All Comments on 'We Were All Fucked Up By Feminism'

The only problem I see is that I don't believe men and women are all set to be one thing. I believe that both genders have a distribution all across the board, although they are centered slightly differently, and we need to allow everyone to go where they want to go and can succeed. If women really do just want a hot guy who doesn't help around the house, I'm pretty screwed (in the bad way), as I actually am not a stud and I have no problems helping around the house. But, while that might be what the majority want, or at least it's the largest single preference, we have plenty of other views.

I've always thought that, roughly, any successful relationship needs a certain amount of both femininity and masculinity, so a girly-girl will get with a macho guy, and a wussier guy will end up with a stronger-willed girl. Regardless, all we really need is that old-school "leave me the hell alone" mentality, not some sort of view of how the world has to otherwise be. And, BTW, divorce rates have started going down, last I heard.

this is ridiculous. I'm not sure what planet you grew up on, but here in Reality Land there has not been a complete reversal of expected gender roles. Sorry. Men are still accepted, even if they can't cook. Sure, women appreciate it if they're not expected to be maids, simply because it is a sign of respect. Being partners in a relationship meaning an equal sharing of burdens. There's not too many people out there who like to wash dishes for kicks. So, in a mature, healthy relationship it's only fair to share the task. If someone is especially into something the other's not, by all means have at it, no matter what the gender. Now, if a guy can, say, cook well, he gets fawned over for being a refreshing difference from what is often still the norm. If a gal can't cook worth a damn, she is still held to be seriously lacking. With men, folks shrug it off. A wtf is this shit about some gorgeous big strong guy suddenly becoming emasculated and undesirable just because he starts helping around the house????? I'm sorry, but as a man you might find that to bring him low, as a woman (who has never styled herself a feminist) I find that just damn sexy. I am not out of the ordinary, I promise. Nor am I some antiquated hag. I'm in my twenties, I do modeling. And me and my gal pals get turned on every time our men pick up a frying pan. Because it means he loves us, respects us, and is willing to go the extra mile for us. It means that he's comfortable enough in his manhood not to be threatened by a knowledge of cookbooks: he still fucks me 4 times a day anyway, every way. Wanna know why you're living in a cruddy bachelor's pad? Look no further than the attitude behind this essay.

This isn't worth responding to rationally. It is not reasoned, why respond in a reasoned way to rubbish? Too much genever and Amstel pal. Go get a life.

All I will say is that I am one of those "opressed, pathetic SAHM's", who nursed our baby until she was 2. LOL And it is amazing the mentality of the world at large. Most of our friends/family beleive as we do. But when I get a bill collector calling, it's like "Are you working?" No. "Are you collecting unemployment?" No. "Are you looking for work?" No.

I am happy to cook, take care of the house, and our daughter - would be nice if he picked up after himself though.

And the divorce rate is not changing by leaps and bounds.

you know nothing about genetics. have you even been to college?

I could not have said it better!

If divorce rates are going down, I suspect it is due to the recession and one's lack of being able to afford a divorce! Two together can live cheaper than two apart. I don't think divorce rates are decreasing due to some new appreciation of gender roles, be they more "respectful" or not. The author, although a bit repetitive, does make some good points. I think many women would actually agree with him; the "feminist" stereotypes he is criticizing are actually those of the radical wing of feminism, IMO. I suspect the author would not disagree with many of the tenets of the majority of feminists, who are moderate (and reasonable). Radical feminists have written treatises suggesting men should embrace the idea of being fucked up the ass by dildo-wielding women (i.e., Germaine Greer, if you've ever read her stuff). As a fantasy, a variation, a power exchange (maybe a disguised homosexual fantasy), to each their own. But as the "norm" for sexual relations, give me a break. I do my share of the laundry, cooking, and grocery shopping, but I also work a very full-time job and it's not one for the squeamish. I can fend for myself when necessary (as can my wife of many years). We respect each other and are best friends, but it is obvious who faces down our enemies. Enough said. Please keep writing.

I think you are right on. And probably if you had posted this as a woman you may have not gotten so much flack!

I don't think that Womens Lib was a horrible thing as there were definite wrongs that were righted by it. But I am curious if we were able to look at the timeline that coincides with the movement(Womens Lib)and the increase in divorce, childhood suicide, depression, debt ect...could it be an unintentional negative side effect? Also, as a wife and mother I have had my own struggles with learning it was not just "ok" to be "just" a wife and mom, it was in fact my most natural state of who I am. It wasn't until I almost died that my brain was finally able to accept that no matter what the "laws" of man say, men and women are in FACT not the same. I find it sad to see women struggle to be the "Super-wife" or "Super-Mom" and "do it all". Or for a man to try to be the politically correct man, it just isn't natural and it goes against the grain of the soul to try and be otherwise. There is so much more I could say on this matter, but I will just end with this- I am not a doormat or a brainless creature...I am a wife and mother and I have nothing but sadness for the men and women who will inevitably spend their lives looking to "find themselves" to no avail. Get back to basics people....

