Saturday, February 25, 2012

Indirect Feminism

In an indirect way The Thinking Housewife says society does not worship women, but rather still men since women are really men these days. The thing is society does not understand that it forces women to "negate their femaleness". Society does not think women are taking on manly traits, but rather equally womanly traits that were there all along, but were just oppressed by men. It then celebrates and worships women for rising above male oppression and being the strong women they always were.

18 comments:

Jim said...

The problem though is that strength is measured in sexual manipulation and nothing else.

My mother was a strong woman. Grew up in the depression, lived through WWII, a civil war that separated her from her siblings, in which her parents were murdered by communist and she was imprisoned. Afterwards started a family in poverty and eventually came over here along with my father and 3 kids in tow with merely the clothes on their backs. And then started and worked in their own business and made it. Through it all she never lost her faith in God even though she had every reason to. Even on her death bed in which pancreatic cancer consumed her, she still had strength and faith and looked forward to dying.

That's a strong woman. Modern women, especially here in America don't and never will have a tenth of that. Because for the most part, they don't ever have to struggle for what they gain. And they will never find contentment, peace, or even real love. They simply don't have any roots to measure their happiness by except for what's pushed into their minds from the media. Period.

Sex and job titles do not make a woman strong. Ever.

Anonymous said...

"The problem though is that strength is measured in sexual manipulation and nothing else."

It might not be or have been measured by that "standard" if it didn't work so gosh darn well, and you can't blame that entirely on the media pushing it into women's minds. In a myriad of ways, men are and have been very supportive of women using sexual manipulation as their only strength. To use but one example is the more socially acceptable "using your softer, gentler feminine wiles" rather than outright stating your opinions/wants/desires, etc., as being forthright is being a ball-buster and emasculating/humiliating a man.

And far be it for those of us who have struggled for what we have gained to point out how it is not good to measure a woman's strength by her ability to sexually manipulate, because then we're branded as "you're just jealous", by not only women but men also.

Anonymous said...

Wow, Jim! That is some true tale. Thanks for sharing.

I have long felt that women are unhappy, because they are not really needed. They just plug through life. With over 1 million abortions, we don't even need them as mothers. Life is too easy so they are bored and unmotivated.

I have discussed what will happen when our big luxury machine goes down, and we are scrapping for survival. Some say women will buckle down and hustle. Others say they will commit suicide. I don't know.

Anonymous age 69

Jennifer said...

Jim, many women still fight for various things and find purpose in life; to say that modern women will never do so is quite false. Work of various kinds helps strengthen men and women. The fact is that men and women ARE actually needed; women ARE needed as mothers, men as fathers. And this is what they've forgotten.

Jim said...

Problem with the responses here is that you interpret my mother's fight merely to stay alive with what women supposedly fight for today. They have nothing in common. Nor can you even remotely make a compelling case that they do.

Women are privileged and they've shown many men what they are capable of. And while you strongly believe we need each other, as more cases of paternity fraud, crony divorces, false rape accusations, and other various actions are brought out, it's causing men to lose faith in them. I certainly have and know many other that have as well.

Many men who watch news or TV programs in which women are hurt are indifferent or actively cheer when it happens. That's not only been my observations, but that of many men. Better fight to change that attitude by changing what women are. Before it becomes more commonplace in the real world.

Anonymous said...

Oh here we go, another variation on a theme, "only women who are agrarian farmers are REAL women... men, well they can be and do whatever they want and will still be REAL men".

Yes, women are capable of doing as great a good or as great an evil as men because.......wait for it...... women are human, too, complete with strengths, weaknesses and vulnerabilities that go with the territory; yet somehow it's not nearly as great a good or it's a more reprehensible evil when a woman is the agent of it. Funny, that.

And let's top it all off with a sprinkling of "better start being what men want you to be and say what men want you to say and dress the way men want you to dress (and on and on, ad nauseum) OR ELSE!!!". Yep, women have never been through THAT before! Hmmmmmmm.....how on earth DID that thing called feminism take root and spread?

Of course since I am a woman who has thoughts and opinions that aren't completely in deference and acquiescence to any and all men's thoughts and opinions, I simply must be "on my period" or other such nonsense.

