You can’t manage your work life if you can’t talk about it
Recently I ran the following twitter:
“I’m in a board meeting. Having a miscarriage. Thank goodness, because there’s a fucked-up 3-week hoop-jump to have an abortion in Wisconsin.”
Why the uproar over this twitter?
Not only have bloggers written whole posts about the disgustingness of it, but 70 people unfollowed me, and people actually came to my blog and wrote complaints about the twitter on random, unrelated posts.
So, to all of you who think the twitter was outrageous, think about this:
Most miscarriages happen at work. Twenty-five percent of pregnancies end in miscarriage. Seventy-five percent of women who are of child-bearing age are working. Most miscarriages run their course over weeks. Even if you are someone who wanted the baby and are devastated by the loss, you’re not going to sit in bed for weeks. You are going to pick up your life and get back to it, which includes going back to work.
This means that there are thousands of miscarriages in progress, at work, on any given day. That we don’t acknowledge this is absurd. That it is such a common occurrence and no one thinks it’s okay to talk about is terrible for women.
Throughout history, the way women have gained control of the female experience is to talk about what is happening, and what it’s like. We see that women’s lives are more enjoyable, more full, and women are more able to summon resilience when women talk openly about their lives.
To all of you who said a miscarriage is gross: Are you unaware that the same blood you expel from a miscarriage is what you expel during menstruation? Are you aware that many people are having sex during menstruation and getting it on the sheets? Are you aware that many women actually like period sex? Wait. Here is a link I love, at askmen.com, telling men that women like it so much that men need to be aware of this preference.
To all of you who are aghast that I let myself get pregnant: having sex is playing with odds. There are no 100% sure methods of birth control. I am 42 years old. The likelihood of someone my age getting pregnant even with fertility treatment is less than 5%. The likelihood that a pregnancy in someone my age ends in a miscarriage is almost 75%. This means that even if I had done nothing for birth control it would have been as effective as a 25-year-old using a condom. So everyone who is complaining that I’m an idiot for getting pregnant should go buy a calculator.
To all of you who said I should not be happy about having a miscarriage: You are the ones short on empathy. Any woman who is pregnant but wishes she weren’t would of course be grateful when she has a miscarriage. Yes, there are many women who want the baby and have a miscarriage. I was one of them. I cried for days. I get it.
But if you have ever had an abortion, which I have, you would know that a miscarriage is preferable to an abortion. Even the Pope would agree with that.
And what is up with the fact that just one, single person commented about how Wisconsin has a three-week waiting period for abortions? It is absolutely outrageous how difficult it was going to be for me to get an abortion, and it’s outrageous that no one is outraged.
Wisconsin is one of twelve states that have 24-hour waiting periods. This puts a huge burden on an overworked system. These are also the states where there are few ways to get an abortion. For example, in Wisconsin, the only place to get abortion that is covered by insurance is at a Planned Parenthood clinic. There are 3 of them in all of Wisconsin. In Chicago, you can get an abortion at Planned Parenthood with less than 24 hours notice. In Wisconsin, there is a week and a half wait to get the first meeting and a week and half wait to get the abortion.
A digression: I’m linking to Planned Parenthood so everyone can make a donation. This organization is enabling women to have the right to abortion. Planned Parenthood seems to be the only effective, community-level force against states that are attempting to legislate the choice into oblivion.
To all of you who think this has nothing to do with work:
I think what really upsets people is the topic. We are not used to talking about the female experience, and especially not in the context of work. But so what? We can start now. The female experience is part of work. What we talk about when we talk about work defines how we integrate work into our lives. If work is going to support our lives, then we need to talk about how our lives interact with work. We need to be honest about the interaction if we hope to be honest about our work.
John and Jason:
Yes! Women need to wake up. The legality of killing our children doesn’t make it right. Equality for all women, those born, and those who have yet to be born!
Mr. John Wilders,
I ask you to remain calm and respectful to others, regardless of what they may call you.
