How Feminism Failed Women

[Wrangler]

Despite being a thirty-something virgin, I don’t lash out at women like you do. Feminism in and of itself means equality between men and women;

Ideology before facts and logic. Gotcha.

Listen, a great defense feminists use is to hide behind women. An attack against feminism is deflected as an attack against women. So, a friend of mind developed a mantra that even you can understand.

LOVE WOMEN
HATE FEMINISM​

 

[Wrangler]

But what you won’t admit—and what I suspect you know is true—is the fact there are women who call themselves feminists but don’t hate men, don’t lash out at men, and don’t engage in the kind of mean conduct you are describing.

Appeal to Majority/ALL. The fallacy of perfection. If there is only one exception, it makes the rule.

 

[Wrangler]

Get it? The misconduct of people from a political label, whether it’s Republican, Democrat, feminist, or whatever, doesn’t mean all people of that particular political label are bad.

Yea, when was the last time Demon-rats defended "White Supremacists" on the grounds that it doesn’t mean all people of that particular political label are bad.

 

[Cassandra]

I feel like a truly pro-woman movement would support pregnancy resource centers rather than protest against them. They'd advocate for more support for moms who face challenges, promote and honor domestic skills, etc.

But instead feminism envy's traditions masculine roles and even bad stereotypes that men get. They want the respect that men get without experiencing anything close to what it's like to live as an actual man.

You probably won't ever know what it is like, but being a single mom having to raise her children alone should be enough of a task that she can should get the respect by"experiencing anything close to what it's like to live as an actual man."

 

[Wynona]

You probably won't ever know what it is like, but being a single mom having to raise her children alone should be enough of a task that she can should get the respect by"experiencing anything close to what it's like to live as an actual man."

A true pro-woman movement would give more honor to all Moms, including those raising children alone, than feminism. But I don't think being a single Mom is like being a man because it's not the same experience. A single Dad's experience will be different than that of a single Mom. If you quote part of my sentence out of context like that, of course my statement is going to sound bad.

I believe women should get the respect that women deserve for being women, not for being pseudo-men, as feminism trains us to be.

 

[Cassandra]

A true pro-woman movement would give more honor to all Moms, including those raising children alone, than feminism. But I don't think being a single Mom is like being a man because it's not the same experience. A single Dad's experience will be different than that of a single Mom. If you quote part of my sentence out of context like that, of course my statement is going to sound bad.

I believe women should get the respect that women deserve for being women, not for being pseudo-men, as feminism trains us to be.

That is exactly the way I see you saying it.
I know you are a stay at home mom. Good. I was married for over a decade and was divorced, never remarried, and struggled the whole time. You have no idea what it is like. I personally don't know any single dad's with custody right now, but still. I don't see why a woman cant have the respect a man can have.
Some of us have had to be mom and dad both to our kids.

 

[Wrangler]

But I don't think being a single Mom is like being a man because it's not the same experience. A single Dad's experience will be different than that of a single Mom.

Great point! The mantra of "women can do it all" appeals to the ego when God calls us to be humble. The question is not who "can" do what but what does God call us to do?

I believe biology, science has the answer. It takes a man and a woman to make a baby. Therefore, it is God's ideal plan that the mother and father raise the child in harmony with each other through God's laws. For instance, the 10C says nothing about honoring single mothers.

I filed for divorce when my daughter was 12. My ex, who ran a home daycare, was suspicious when the parenting plan I proposed included our daughter go to her house even on days that was "my day" to have her. Perhaps my ex flattered herself that I was looking to spy on her. My concern was the welfare of my daughter. Knowing she gets home from school by 3 PM and I don't get home from work until after 6 PM, was an opportunity for mischief that I did not want my daughter to have. It's called parental guidance (not single mother guidance).

I suggested to my ex that our daughter is better off being with her, even if she's distracted with the daycare, than to be at my home alone for 3 hours. No good could come from that. My ex reluctantly saw the wisdom in my proposal.

