienced. I did not understand or have experience with coming on to a girl with the idea of hurrying her to the bedroom. As far as the girl herself, she was a product of compromised feminism, reactionary feminism, the kind of ideas in Helen Gurly Brown's Cosmopolitan Magazine. And this is a lesser version of the kind of feminism that has the additional money go into a higher mortgage payment. That is how the women are justifying themselves, the pricier house, "better neighborhood, better schools, for the kids." [view link] It is an example of how the middle-class lives, Bad Faith, not admitting that it creates its own values, and looking for things to hide behind. It is not feminism, it is a shadow there of. So the girl I was in the restaurant with was one who should have been either quickly fucked, or should have been long behind me. Probably both. A better one would not have been a Business Major and would not have been talking about all the kinds of things this one talked about. With a better girl there would have been some evidence of Bohemian Thinking in her life, and in the people she associated with. She would not have seen it as her role to judge men and separate us into the up and coming and the not so. She would not have been influenced by things like Cosmopolitan Magazine. She might have been influenced by the Feminist Alexandra Kolentai, or she might have been influenced by Simone de Beauvoir, or by a highly pro-sex feminist writer such as Catherine Texier. And she might have been a stripper, first found in high heels and makeup. But in those days I knew absolutely nothing about that. [view link] That girl was a conformist, a parent pleaser. Like I said, most of the women who claim to be feminists don't even understand what the word means. The reason I was with that one was just a testimony to my own social conservatism, and even, my own middle-class Bad Faith. Women are not going to go back to domesticity, though I will admit here that it seems like some could be bribed into it. Domesticity is a trap. And we have had enough of the "mommy wars" It was said that Bill Clinton was enjoying a Gender Gap, a big margin with women over his opponents. But when it came to Al Gore, he was only enjoying a Marriage Gap. That is, single women went for him, whereas married women were going to George W. Bush. And then think about it, who listens to platitudes and posturing anyway, married women. Feminism has left many promises unfulfilled, but that is because it has not gone any where's near far enough. Other's have written that French women have better love lives, and that is because they just go with it. Whereas in the US we have this huge self-improvement industry that writes to women and makes it all into shit. This is where the confidence and shit tests would be coming from. All completely reactionary. Woman who was able to break with this, very interesting book, a most telling pivotal chapter, lives in San Francisco, graduated from SFSU. At the start, the women are so neurotic that they are making themselves miserable. But they finally do find the way out of their fly bottle. As I would say it, it just amounts to going for it, and it means men who would be considered unmarriageable due to age or lifestyle. In a sense, they opened up by becoming cougars. This completely changed them, long over due corrective. [view link] Astute observers have pointed out that the Sexual Revolution did not start in the 60's, it started in the 1880's. [view link] Before there were only parlor courtships. So the rules of marriage eligibility were in full force. Access to unmarried women was tightly controlled. Then in about the 1930's at some Midwestern colleges, the dating script began to be substituted. But it was always elitist. And then in some social venues today you have the hook-up script. But none of these things are that egalitarian. Some places today you have sex parties, like Swingers Clubs for single people. But usually you have to bring your own woman to get in. [view link] There was this woman who ran these "Cake Parties", London, NYC, San Francisco, like a single women's fantasy SEX ON SITE party. She also has written a book about this. And then we also have more and better forms of P4P. So things are improving, just slowly. Feminism has never been the problem, it remains part of the solution. And of course my organization will be the Ultimate Remedy, converting your relationship with sex from a condition of scarcity to one of super abundance. SJG Frampton Midnight Special [view link]
  • skibum609
    •
    5 years ago
    Your organization exists already and is called: NAMBLA.
  • rickdugan
    •
    5 years ago
    ===> "I one time told a girl that the characteristics I look for in a potential wife are traits that show she will be a good mother to my children. Her response was "I think I'm gonna barf."" It's what I looked for, especially when I hit my 30s. But you're not supposed to tell them that upfront, lol. There are some girls you marry and some you just fuck. You don't tell a fun time girl that you're looking for a potential baby mother because she's already a train wreck and it just messes her up yet more, meaning no pussy. You just fuck her damned good and be sure not to put a baby in her belly - leave that for the moron that wants to spend 20+ years paying child support or living with a useless headcase of a woman who inevitably will raise equally fucked up kids.