On the playgrounds of our youth we all heard the old phrase, “Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.” Unfortunately, many societal groups seem intent today upon claiming that words too always hurt. Whoever believes this gets to feel hurt a lot and is always at the whim of some person out there. Personal power is lacking.
It has only been in recent years that significant questioning of a hurt response to such verbal slings and arrows has developed. In the gay/lesbian movement there has been much recent discussion over the words “fag” and “queer” with many of the younger generation of gays and lesbians claiming those labels publicly. (Young blacks sometimes calling each other “nigger” has been a parallel development). By so doing, these younger men and women are increasing their self-esteem as well as making it impossible for homophobic/ racist bashers to bother them with words. This healthier response is an example of empowerment. A few happier activists are even coming to a belief that there is no such thing as adult verbal harassment. They are viewing claims of verbal victimization very differently. Their view is that claimants of verbal harassment have often thrown away possibilities for verbal repartee and capabilities for moving away.
The process of name-calling is typically based upon feeling not OK, and name-callers are trying to make themselves feel more powerful by using the process. If I call you a name and get you upset, then I temporarily feel more powerful because I had a powerful effect upon you. My self-esteem rises at your expense. I project my unhappiness on to you and you take it on if you allow yourself to be upset. If you do not get upset at my attempt, then I cannot dump my original unhappiness on you. Then I am left not only with my failure to successfully dump it on you but also with my original unhappiness to boot. Thus, if you’re successful at being unbothered by my words, then I wind up more unhappy; and I’ll probably quickly stop those words. This is a key element to understand, that name-callers will usually feel worse if you do not react to their name-calling. They will therefore be much quicker to stop such behavior than if you get visibly upset.
Someone call you a name? Whenever you hear such a name directed your way, thoughts along the lines of, “The name-caller is feeling weak right now” will help to prevent a possible hurt for you. Another useful self-thought is, “Whatever people say about me says nothing about me but a lot about them.” We would be happier, feel more self-esteem and change the world dramatically if we all thought the following, “If I get upset by someone calling me a name, then I have given away my power and I need to make a different choice.”
Todays Bible Verse(s): Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. 2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. 3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, 4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
Matthew 7:12 “In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
Mark,, I appreciate your sentiments and your tone but you have clearly misunderstood my writings. If you had read all of the posts on here, you would have seen several by me exhorting other writers not to engage in profanity and name calling and not putting other people down but to respectuflly disagree with them.
Your comments are more appropriately addressed to Joan F who is doing the name calling, especially egregiously calling unborn babies parasites. A parasite is always something that you don’t want attached to you or in your intestinal tract and treat it to get rid of it. This is common in prejudice, to denigrate a person and demean the person so that it is okay to kill that person.
I did not call anyone names, I quoted other racists and biggots in some of the typical things that they say and pointed out to Joan F that she was following in their footsteps with her demeaning language and name calling the most precious, helpless and absolutely innocent human beings, unborn babies. Jesus said to the Jewish rabbis who did not consider children legally people until they turn 13 (and it was okay to kill them) “Whatever you do to the least of these my brethern, you do unto me”. He had also previously answered them when He was questioned about who would be the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven (because they were all about social standing and being in the in group and children were certainly not there and were looked down upon in Jewish circles just like unborn children are today) and Jesus answer was a young child. They were so insulted and incensed, they decided to kill Him over that.
I have re-written that old nursery rhyme to a more appropriate meaning: Sticks and stones can ONLY break your bones, but words can wound a heart, break a spirit or kill a relationship.
So please sir, you need to address your comments to Joan F.
I don’t tolerate name calling nor did I call anyone any names.
Best Wishes
ATTN:: John Wilder
parasite
1. an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
2. a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.
3. (in ancient Greece) a person who received free meals in return for amusing or impudent conversation, flattering remarks, etc.
Nothing there about “something that you don’t want attached to you or in your intestinal tract and treat it to get rid of it.”
Joan F.
Let's look at another example of irrationality from your view of feminism.