Jennifer said...

"Many men who watch news or TV programs in which women are hurt are indifferent or actively cheer when it happens"

Well isn't that lovely. I could make the same argument, that because most men don't have to fight to stay alive, they're somehow spoiled. But instead, the men and women I know still work for what they have, and live for people other than themselves. The fact is that men and women will always need each other, whether either sex likes that or not. Cheering when women get hurt; wow. I don't care to affect men like that; my concern is to help change society in general for its own good, not because I'm worried about threats like yours.

Amen, anon.

Omnipitron said...

Sigh, once more the point is missed. Men what those issues are pertaining to men in regards to society and no one seems to care.

What happens to one gender will negatively affect the other, simple as. It isn't men who state that mothers aren't necessary, we need to keep this in mind. That would be our friendly neighborhood feminists. However, I really wonder how many women even consider that fathers are necessary, even though there is ample evidence to prove this fact?

Bernie Goldberg had just stated that our of wedlock births have overtaken those our married parents, no one sees a problem to this at all?

"only women who are agrarian farmers are REAL women... men, well they can be and do whatever they want and will still be REAL men".

How about only women who realize that by men getting denigrated by society and realizing that this is in fact negative to both genders is the mark of a "REAL" woman? You and Jennifer missed Jim's point entirely. You both are defending 'team woman' and your so called place in society when you need to realize that 'team man' is getting completely effed up.

Jim's mother realized where she could help and she did so, she didn't argue about were her place 'should be' while society was burning down around her. Take it anyhow you want to, this is why arguments such as these really irk me. Men are screaming for help and people would rather posture in how they shouldn't be pigeonholed into certain situations.

How many men in the past ever argued that they too should be able to give birth to children? While we p!ss our time away having academic arguments, our society is burning around us.

Get a clue.

In time, this will effect team women in the economy, marital status, and our collective futures. What happens to men, will happen to you.

Men used to want to stand up for this society, we no longer do, and here you both are defending your positions and how you no longer wish to be placed in a box by 'the patriarchy'.

What's really sad about this whole situation, is that Feminism snipes women's noses to spite their faces. If society collapses akin to the Misandry Bubble, trust me when women will wish they were 'oppressed' like their relatives of times passed.

Women en masses really haven't the foggiest of how much power they have let go thanks to Feminism.

Anonymous said...

"What happens to one gender will negatively affect the other, simple as."
But only when the effects of what happens to females negatively affects males do we give pause to think; so long as it seems to be only affecting females negatively, then all is right with the world. Take the disparity in percentage of young females vis-à-vis percentage of young males in some parts of Asia, for example.

"It isn't men who state that mothers aren't necessary, we need to keep this in mind. That would be our friendly neighborhood feminists."
More fear-mongering BS. I have spent considerable time at both feminist and "manosphere" sites and blogs, and have read some of the published literature of each, and I have never come across persons who identify as feminists stating or even implying that mothers are not necessary. I have, however, and on many occasions, seen children referenced to as "womb turds" in the ole manosphere. Is that how men view motherhood, women sh1tting turds out of their wombs? Nice.

"How about only women who realize that by men getting denigrated by society and realizing that this is in fact negative to both genders is the mark of a "REAL" woman?
Nope, we were already informed, by a man..... in this very blog..... that only women who are agrarian farmers are REAL women. But thanks for playing.

"Men are screaming for help and people would rather posture in how they shouldn't be pigeonholed into certain situations."
Those screams for help tend to be thinly veiled (and sometimes NOT so thinly veiled) threats of "get back into your pigeonholes, women, because men are not happy when they don't have preeminence".

"How many men in the past ever argued that they too should be able to give birth to children?"
Are you kidding me?? Who'd a thunk it that men might have wanted to be able to sh1t out womb turds and then be told that because they can sh1t out these womb turds they are incapable of doing much else.

"Get a clue."
This then followed by more threats of "do what we want OR ELSE!!!"

Since this is a blog that purports to extol the values of Christianity, has anyone ever noticed how Christ did not force nor use threat of force to encourage people to believe in him and follow his path?

Jennifer said...

"You and Jennifer missed Jim's point entirely. You both are defending 'team woman' and your so called place in society when you need to realize that 'team man' is getting completely effed up"

I didn't miss this remotely, and have said continiously that men are very much needed. Team Woman, my as*. However, I am tired of modern women being spoken of like they, as a whole, can't amount to anything; that derails a thread easily.


"How many men in the past ever argued that they too should be able to give birth to children?"

Yeeees, giving birth is exactly like working and having education. Gigantic pile of horse manure. I don't give a damn about feminism; the world was already evolving in women's places before it, giving them jobs and votes. The problem is telling women they should all be doing the exact same things as men, not giving them more choices perse.

Anonymous said...

"Team Woman, my as*."

I second that motion!

Yes, Jennifer and I are both women, but I don't always agree entirely and sometimes completely disagree with her, and the inverse is true, as well. However, I have never said nor ever felt that Jennifer ought to be in complete accord with me OR ELSE she will suffer at my hands; nor has Jennifer threatened same to me (and I can only assume that she has never felt that way, either).

Forcing someone to think as you do or to do as you say, etc., might give some satisfaction to the "forcer" in the short run, but it does nothing to change the heart of the "forcee", and that is why it is not a good long-term solution.
The Apostle Paul mentioned slaves in his writings, but never ordered the persons who owned slaves to release them from their bondage. This was not, as was previously mistakenly assumed, because slavery is righteous, but because this would not change the hearts of slave-owners towards the class of persons that were considered slaves.

"However, I am tired of modern women being spoken of like they, as a whole, can't amount to anything"

In my humble opinion, that is partly to blame for "telling women they should all be doing the exact same things as men"

Anonymous said...

Anonymous and Jennifer, you two seem to lack any desire to understand what Jim wanted to convey with his story. His story could be broken in the following topics: common sense, willing to sacrifice for those one loves and the value of the hierarchical family. If she had thought like any of you for long, she and probably her whole family wouldn't have made it. Hell if women of her country had thought that way her country would've have become a gulag faster than saying "communist psychopaths in power" since many men at a subconscious level would've thought "what the hell am I doing dying for nothing?"

By the way Jennifer no one was threatening women, please don´t project what you and your ilk really thinks, normally when I hear you or anonymous preach on the myths of female oppression the only thing one can conclude is that they wish they could oppress men in the way they purportedly believe their fore-mothers were oppressed. Jim just documented on a fairly recent phenomenon that should worry you since 99% of women are unable to defend themselves as effectively as men in most dangerous situations, not because of some patriarchial oppression but because they can't and/or don't want to. I said fairly recent because most men had nothing but goodwill towards women, something not reciprocal obviously...

Jennifer said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jennifer said...

Jim said "Better fight to change that attitude by changing what women are. Before it becomes more commonplace in the real world." That is a threat, whether it's directed towards me or not.

"If she had thought like any of you for long, she and probably her whole family wouldn't have made it"

LOL Thought like what? Like, "I can make a difference whether I'm 'limited' in physical aspects or not?" I applaud his mother, and my only distaste was his condemnation of her sex today. Please don't bother projecting your hatred of what feminists believe onto me.

Anonymous said...

This is an AMAZING site against feminism, socialism and the almighty government!! http://nativecanadian.blogspot.com/

The best site that Laura links to, and deserves much more traffic than many others.

Anonymous said...

Jennifer, if she had disregarded her husbands authority because she was an "equal or superior" and thought her short term needs were the only thing that mattered beyond the interests of her offspring they wouldn´t have made it. It's that so hard to understand? Enough said.

Jennifer said...

What in hell does her husband's authority have to do with it? Of course she put her kids' well-being above her own, nor have I ever said anything REMOTELY suggesting any other kind of attitude should be shown.

Anonymous said...

"What in hell does her husband's authority have to do with it? "

Absolutely nothing. It was just another chance to make a plug for "husband's authority". Chances are, Jim's mother wasn't as obsessed as the author of that comment is with "husband's authority", and simply forged ahead doing what she believed to be the right thing for her family's well-being.

I guess the author believes that, outside of their "husband's authority", women will always act in selfish short-term self-interest, sorta like Abigail in 1 Samuel 25.....oh, wait.....