Author Topic: Is it feminism that we blame women? (Read 3557 times)

Tiffany · « **on:** October 18, 2012, 10:38:44 AM »

One thing I've noticed on this board is how men are "left out" off the picture. We blame the women, the teenage girls for feminism or immodest clothing but never their husbands or fathers? I see men are allowing feminism into their home, providing funds for immodest clothing, not guarding their daughters, and enabling it.

Is it a part of feminism that we seem to only blame the women in the first place instead of the men for allowing it? If the men did not allow it, it would not happen in their homes.

Marcelino · « **Reply #1 on:** October 18, 2012, 10:43:24 AM »

It seems to me, women's fake-lib (femѕυιcιdєism) doesn't really come from the general public; i think it comes from the top.

Marcelino · « **Reply #2 on:** October 18, 2012, 10:58:19 AM »

Take all this breast cancer awareness stuff. It's a huge campaign. Pink ribbons everywhere! When was the last time you saw that kind of attention given to prostrate cancer???

It makes me feel like a second class citizen.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #3 on:** October 18, 2012, 11:16:26 AM »

Quote from: Tiffany

the teenage girls for feminism or immodest clothing but never their husbands or fathers?

I've placed plenty of blame on fathers. And I suppose there are many families where husbands are also to blame for trying to push their women out of the house.

Quote

Is it a part of feminism that we seem to only blame the women in the first place instead of the men for allowing it? If the men did not allow it, it would not happen in their homes.

No, it's not part of feminism. In fact, it is typical of "social conservative" feminist thinking to say that the whole feminist revolution is a result of men not being men, that is, to blame men for the choices of women. Since women's suffrage, men haven't been able to act collectively to restrain the behavior of women. It is a consequence of feminism, that things are getting so bad that it is possible to be openly critical of women as a class and be taken seriously by some.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #4 on:** October 18, 2012, 11:17:50 AM »

Quote from: Marcelino

Take all this breast cancer awareness stuff. It's a huge campaign. Pink ribbons everywhere! When was the last time you saw that kind of attention given to prostrate cancer???

It makes me feel like a second class citizen.

It is absolutely wacked out, it resembles, in its absurdity, having giant posters of "dear leader" everywhere.

Jaynek · « **Reply #5 on:** October 18, 2012, 11:30:52 AM »

There is a sense in which men, in their role as leaders, are more responsible for whatever happens. Leaders face harsher judgement.

But individuals are nevertheless responsible for their actions. As a woman, I have to examine my life, discover the ways that feminism has led me to sin, repent and reform my life. If I refuse to go through this process, instead blaming men for feminism, then I compound my fault.

Marcelino · « **Reply #6 on:** October 18, 2012, 11:34:04 AM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: Tiffany
the teenage girls for feminism or immodest clothing but never their husbands or fathers?

I've placed plenty of blame on fathers. And I suppose there are many families where husbands are also to blame for trying to push their women out of the house.

Quote
Is it a part of feminism that we seem to only blame the women in the first place instead of the men for allowing it? If the men did not allow it, it would not happen in their homes.

No, it's not part of feminism. In fact, it is typical of "social conservative" feminist thinking to say that the whole feminist revolution is a result of men not being men, that is, to blame men for the choices of women. Since women's suffrage, men haven't been able to act collectively to restrain the behavior of women. It is a consequence of feminism, that things are getting so bad that it is possible to be openly critical of women as a class and be taken seriously by some.

I don't often remember seeing you blame men for anything, now I don't think that's because you honestly think they are blameless, but because you think that men have been blamed for too much, so you want to sort of "balance the scales."

Tiffany · « **Reply #7 on:** October 18, 2012, 11:39:52 AM »

Please quit the thumbing down. :drillsergeant:

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #8 on:** October 18, 2012, 12:31:59 PM »

Quote from: Tiffany

One thing I've noticed on this board is how men are "left out" off the picture. We blame the women, the teenage girls for feminism or immodest clothing but never their husbands or fathers? I see men are allowing feminism into their home, providing funds for immodest clothing, not guarding their daughters, and enabling it.

I've said before that it is the man's duty to correct his wife and daughter(s) whenever they dress immodestly. So yes, men who don't correct their wives or daughters who dress immodest will be held accountable on Judgement Day, but so will the women who dress immodestly in the first place!

Quote

Is it a part of feminism that we seem to only blame the women in the first place instead of the men for allowing it? If the men did not allow it, it would not happen in their homes.

Not exactly. You forget that there are plenty of single women out there who dress immodestly, not to mention married women who tend to "wear the pants" (in more ways than one!) in their families, who would tell their husbands off if they told them to "cover it up".

Feminism is a movement that is centered on women. Yes, men are also responsible, but I find it odd that you seem so eager to focus the blame on men.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #9 on:** October 18, 2012, 01:01:15 PM »

Quote from: Tiffany

One thing I've noticed on this board is how men are "left out" off the picture. We blame the women, the teenage girls for feminism or immodest clothing but never their husbands or fathers? I see men are allowing feminism into their home, providing funds for immodest clothing, not guarding their daughters, and enabling it.

Is it a part of feminism that we seem to only blame the women in the first place instead of the men for allowing it? If the men did not allow it, it would not happen in their homes.

Satan remotely and the free-masonic movement (composed of men) are mainly to blame. Women have needed to become independant and self-sufficient because men beat them and cheat on them and walk out never to be seen again.

There was a time, maybe in the 80's when women appeared to be a bit more moral than men. Back then men wouldn't speak indecently in front of them. Now the women lead the charge talking about all sorts of vile and indecent things in mixed company. Before they would pull the reigns on the men, "Now Harry..." Don't do this or that or be impolite. But now the women are man-like not only in dress but in how they cuss and talk. Also how they dictate. But part of this is also man's fault as we would not lead in the family so the wife had to do it.

Also, in reality more is expected of women than men. God has given them a better ability to be nurturing, caring, sympathetic. When a child skins his knee he will generally, probably, run to the mother first if the mother and father are both there because that is where he will get the most sympathy and love.

Women also are better equipped mentally to guard themselves from impurity and they are the ones who need to dress modestly and not flirt or become familiar with members of the opposite sex unless such a one is a perspective spouse. They are the ones with the most "to lose". They are the ones who get pregnant without wanting too. This should be enough to have them be more reserved and to avoid flaunting themselves or putting themselves into positions where they ultimately cannot resist going all the way. Because like it or not, generally speaking, if they will do it, the men would do it.

Women are a vital part of society it is they who primarily spend the most time actually raising their children who will form society. When they lost all sense of morality there was no one left holding back the flow of immorality.

Marcelino · « **Reply #10 on:** October 18, 2012, 01:05:11 PM »

So, when you "empower" a woman, that seems to me, you make her independent of men, to such a degree, that she literally no longer needs men for practically anything. Or even, to a degree, other women and certainly children. The "new woman" sort of doesn't need anyone. Although, she might enjoy company for lunch or something.

So, I guess that's not about exterminating men, as much as it's about making women feel like they can get by just fine, in a culture where men are actively encouraged to behave like animals. I think it is an attempt, on a grand scale, to moderate the consequences to women that a generally immoral culture and economy have produced in their lives.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #11 on:** October 18, 2012, 01:08:45 PM »

The biggest problem with empowering a woman is that God didn't create them to be in positions of power. His Will is for them to stay at home and raise their children. The concept of women obtaining power is really just a way to break up families and for the Masons to snatch children away from their parents so they can indoctrinate them in government schools.

Marcelino · « **Reply #12 on:** October 18, 2012, 01:23:12 PM »

It seems like a woman's job/role/primary function in the "new america" is to tempt men/behave scandalously/be an occasion to sin. So, i guess our rulers think it's important to make women feel comfortable doing that. And, unfortunately, I think they've succeeded in that goal.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #13 on:** October 18, 2012, 02:01:54 PM »

Quote from: Marcelino

So, when you "empower" a woman, that seems to me, you make her independent of men, to such a degree, that she literally no longer needs men for practically anything. Or even, to a degree, other women and certainly children. The "new woman" sort of doesn't need anyone. Although, she might enjoy company for lunch or something.

So, I guess that's not about exterminating men, as much as it's about making women feel like they can get by just fine, in a culture where men are actively encouraged to behave like animals. I think it is an attempt, on a grand scale, to moderate the consequences to women that a generally immoral culture and economy have produced in their lives.

They have been taught that they need to jump to new heights and break glass ceilings. They may not realize, in their enthusiasm that when you do such things you have to break the glass with your head and you might bash your brain in in the process.

This results in think of children as a liability rather than a blessing. It focuses on material goods to the neglect of the spiritual. It makes it easier for them to divorce since they can pay their own bills.

The liberty spoke of by Americans for men and women is a freedom from God and enslavement to the Devil. Freedom to do wrong. It is the masonic/demonic.

They break from God in order to have the freedom to go straight to Hell.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #14 on:** October 18, 2012, 02:05:36 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

The biggest problem with empowering a woman is that God didn't create them to be in positions of power. His Will is for them to stay at home and raise their children. The concept of women obtaining power is really just a way to break up families and for the Masons to snatch children away from their parents so they can indoctrinate them in government schools.

Well put. It isn't power at all. Raising godly children is a more powerful position than any other non-religious position that a man can hold.

Their empowerment makes them slaves to whatever corrupt organization they work for. Morst organizations are corrupt charging more than what is necessary for a modest profit. They are slaves to their selfish desires. If children are damned due to their neglect there will be Hell to pay.