Look at prostitutions, one of feminist's favourite topic.
Feminism consistently urge to abolish prostitution as they like to call it a sex – exploitation' by men on women.
But think about it, on the flip side, men actually paid women for sex and this is a fact often conveniently ignored and disregarded by the feminist –
So, the million dollar question here – Who is Exploiting Who?
Just as men are exploiting women for sex, could it also mean that women are exploiting men for money?
Is this not a fair trade in accordance to the law of Supply and Demand?
That's why I call feminist confused – they are confused between the differences of equality and sameness.
Let's look at another example of irrationality from your view of extremes.
I do not believe in extremes not matter what the circumstances are. I believe extremism distort our view in perceiving the reality. I believe when feminism first started out, their intention was noble and right.
But slowly, feminists got obsessed with it and turn it into a political power. And they got even more obsessed with it and start creating delusional reality to fit it into their belief systems.
Feminism has now generally become the blame-the-men movement, taking a holier than thou stance as if all women are victims and there are no evil and malicious females out there.
I would be interested to hear views on feminism and extremism.
Gina
P.S. About killing grandma, I AM grandma, if things get bad I may kill grandma.
Just having come back to your blog (it’s been sitting in my to-read list for quite some time), I was shocked to see what you wrote on Twitter (I don’t tweet). I thought, initially, “Holy sh**! That’s a an awful thing to say!” But then through some digging and reading some of your other entries I realized what was going on.
I think that’s probably what has been happening (and my biggest problem with Twitter and tweeters). Twitter is so vague (as is facebook and other social networking word limited instant gratification online interaction thingies). Reading your Tweet was shocking. To me, it had no basis, no foundation, and only after reading three more blog posts did I finally understand the whole story and how you came to make that Twitter post.
I like your blog a lot because it does talk so much about communication. I think it’s possible that in the heat of the moment, that this probably wasn’t your best way of communicating. Then again, I’m old school – personal stuff seems best to be communicated with family first and then, if desired, to the world.
I hope your body is recovering from such an ordeal and hope your heart does too (as I hope for your family on the loss of your child). Blessings to you.
Hm, Hillary opposes sex selection abortions?
Question to Hillary: Many of the countries where the abuses against women are most prevalent are also countries that have a vital strategic importance to the United States: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, India. How can you aggressively advocate for women without jeopardizing those strategic relationships?…
Clinton Response: Obviously, there’s work to be done in both India and China, because the infanticide rate of girl babies is still overwhelmingly high, and unfortunately with technology, parents are able to use sonograms to determine the sex of a baby, and to abort girl children simply because they’d rather have a boy. And those are deeply set attitudes. But at the governmental level, there is a great deal of openness and commitment that I am seeing….
Is this problematic for hardcore pro-aborts, because Hillary is admitting preborns are distinct and separate human beings and also that some abortions are wrong?
Can’t find any “pro-abort blog” taking note of this “Hillary traitorism.”
Sex-selective abortion presents radical feminists with their greatest dilemma – either value the lives of their youngest ‘sisters’ in the womb or support a woman's decision to abort her daughter simply because she wants to paint the nursery “blue” not “pink.
Is Hillary only opposed if the human embryo/fetus being killed is a female?
Can we as “good and planning parents” have “multiple-abortions” if want to have only 4 little boys?
Leanne
I am strongly in favor of abortion. Any woman who wants to have an abortion should because such women are genetically predisposed to irresponsibility. Outside of cases of rape and incest, women who are impregnated and choose abortions are irresponsible – they made the choice to engage in coitus, knowing that pregnancy is a risk.
From a global population perspective, the fewer genes predisposing people to such irresponsible behavior, the better. Irresponsibility has caused global warming, accepted and allowed genocide, and countless other globally painful phenomena.
Kudos to you, Penelope, for recognizing that you do not have the appropriate internal responsibility mechanisms to raise a child and have taken action. Your action makes the world a slightly better place by reducing the presence of such irresponsibility in future generations.
Joan F.
