How feminists tried to destroy the family

[Purple & Green]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Erin Pizzey, founder of the battered wives' refuge, on how militant feminists - with the collusion of Labour's leading women - hijacked her cause and used it to try to demonise all men.

[Joe]

Feminism has been the greatest single social force that has enslaved and devalued women for hundreds of years.

[Dunc89]

Originally Posted by Joe
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Feminism has been the greatest single social force that has enslaved and devalued women for hundreds of years.

So it was feminism that prevented women getting the vote for years, was it?

And was it feminism that prevented women from being allowed to leave husbands, reach high positions in jobs, get equal pay...?

Now, I'm not very well read on the feminist movement over the centuries, however am I right in thinking that it has only been in the latter half of this century where a faction from millitant feminism took a distinct men-hating path?

Other than that, I have great respect for those women who fought for their civil rights over the centuries.

[hibadelic]

Originally Posted by Joe
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Feminism has been the greatest single social force that has enslaved and devalued women for hundreds of years.

How do you figure?

[Joe]

Im talking socially not politically. The sad facts of the situation are we’ve gone from a situation where men and women had their own roles in society to a situation where by men still have their traditional role and women now both work in the workplace and then come home and work.

There have been advantages to feminism, increased rights and of course the vote, but ultimately women work more and society puts higher demands on them now than it ever has done. That doesn’t sound like a great leap forward to me. Since the 60s and the supposed "liberation" of women the number of divorces, abortions, single parent families, women and children living in poverty have all increased. Women are now much more likely to live in poverty due to the break down of the family unity that ever before.

[Purple & Green]

Im talking socially not politically. The sad facts of the situation are we’ve gone from a situation where men and women had their own roles in society to a situation where by men still have their traditional role and women now both work in the workplace and then come home and work.

I think you need to expand on that, because, personally I find it baffling. Research shows that the male and female roles are inter-changeable. My personal experience backs up the research.

[snoots]

Originally Posted by Joe
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

men still have their traditional role

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[hibadelic]

Originally Posted by Joe
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Im talking socially not politically. The sad facts of the situation are we’ve gone from a situation where men and women had their own roles in society to a situation where by men still have their traditional role and women now both work in the workplace and then come home and work.

There have been advantages to feminism, increased rights and of course the vote, but ultimately women work more and society puts higher demands on them now than it ever has done. That doesn’t sound like a great leap forward to me.

Sounds like feminism hasn't gone far enough where you're from. Part of the problem may be mens unwillingness/inability to cope with equality.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Since the 60s and the supposed "liberation" of women the number of divorces, abortions, single parent families, women and children living in poverty have all increased. Women are now much more likely to live in poverty due to the break down of the family unity that ever before.

There are loads of other factors there too, I'm not sure that feminism is the only thing to blame.

[Joe]

Originally Posted by hibadelic
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Sounds like feminism hasn't gone far enough where you're from. Part of the problem may be mens unwillingness/inability to cope with equality.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




There are loads of other factors there too, I'm not sure that feminism is the only thing to blame.

Of course its not solely to blame but feminism has attacked the family which I believe to be the corner stone of society, this has lead to many negative repercussions.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by Joe
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Feminism has been the greatest single social force that has enslaved and devalued women for hundreds of years.

Can't agree. The womans movements from Wolstencraft through suffragettes to modern day have made tremendous srtides against the systematic discrimination and often abuse suffered by women. This has taken a great deal of time and I can honestly say that attitudes have even changed markedly since the 70s.

There are lunatic fringes with all these things and this was well documented a while back on BBC 4 documentary Lefties which we discussed on here at the time. I remember one complaining that a commune instisted that women abandon any male children they had and another that groups competed internally for the status of most marginalised (e.g. as a black disabled lesbian ....). It was interesting but you can't say it was typlical or belittle what has been achieved.

I recall an interview recently with, I think, Alan Bleasdale, saying that when he was young it wasn't really accpetable for men to have female friends - a kind of sexual appartite - and he was envious that attitudes had changes to the extent that his children mixed freely with other genders. Its easy to forget how much things have changed for the better.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by Joe
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Of course its not solely to blame but feminism has attacked the family which I believe to be the corner stone of society, this has lead to many negative repercussions.

Your view of the family seems based on the architypical Victorian middle class ideal which was never really achieved by many people except the middle classes and also the aspirant working classes between the war and the 70s.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by Colr
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Your view of the family seems based on the architypical Victorian middle class ideal which was never really achieved by many people except the middle classes and also the aspirant working classes between the war and the 70s.

I agree, but then the same is true of the feminist aspiration towards woman having equal access to fulfilling careers. Outside middle classes the result is both halves of a couple having to endure sould destroying jobs to command the purchasing power that a single householder provided previously. Even then it's actually less spending power as you now need child care. Scarce wonder that there's a strong economic argument that this doesn't make sense, versus splitting up and scoring off the social.

I don't share Joe's view, but to imagine that there hasn't been an enormous downside to some of the advances achieved by feminism is to deluded oneself. IMHO the real victory would have been if it had become immaterial who was the breadwinner in a household, rather than it becoming something that both needed to be.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I agree, but then the same is true of the feminist aspiration towards woman having equal access to fulfilling careers. Outside middle classes the result is both halves of a couple having to endure sould destroying jobs to command the purchasing power that a single householder provided previously. Even then it's actually less spending power as you now need child care. Scarce wonder that there's a strong economic argument that this doesn't make sense, versus splitting up and scoring off the social.

I don't share Joe's view, but to imagine that there hasn't been an enormous downside to some of the advances achieved by feminism is to deluded oneself. IMHO the real victory would have been if it had become immaterial who was the breadwinner in a household, rather than it becoming something that both needed to be.

The career childcare dilema is one that many face, including myself. One thing that is gauling is the lack of government relief to assist. Given that when both parents work (and its usual for the reasons you state) the government is still taking tax from both, it would be in its, as well as the parents interests to provide some help with childcare either through tax allowances or direct provision. This has become a major feature of life for many couples over the last decade or so and the government has done nothing that I can identify to address it (except continue to take the tax). Certainly in many fields such as the NHS the economy relies on the work of these working mothers.

[pilrig70]

Originally Posted by Colr
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Can't agree. The womans movements from Wolstencraft through suffragettes to modern day have made tremendous srtides against the systematic discrimination and often abuse suffered by women. This has taken a great deal of time and I can honestly say that attitudes have even changed markedly since the 70s.

There are lunatic fringes with all these things and this was well documented a while back on BBC 4 documentary Lefties which we discussed on here at the time. I remember one complaining that a commune instisted that women abandon any male children they had and another that groups competed internally for the status of most marginalised (e.g. as a black disabled lesbian ....). It was interesting but you can't say it was typlical or belittle what has been achieved.

I recall an interview recently with, I think, Alan Bleasdale, saying that when he was young it wasn't really accpetable for men to have female friends - a kind of sexual appartite - and he was envious that attitudes had changes to the extent that his children mixed freely with other genders. Its easy to forget how much things have changed for the better.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Feminism was just a natural reaction among women to a society where they were paid less than men, pressurised into domestic duties, and where many were treated as brainless sex toys.

As Colr says there was a few wummin who were hardly representative of all femininists but the majority just wanted equality with men. And they still aint got equality if pay study comparisons are to go by.

If there are guys who still think a womens place is looking after kids and slaving away in the hoose with domestic chores then they better get that right wrist in good working order cos theyre gonna need it a lot over the years. :wa**ker:

[Purple & Green]

Originally Posted by pilrig70
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

As Colr says there was a few wummin who were hardly representative of all femininists but the majority just wanted equality with men. And they still aint got equality if pay study comparisons are to go by

Pay studies is one example, but what about other measures? In my experience, women have achieved more than parity with men especially in family matters.

It was bad enough that this relatively small group of women was influencing social workers and police. But I became aware of a far more insidious development in the form of public policy-making by powerful women, which was creating a poisonous attitude towards men.

In 1990, Harriet Harman (who became a Cabinet minister), Anna Coote (who became an adviser to Labour's Minister for Women) and Patricia Hewitt (yes, she's in the Labour Cabinet, too!) expressed their beliefs in a social policy paper called The Family Way.

It said: "It cannot be assumed that men are bound to be an asset to family life, or that the presence of fathers in families is necessarily a means to social harmony and cohesion."

It was a staggering attack on men and their role in modern life.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by Bobby S
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Pay studies is one example, but what about other measures? In my experience, women have achieved more than parity with men especially in family matters.

Well, I enjoy a far greater role in caring for my child than my father ever had (not that I would hold him up as an example). Its is immensely rewarding was often denied previous generations of men who have been chased out of the nursery and kitchen for too long. Hardly the same as equal pay, etc.. but some of the other side of the coin.

Where progress has yet to be made is in issues such as custody in family break-up but progress also needs to be made in preventing people breaking up with families.

[Purple & Green]

Originally Posted by Colr
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Where progress has yet to be made is in issues such as custody in family break-up but progress also needs to be made in preventing people breaking up with families.

I agree, but I also think the two are linked: because it's very easy for a woman to leave a relationship knowing that there's a very good chance her "family" will remain with her it makes it easier to dismiss the role of the father. Whether intentional, or not, that has been the effect of the family law reforms in the UK in the last 20 years, and mainstream feminism has been in part responsible for that.

As an aside, I don't think any of the "equality" strides of the last 40 odd years would have happened had it not been for the pill. And once a readily available "male-pill" is available the balance will start to change.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by Bobby S
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I agree, but I also think the two are linked: because it's very easy for a woman to leave a relationship knowing that there's a very good chance her "family" will remain with her it makes it easier to dismiss the role of the father. Whether intentional, or not, that has been the effect of the family law reforms in the UK in the last 20 years, and mainstream feminism has been in part responsible for that.

As an aside, I don't think any of the "equality" strides of the last 40 odd years would have happened had it not been for the pill. And once a readily available "male-pill" is available the balance will start to change.

I think its important that men actively reclaim the role of fatherhood rather than sit back and let it wash away.

[Dub]

Looks like this thread has gone slightly off topic. Ok all the points made are in relation to Women/Family/Women out working and contributing more to the fiscal pot/men helping more in the kitchen and nursery but the original post pointed towards a group of women (some of them in governement) who are trying to hijack the family and use rhetoric such as "all men are rapists/potentialwife beaters etc. I dont have a family to take care off but if I did I would like to think I would approach the family unit in the same way as probably all of you do ie. on an equal footing with mrs Dub and the dublets but what has that got to do with the original post?