Every child needs their mother and father. Not one only. A mother makes a poor substitute for a father. And a father makes a poor substitute for a mother. It is said that a mother cannot teach a boy how to be a man. Obviously, the same is true for fathers and daughters. The facts are in regarding the harm of feminism, responsible for more deaths than communism and fascism combined and that's just the tip of the iceberg regarding how feminism has failed women.

lack of father figure triggers risky sexual behavior among young girls
Absentee Father Affects a Woman's Sexuality
FATHER ABSENCE AND FEMALE YOUNG ADULT PROMISCUITY

And what kind of men, destroyed as boys by feminism, are available for the next generation of women to marry? See Dad's Count poster attached.

 

[Cassandra]

It's called parental guidance (not single mother guidance).

Well, if the father doesn't want to be a part of the child's life, then it is single mother guidance.

 

[Wrangler]

Well, if the father doesn't want to be a part of the child's life, then it is single mother guidance.

Sure. The point I made was not about exceptions but God’s plan for us.

Used to be, a woman could get divorced but she had to abandon her property and her children.

I know men who would rather abandon their children than deal with the toxic feminists. May be easy to say ‘bad dad’ but it begs the question, why are so many feminists so bad at picking a man?

 

[amigo de christo]

I have to take another bite of this apple.

I know another poster rejected the claim that Paul was angry. However, let's explore Paul's emotions, in particular, and men's emotions, in general ... For decades feminists have been claiming they want men to be more emotional. Here the truth is revealed. They don't want men to be more emotional. Women want men to feel the way women want them to feel. This is not equality but manipulation, which is disrespectful.

Implied is that the women are automatic victims of a man feeling a way she does not approve of. Paul's angry? Ever hear of self-righteous anger? It's as though there is no possible way the women could be in the wrong for their actions AND Paul has every right to be angry about it.

Regarding the right to feel the way one does; also for decades we've heard feminists lecture men that all emotions are valid and should be validated.

• Except when a man has emotions.
• Except when a man has emotions a woman does not approve of.
• Then shaming language is used to neutralize the truth about how a man feels.
• "Equality."

 

[Cassandra]

Sure. The point I made was not about exceptions but God’s plan for us.

Used to be, a woman could get divorced but she had to abandon her property and her children.

I know men who would rather abandon their children than deal with the toxic feminists. May be easy to say ‘bad dad’ but it begs the question, why are so many feminists so bad at picking a man?

Doesn't have to be a feminist that winds up being a single mom. I'm sure you have single moms in your congregation. Hope you don't trash talk them.
Why do you always blame women? Got a bee in your bonnet?

 

[Wrangler]

Doesn't have to be a feminist that winds up being a single mom. I'm sure you have single moms in your congregation. Hope you don't trash talk them.
Why do you always blame women? Got a bee in your bonnet?

Not really an answer to my question.

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

Sure. The point I made was not about exceptions but God’s plan for us.

Used to be, a woman could get divorced but she had to abandon her property and her children.

I know men who would rather abandon their children than deal with the toxic feminists. May be easy to say ‘bad dad’ but it begs the question, why are so many feminists so bad at picking a man?

I know how many mothers who have a daughter or daughters that the mother is all for them having Sex at 14yo .
Two Father's that i know have been telling me that this is the case this year, so the Father that i have known from 1973, so i know him real well is having problems because of her daughter, not his own kid ? He says No ! to such as a 14yo having sex and that such is not going on under his roof ! so she left him over the argument for a few weeks to change his mined, but he says that he can't change his mind, so he is worried that he will loose his house over it, but so be it he says, because he can not support a 14yo having sex.

Then another mate known for 1979 his own daughter is pregnant at 15yo and his wife and daughter ran away from him and he found them 4 days later, real nice ! is an abortion on the cards ? i do not know, but he is 62yo to put up with all that.

Them kids are not old enough to be responsible regardless of what one would think.

Kids using sex toys ? and some of the rubbish i have heard from mothers saying daughter has to have, they can not say No ! Why is that ?

 

[Wrangler]

Doesn't have to be a feminist that winds up being a single mom. I'm sure you have single moms in your congregation. Hope you don't trash talk them.
Why do you always blame women? Got a bee in your bonnet?

Another bite at this apple…

1. I’m not trash talking but being a woman, being a single mother is not a special class of NON-EQUAL Beings incapable of sin.
2. One does not have to identify as a feminist to still act on feminist ideals.
3. In all humility, single mothers ought to be ashamed that they are parenting in a manner less than God intended with both parents raising the child.
4. Regarding the claim that ‘fathers’ don’t want to be involved,’ the question revealing these woman victimized by feminist ideology remains; why are they so bad at picking mates?

Of course, there are exceptions but we are not talking about exceptions. In defense of single mothers, you did not even attempt to invoke the exceptional scenario that the fathers’s died. You went right to blaming men for choices these women made. And this fundamentally shows how feminism has failed women.

As I wrote, it used to be that women could divorce their husbands but they had to abandon their property and children. Consequently, divorce was rare. Now, women initiate divorce 80% of the time when children are involved. Our feminized system incentivizes and subsidizes this irresponsible behavior. No wonder todays emasculated men don’t want to be involved. The question in #4 remains …

Hope this helps.

 

[Wrangler]

know how many mothers who have a daughter or daughters that the mother is all for them having Sex at 14yo .

a 14yo having sex and that such is not going on under his roof ! so she left him

he is worried that he will loose his house over it

The price men must pay for feminist glory.

abortion on the cards

Powerful testimony of the ‘glory’ of feminism. The devil glamorizes sin of promiscuous female sex - approved by feminized mothers - as ‘empowering.’

Sin does not over-power, it seduces. These feminists are not ashamed of their sin but proud of it! Feminism is a sinful ideology that has failed women - and dare I say, men and children also.

 

[TinMan]

Funny how the counterpart is ignored.

In exchange for the man providing insurance, the woman would also provide insurance. This is called a dowry. In Biblical times, a wife was a woman who provided a dowry. There was a term given to woman to could not contribute equally to insure the success of the marriage, concubine.

False. In patriarchal times the dowry was not known. In Israel the bridegroom named a price or ransom ("mohar") to the father of the girl he wanted for himself. The girl, (average are of Girls in Iseral at the time was 12) was purchased like a cow or a slave. Gen 34:12, Exodus 22:17 and 1 Sam 18:25

In the Old Testament, a concubine was a woman acquired by a man as a secondary wife and one he still paid a mohar for. Her purpose was to provide a male heir in the case of a barren wife, to provide more children in general to enhance the family’s workforce and wealth, and to satisfy the man’s sexual desires. A concubine was endowed with rights and protections by Hebrew law but was not equal in status to a wife

 

[Wrangler]

False. In patriarchal times the dowry was not known.

According to Dowry:

DOWRY (Heb. נְדֻנְיָה), the property a wife brings to her husband at marriage; the Yiddish equivalent, nadn, is from the same root. The custom of nedunyah became clearly defined and institutionalized only in the talmudic period. In biblical times, mohar (מֹהַר), whereby the groom bought his wife from her father (Gen. 24:53; Ex. 22:15–16; Hos. 3:2), was the accepted practice. It was then customary that the groom give the bride gifts, and that she bring certain property to her husband's home upon marriage: slaves, cattle, real estate, etc. (cf. Gen. 24:59–61; 29; Judg. 1:14ff.; I Kings 9:16). Evidence of the custom of nedunyah is to be found in Tobit (7:14; 8:21) and in the Assuan papyri (Cowley, Aramaic, nos. 15, 18). Gradually, mohar was superseded by the ketubbah custom according to which the husband merely assumed the responsibility of compensation to his wife in case he divorced her: he had to pay her 200 zuzim if she had been a virgin at the time of marriage, and 100 zuzim if a widow or divorcée (see *Ketubbah).​

​

By talmudic times, the institution of nedunyah was prevalent; the father gave a dowry to the bride since the daughter was excluded from paternal inheritance. Fifty zuzim (equivalent to the worth of 180 grams of silver) was the minimum amount a father was obliged to give to his daughter (Ket. 6:5). Parents usually gave much more, according to their social standing. Community funds provided the dowry for an orphan or a very poor girl (ibid.; cf. Sh. Ar., YD 251:8). In case of her father's death, the brothers of a minor girl were obliged to give her the minimum dowry, and the court estimated how much her father would have given her above the minimum dowry. ​

Too easy to confirm your lies. As Reagan said, it's not that our Leftists friends are ignorant. It's that they know so much that isn't so. In the spirit of equality, how do you justify a bride not giving a dowry but a groom giving a diamond ring?​

 

[TinMan]

According to Dowry:

​

DOWRY (Heb. נְדֻנְיָה), the property a wife brings to her husband at marriage; the Yiddish equivalent, nadn, is from the same root. The custom of nedunyah became clearly defined and institutionalized only in the talmudic period. In biblical times, mohar (מֹהַר), whereby the groom bought his wife from her father (Gen. 24:53; Ex. 22:15–16; Hos. 3:2), was the accepted practice. It was then customary that the groom give the bride gifts, and that she bring certain property to her husband's home upon marriage: slaves, cattle, real estate, etc. (cf. Gen. 24:59–61; 29; Judg. 1:14ff.; I Kings 9:16). Evidence of the custom of nedunyah is to be found in Tobit (7:14; 8:21) and in the Assuan papyri (Cowley, Aramaic, nos. 15, 18). Gradually, mohar was superseded by the ketubbah custom according to which the husband merely assumed the responsibility of compensation to his wife in case he divorced her: he had to pay her 200 zuzim if she had been a virgin at the time of marriage, and 100 zuzim if a widow or divorcée (see *Ketubbah).​

​

​

By talmudic times, the institution of nedunyah was prevalent; the father gave a dowry to the bride since the daughter was excluded from paternal inheritance. Fifty zuzim (equivalent to the worth of 180 grams of silver) was the minimum amount a father was obliged to give to his daughter (Ket. 6:5). Parents usually gave much more, according to their social standing. Community funds provided the dowry for an orphan or a very poor girl (ibid.; cf. Sh. Ar., YD 251:8). In case of her father's death, the brothers of a minor girl were obliged to give her the minimum dowry, and the court estimated how much her father would have given her above the minimum dowry. ​

Too easy to confirm your lies. As Reagan said, it's not that our Leftists friends are ignorant. It's that they know so much that isn't so. In the spirit of equality, how do you justify a bride not giving a dowry but a groom giving a diamond ring?​

"The custom of nedunyah became clearly defined and institutionalized only in the talmudic period." the Talmudic Period happened long after biblical times

"In biblical times, mohar (מֹהַר), whereby the groom bought his wife from her father"

You just confirmed my post. Thank you

 

[Wrangler]

Not really an answer to my question.

Before modern times, marriage wan not about emotion but resources needed to secure the survival of the next generation. What do you suppose to poor men who could not buy a wife? Same as now. Their genes tend not to get passed on.

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

The price men must pay for feminist glory.


Powerful testimony of the ‘glory’ of feminism. The devil glamorizes sin of promiscuous female sex - approved by feminized mothers - as ‘empowering.’

Sin does not over-power, it seduces. These feminists are not ashamed of their sin but proud of it! Feminism is a sinful ideology that has failed women - and dare I say, men and children also.

I have to object to the word being called feminist ? they are not that at all truly in fact but something other truly.