I definitely feel this article. It is frustratin when you've been raised to believe the man should pay for dates when a lot of women i've found get offended at the offer (because it apparently implies they're not able to look after themselves). However, evolutionary studies has shown that genetics in humans would tend to promote the monogamous marriage, and the science really doesn't support some of your article, not that feminism checks its facts either I took a Women's Studies course and it was one radical political position after another stated as if it were fact. I mentioned the claim made by Ayn Rand that gender roles had a natural basis (which they do) and i had about 30 feminists jumping down my throat at once immediately.

An evolutionary psychologist actually supports the differentiation of gender roles.

Take for example a feminist and career-oriented single mom who wants her only daughter to be just as successful as she is. What are the chances of her daughter grow up to be just like her?

"Girls who grow up without their fathers in their homes tend to hit puberty earlier than girls who grow up with their fathers, possibly because father absence is an indicator of the degree of polygyny in society. Because girls who experience puberty early are more likely to start having sex and get pregnant at an earlier age and to become sexually more promiscuous throughout life, the age of menarche is an important determinant of the rest of her life."

http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200810/why-has-the-age-puberty-declined-in-recent-decades-iii

It also goes on to say that only the biological dad will do. Her mom's boyfriends and step-fathers have unrelated pheromones that will trigger early puberty.

"Forget what feminists, hippies, and liberals have told you in the last half century. They are all lies based on political ideology and conviction, not on science. Contrary to what they may have told you, it is very unlikely that money, promotions, the corner office, social status, and political power will make women happy. Similarly, it is very unlikely that quitting their jobs, dropping out of the rat race, and becoming stay-at-home dads to spend all their times with their children will make men happy.

Money, promotions, the corner office, social status, and political power are what make men happy (as long as they win, of course, but then dropping out is by definition a defeat). Spending time with their children is what makes women happy. As Danielle Crittenden very eloquently argues in her book What Our Mothers Didn’t Tell Us: Why Happiness Eludes the Modern Women, it is very unlikely that women will be truly happy without having children, but, as Crittenden points out, there are ways to combine careers with motherhood. It’s not the way that the feminists have told us."

"Men and women are very different, because they are designed by millions of years of evolution to be very different. Women cannot become happy by pretending to be men, and men cannot become happy by pretending to be women. Swedes have already tried that, and they have failed massively and spectacularly.

What can evolutionary psychology tell us about what we as a society can do so as not to repeat the Swedish mistake and make our citizens happy? The best thing to do is to kill all the feminists and hippies and liberals. Destroy political correctness completely once and for all. Teach boys and girls that they are different, not the same, and that it’s okay (nay, wonderful) to be different. One is not right and the other is not wrong. Stop telling girls that they are inferior versions of boys, as feminists have done for the last half century, or, as has more recently been the case, stop telling boys that they are inferior versions of girls."

http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200812/how-be-happy

the title says it all i wish i saw this argument being made more often and i wish i could get half way through an explination of this without the name calling and being told i sound like an opressionistic pig by people whom know im not

we are geneticly set for certian roles and if you chose those roles it sholdn't be a problem

however you should also be free to go outside this role if you so chose it's a freedom thing people and a common sense one to

p.s. i never get why it is called common sense after all it's not all that common anymore

Everyone should know how to cook, merely for the purpose of individual survival. I'm not sure that the feminist movement has pushed the gender balance as far off kilter as you think it has. I do think constantly trying to define gender roles is problematic, and I agree that feminism has not been successful in removing stereotypes as one would hope. I also think the purpose of feminism is not to "sissify" men or to make women more masculine, but rather to balance out those roles. The ideal would be to have men help out in the traditional "woman's territory," such as cooking, cleaning, and childcare. In return, women help with the traditional "man's territory," namely bread-winning.

Unfortunately, housewives are not treated well by our society, but I, for one, am not interested in being a housewife. I have friends who want nothing more than to stay at home and care for home and children, and that is fine, it's just not what I dream of doing. We live in a very different time from what seems to be your ideal. Most people cannot afford financially for one spouse to stay at home.

Lastly, I'm pretty sure I haven't seen a real apron in at least 10, if not 15 years, on either a man or a woman.

Gender roles to begin with are fucked up. Why cant people just be people?