  • skibum609
    •
    5 years ago
    Traditional gender roles are over. In the past five years my wife has remodelled both bathrooms; rebuilt a wall in the addition and remodelled the basement, except for carpet which is not worth the effort. The idea I could do any of what she did even 10% as well is laughable. She even hard-wired our smoke detectors.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    5 years ago
    Most women do eventually seek marriage, or at least long term relationships. They just don't feel as pressed to do this as early, putting education and career building ahead. And then for many what they seek does not come. So there are more unattached women around. Over all the world is more open and free because of feminism than it would be without it. Having full time homemakers results in women having low social status, and it tends to promote certain types of child abuse. Most middle-class child abuse is impossible to prosecute because it revolves around doctor's of some sort or another. So the doctor's license insulates the parents. If the parents were taking the child to a fortune teller or a channeler, and that person was convincing the child that they had some sort of a defect or difference, there would be legal intervention. But in our society doctors pretty much have carte blanch to do what they want and say that it is for the good of the child. And this helps the parents be able to claim that they are "good parents". Being able to claim that is the reason they had children in the first place. So one explosive growth area has been this Autism/Asperger's/Neurological Difference Hoax. [view link] Medical Child Abuse used to be called Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy, then it was called Facetious Disorder. Usually the parent, most always a mother, needs to create some need to justify her existence, and create some justification for being outside of the labor market. Very good book: [view link] And this is from Rhode Island where the hospital in Providence has the state's only isolation ward, so they get children of all races and socio-economic levels. Gotta read this: [view link] We have Neo-Liberalism, which is the co-option of the goals of Enlightenment Liberalism in order to create an oppressive society, Supply Side Economics. Well I am calling out Neo-Feminism, the co-option of the goals of Feminsm, in order to create oppression and make women into strivers, similar to the ways in which most men are strivers. It creates no freedom, just more oppression. Often closely coupled to the bogus doctrine known as Libertarianism. [view link] But as it pertains to elite colleges I strongly recommend this book: [view link] As this book explains, in these elite schools, even though the academics are tougher, they have a lower average age of students than schools which it is easier to get into. So getting in then mostly depends upon how wealthy your parents are. Most students have never lived anywhere but with their parents in while in high school, and now at the college. Most find the tough academics incompatible with even part time employment. So these students have no other social basis for their lives except being a college student. So for a man this means that you will be seen as immature. For women, now following Neo-Feminism and looking forward to high powered careers, the last then they want is an intimate relationship. What they want to after they have their career running, to be able to marry a man who can show that he already has that himself. So before that, it is kind of an extended adolescence, often with very narrow standards for who is legitimate and who is not. I lived through this, but it was hard. Elliot Rodger did not live through it. He believed the idiocy of this Manosphere Right Wing Misogynist Movement. This thread was started by CC99. He seems to be living though that bizzare world of the elite college right now. He has an advantage though as he does know that there is something strange about it. In the work place, girls will be throwing themselves at you. You will be continually having to dodge them. But judging by now, it may not look that way. Nevertheless, what the Men's Rights Anti-Feminists have to say is nonsense. So CC99, my heart goes out to you. In this Men't Rights Anti-Feminist Anti-SJW Movement you have been listening to poison. If you can make it through college, things in the work place will be completely different. SJG
  • 48-Cowboy
    •
    4 years ago
    I put her on ignore because she wouldn’t stop harassing me in the weeks that followed. Several other people were in that discussion and either moved on because it was just another internet debate or don’t even remember it anymore.
  • IceyLoco
    •
    4 years ago
    Women submit to men they love.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    4 years ago
    Mostly women have decided that domesticity is a trap, and so they do not want it. And I agree. Women trapped at home raising children is, in my view, a toxic situation. SJG
  • IceyLoco
    •
    4 years ago
    It is toxic. And for most it simply isn't economically viable any more anyways
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    4 years ago
    Women who only know domesticity are not very interesting to know. And I don't think they are good for children. The Israeli Kibbutz movement, started in 1910, had as one of its goals, freeing women from domesticity. Giving women other things in their lives also lowers the birth rate, which I see as a major determinant of our future viability. SJG
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    4 years ago
    Women trapped in domesticity tended to be the ones on prescription meds, the little yellow pill, "Mother's Little Helper". I see one bright light that today an increasing number of children are born to single women, like 40%, and the number is rising. SJG
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    4 years ago
    ^^^^^ They say that during the heights of the Victorian Era, for each well off white family living the life which was advertised, it took the labors of two working class families living much lower on the hog, and out of compliance with the idea. The real thing which defines the middle-class family is the pedagogy manuals. And these are child exploitation pure and simple. SJG Black Sabbath [view link]
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    4 years ago
    Very good book, and I have read it most carefully. Ask me anything about it: [view link] SJG
  • crazyjoe
    •
    4 years ago
    I shit at McDonald's. What gender role does that play into?
  • nicespice
    •
    4 years ago
    Joe! Joe! Joe!
  • crazyjoe
    •
    4 years ago
    Lets settle this once and for all...
  • crazyjoe
    •
    4 years ago
    I challenge spice to a game of battle shits! [view link]
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion