Feminism is anti-woman

submitted by Schloss from files.catbox.moe

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (20 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

    Ugh, striving for a decent income has more to do with having enough money on hand to escape from an abusive marriage/relationship/family than it does anything else. Often times, women with no income get trapped in a situation that is inescapable and makes them mentally ill. No man is better than one who abuses you, that's just the way it is. The same men who claim to not want "cut throat career driven women" will lord their money-making power and "dominance" over their lesser-earning wives and girlfriends, making relationships with them tortuous. Guys want women with money, but don't want these same women's money making to interfere with 24/7 domestic toil and on-the-call-sex.

    [–][deleted]  (9 children)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

      I'm surprised, although maybe I'm thinking in terms of men seeking long-term relationships. It seems to me that the women who are poor or less-well-off are seen as social pariahs, "losers", "stupid" or "gold diggers". The women I know who have men hitting them up are nurses, managers, women with rich families, women with obvious cash coming in.

      Women who look "high maintenance" or have nice dyed/straightened hair, clear skin, perfect makeup, waxed bodies, nice clothes, gym memberships etc., often have money to burn in order to keep up those appearances. It costs more than most men think to look "porn star perfect". A good hair cut plus highlights is easily over $150 every 6 weeks, Brazilian wax $75 ever 6 weeks, gym membership $50 every month, makeup is ridiculous expensive. I'll stick with the gym at present since my job offers a discount, but most of the activities women must perform in order to appear "hot" are out of my reach.

      I know when I lived with my father and had a "nice address", I had a lot more men express interest in me. In hindsight, they thought "Daddy" would leave me some money. In reality, I wasn't his favorite, so I barely got table scraps while my older siblings had houses and cars bought for them. LOL. The appearance of having a rich parent will make people more interested in you than they'd otherwise be.

      Even then, someone like myself who earns average but less-than-ideal-wages can't afford "fun social things" like drinks and going to concerts. Women like me survive from paycheck to paycheck, this kind of eliminates women from dating. (I'm sure men fall into this predicament, too.) Most men don't want to pay, and I wouldn't expect them to do so... so I wouldn't take up an offer for an average restaurant if I knew I couldn't afford it. A lot of men have haphazard employment histories, so they will seek out women who have stable jobs with benefits over women who work as day-care assistant or check-out clerks at Wal-Mart-- at least in terms of long-term relationships.

      My views might be warped, but in my experience it pays to allow for the worst-case-scenario. I've seen way too many women trapped with horrendous spouses... and my observations started at a very young age. A woman with a meager income coming in has no way to protect herself in many places. We're talking drunks, drug users, emotional abusers, serial cheaters and most of my family is Catholic so they believe "marriage is forever", so I had to witness many of these women sink into depression, food/alcohol addiction, insanity.

      It's not much different than being a young adult child, underemployed, and trapped with abusive parents. There's no way out unless you make money, or have access to money... the longer you stay, the more your mind and spirit are destroyed from within, and the harder it becomes to leave.

      [–][deleted]  (7 children)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        I think many women who might have college degrees/stable jobs will still fall into the “low income” range... Same for men. Plenty of people with the right “qualifications” aren’t self sufficient, therefor they’re deemed “poor” and not “date-able”.

        [–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

        Rich family? Now we're getting into territory of what I described myself having experience with and it's a hurdle.

        Tbh, I think this is just you not wanting to put in the extra effort, which is fine btw. As a man, I agree with you. It is a hurdle.

        [–][deleted]  (3 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          Yes, I have. And yes, it is a hurdle.

          [–]wecandobetter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          It's not all juicy peaches to date a highly driven career man either. The trope of the neglected wife and family that become more and more distant and resentful of Mr Bacon-getter exists for a reason.

          [–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          That's true.

          [–]TheJamesRocket 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

          The same men who claim to not want "cut throat career driven women" will lord their money-making power and "dominance" over their lesser-earning wives and girlfriends, making relationships with them tortuous

          And that right there is the fundamental problem with modern women: You do not want to submit to your boyfriends or husbands. You want to retain power and keep your options open. You want to be able to shit test them. And then, once you get tired of your partner, or once you find a better man, you are free to leave the relationship.

          That is why society has turned into an unstable shitshow. The nature of the marriage contract has been altered beyond recognition. In the old times, when a woman wanted the status, protection, and money that came from marriage, she needed to submit to her husband. She was not allowed to 'keep her options open', because she would simply abandon her husband or cheat on him. This was ancient wisdom, something that is now called 'patriarchy' or 'misogyny.'

          Back in the old days, women were only allowed to have three different careers: They could be whores, they could be nuns, or they could be wives. It might seem cruel now, but the world was a tougher and more dangerous place back then. Society could not afford to give women lots of options, because they knew it would backfire on them. Women needed to have some skin in the game, they needed to be in it for better or worse. Because otherwise, marriage just doesn't work.

          [–]wecandobetter 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

          Sorry technology has freed up your sex-slaves *not sorry. And yes you're absolutely right. We do not want to submit to a man. Why do you deserve being 'submitted' to? When the power was all in their hands, men felt perfectly free to use that power to sleep around and mistreat their wives with full impunity. If it was such a rosebed to be under the tender hand of the male sex, why did women fight so hard to get out from under it? Yeah nah. We're not going back to the 1950s.

          [–]TheJamesRocket 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

          Sorry technology has freed up your sex-slaves *not sorry.

          The problem isn't about your characterisation of marriage as sex slavery (which just goes to show how warped your views are). The problem is that women like you want to have their cake and eat it: You want all the benefits that come with marriage without any of the sacrifices. And moreover, you want the freedom to divorce your husbands whenever you get bored, and use the government to rob him in the form of alimony.

          And yes you're absolutely right. We do not want to submit to a man.

          The institution of marriage is over 5000 years old, and can be traced back to the Sumerians. If women wanted to be provided for and protected, then they needed to submit to their husbands. That was how the contract worked. And it worked so well, in fact, that it enabled civilisation to flourish. 200 generations of women have submitted to the institution of marriage. It is only now, in the past 2 generations, that women have decided that marriage places unreasonable demands on them.

          Why do you deserve being 'submitted' to?

          Why do you deserve a man who will protect you, provide for you, and give you unconditional love (the kind that most woman are incapable of reciprocating)? Why should any man who decides to be your husband have to put up with your constant shit tests? What are you bringing to the table that would compensate for that?

          When the power was all in their hands, men felt perfectly free to use that power to sleep around and mistreat their wives with full impunity.

          That sort of thing never really happened much outside of your imagination. In the past, most of the adult population were married. There were not as many opportunitys for either men or women to cheat. There also weren't 'dating apps' that enabled random strangers to meet for casual sex.

          If it was such a rosebed to be under the tender hand of the male sex, why did women fight so hard to get out from under it?

          Because, lifelong monogamy is not really in the nature of women. They prefer serial monogamy. Women only want to be partners with a high status man, and even then only for a few years. They eventually get bored of the relationship, and look for another high status man. Marriage prevented them from pursuing this reproductive strategy. Women were forced to remain faithful to one man for life. So they were always filled with regret, wondering if they could have done better.

          Yeah nah. We're not going back to the 1950s.

          LOL, you feminists are always talking about women of the 1950s, as if this was the pinnacle of female oppression. In fact, it was nothing of the sort. Women in the 1950s were actually happier than women of today. It is the height of irony that in spite of all the 'advances' feminism has made, it has not only failed to make women any happier, but has actually made them unhappy. People continue to hold onto ideologys even though they hurt their quality of life.

          [–]not_mean_enough 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          LOL, why do you assume women with that kind of views want marriage? Marriage benefits modern women only in the countries where it provides tax cuts.

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          I mean, even women who want a traditional marriage can’t find men who want to keep up the kind of commitment that relationship requires. They also had a notorious habit of leading their original wives for trophy wives and mistresses, or simply abandoned their families “back in the good ole days”. Much of the behavior of women today is a reaction to the harsh reality that men tire of women very quickly, and think nothing of abandoning women and children so they can seek a sexual thrill elsewhere.

          [–]Hadza 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          The anti-nomial dummies will very soon learn what happens when you strip away rules that built civilization

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Yeah, well, no one wants to feel like a trapped animal in a cage. I saw too many women in my life turn into complete psychological basket cases by allowing themselves to become controlled/smothered by husbands or boyfriends. The worst among them will demand demand demand from “obedient” women until they break.

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          ... I should also mention that there’s no possible reason a woman should or would “submit“ to a boyfriend even if she were in a conservative culture... It’s considered taboo to sleep with/live with/take care of a boyfriend since there is no marriage contract. That’s a lose/lose situation for a woman.