I recall Betty Friedan being upset with members of NOW who were more concerned with gaining power than working with men to give women a hand up in the interest of equality and life choices.

I agree with Betty's ideals of working together in order to give women a hand up while freeing both genders from restrictive social expectations.

It seems that money and power have ruined the women's movement, and that the current group of radical feminists are more concerned with stepping on men in order to preserve their power.

What was that trite cliche about absolute power corrupting absolutely...?

Good compilation of anti-feminist talking points. I see you've got plenty of proven-false evopsych in there and whining about the feminization of men. (I always find it funny when people talk about how feminism is dead in the same breath that they talk about what a horrible thing it is for men to be "like women.")

You even included a comparison of feminism to rape, though as an aside, I'm not sure that's quite hyperbolic enough. Next time maybe try the holocaust. You know, you just can't have a good demonstration of the stupidity and sexism inherent in post-feminism without comparing the breaking down of "traditional" gender roles (gender roles as we know them were largely invented in the 1950s) to genocide.

Anyway, grow up. Women still make less than men for the same work. Women still put in more hours of work at home. Women are still largely pushed into fields that are considered feminine and that are therefore severely undervalued. Men are still thought of as helpless morons who can't navigate a simple cookbook (you demonstrated that opinion yourself). Men are still pushed out of supposedly feminine fields. Men are still conditioned to act like entitled children who need women to take care of them.

It's all very silly, isn't it? Women don't need men to protect them from the dangers of earning a paycheck. Men don't need women to cook and clean for them. We're all adults, and we're pretty much all capable of taking care of ourselves. Someday, maybe we'll all start acting like it, and marriage will stop being about seeking a stand-in parent.

Maybe I'm just too optimistic.

You are right that thousands of years have molded us to want older, traditional gender roles in some ways. Men lust after the girly-girl. Women want the strong, manly type. Deep down, that is. But modern society tells us we're wrong for that, somehow less, or more primitive, deserving of less respect.

Some of us, especially those who don't live in urban areas, still favor traditional gender roles. Like you, my family and my husband's family has many generations of non-divorce, and now younger folks have divorce all over the place. This damages children emotionally and sets a cycle of generational dysfunction. I am speaking in generalities of course, and there are always exceptions.

My husband and I have chosen traditional roles. We see society for what it is and stick our thumb in its eye. He is the provider. I am the homemaker. We have sons who we are raising to traditional roles. We are not an extinct species. We simply observed what worked in the past for a happy family life and healthy children and chose to follow our ancesters. We are all very happy and have much love in our house.

Anyone can choose this. Just don't be a sheeple, thoughtlessly following the dictates of society. Think for yourself, observe what works. Funny how things go around and come back again.

I am going to have to disagree with you on almost every level and in almost every way.

While the way in which feminism is sometimes expressed has its flaws, you are conflating the idea with the expression. Additionally, you falsely equate the effects that these flaws have on men with the historical effects of sexism on women.

For example, you describe the feminist complaint about media images of women, saying that while they are unrealistic, the images of men in the media are also unrealistic. This is flawed in two ways. One, the fact that men are portrayed unrealisticly is not caused by, nor does it diminish, the complaint that women are portrayed unrealisticly. Second, the prevalence of and degree to which women are portrayed unrealisticly dwarfs that of men. For example, Ken, while broad shouldered, muscular, and athletic, had a body that was at least physiologically achievable, whereas Barbie's figure could not possibly be achieved without removing several ribs and parts of the pelvis.

Also, you're description of human evolution is, at best, inaccurate. Evolution has shaped what men and women see as desireable in each other, but to a far more limited extent than you describe. Also, societies that still live in the conditions that humans evolved in (such as the Aka in the Central African Republic) do not show the kind of gender roles that you describe.

Intentions and actions of the feminist movement are completely at odds with each other.

I sincerely hope you get the help you need, but at least we apparently don't have to worry about you procreating with that attitude.

Equality was the first mistake.

Timothy 1

2:8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands,

without wrath and doubting.

2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with

shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls,

or costly array;

2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man,

but to be in silence.

2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the

transgression.

2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in

faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

And before anyone reading this starts complaining, this has little to do with Christianity. Numerous other religions hold the same opinion. Even independent of religion, Schopenhauer, Aristophanes, and countless others warned us.

Some of the comments you will get will be personal attacks, people might even stoop low enough speak ill of your family. Some of the comments will be the same indignant claptrap you might be used to. I however will refrain from finger wagging. Your opinions and thoughts are for you to explore.

bro this is why nobody wants to have sex with you. go touch grass

Based Essay, copers will deny even thought the facts have been here for a while