I would like to think that you are not being willfully ignorant to support your argument.
I have worked in the medical field and also went to nursing school. You could not be more wrong. Just because you found one reference (by the way, all refernces in your reference were humans and could not be legally killed like babies, nor did you show that an unborn baby is a parasite according to the definition)does not mean that you are right.
I invite you to punch into your search engine, intestinal parasites and human intestinal parasites and see a whole myriad of reports chronicaling all of the potential internal parasites which can end up being deadly.
Of course leeches and ticks are external parasites as well as fleas.
I could go on but you hit a new low even for the most rabid pro abortion opponents by slandering the baby by calling it a parasite. Like I said, all bigots demean someone so that they can justifiy their inhumane treatment including killing them.
A baby is an innocent human life that you are advocating killing at will in the most horrendous fashion. They offer more protection for animals than we do human babies.
Like I said, would you pay a vet to hack a puppy to death chopping him into little pieces like they do to unborn babies?
Kudos to Leanne, this is the best post on the whole comments section. What a challenge to all you pro abortion fanatics. Come on here and answer how you justifiy Hillary’s position. What is wrong with sex selection abortion if it is not a baby?
I can’t wait to hear the verbal gymnaistics that you will try to justify or condemn Hillary.
She has backed feminists into a corner here.
Thanks again Leanne, you just made this post all the more interesting.
I was one of those people who wrote a whole blog post about your tweet. (http://realfastonemorething.blogspot.com/2009/10/tweet-all-about-it.html)
I totally support you. It makes me sad that people attempt to shame others for sharing their own human experience. And, that there are systems in place to circumvent freedoms that we have to make choices about our bodies and our lives.
The only part that didn’t altogether upset me was knowing you were relieved to not have to get an abortion.
That’s about the only nice thing I can say about this right now as an infertile 43 year old woman who tried for 6 years to get pregnant, gave up 4 years ago, and never got a reason for why, except ‘unexplained infertility’.
My baggage to deal with.
Why did Planned Parenthood spend millions of our "hard-working female" donations to help the elections of a "Hooker-Happy" Governor?
Under Gov. George Pataki, his budgets would have cut family planning to "Planned Parenthood" anywhere from $4 to $10 million in New York. However cuts were restored after intense lobbying of the legislature by Planned Parenthood. It was a good political investment for Planned Parenthood, who spent millions (of our hard-working donations) in lobby money to convince the legislature to add to the "Hooker-Happy" Eliot Spitzer's budget.
It was a good investment, by spending millions in lobby money, Planned Parenthood actually saw an increase in family planning funding, i.e. more money for abortion doctors. The total budget increase was close to $92 million.
Before the federal authorities arrested four people on charges of running a prostitution ring that serviced clients in a several cities and took in millions in profit, they ranked the prostitutes on a scale of one to seven "diamonds."
The company ranked the prostitutes on a scale of one to seven "diamonds." A three-diamond woman, for example, could command a fee of $1,000 per hour. A seven-diamond woman cost more than $3,000 an hour. For its most valued clients, the Emperor's Club offered membership in the elite "Icon Club," with hourly fees starting at $5,500 by offering clients the opportunity to purchase direct access to a prostitute without having to contact the agency. We all know Eliot Spitzer's had the best interest of all feminists and women in general at heart, because he felt obligated to join the elite "Icon Club" or the "seven-diamond woman!"
I think Planned Parenthood should implement the "abortion doctors" on a ranking scale of one to seven diamonds, also! For its most valued clients, Planned Parenthood should have the Emperors Club membership in the elite "Icon Club" for repeat clients. The women who have abortions over and over, and who want to purchase direct access to the abortion doctor without having to contact the "goofy secretary" at the Planned Parenthood office! Additional benefits of being a member of this elite Icon Club, or "seven diamond club" could also eliminate any "goofy waiting periods in Wisconsin," most "hooker-women" enjoy! After all, a diamond is a woman's best friend!
Why is the diamond called a woman's best friend? It’s a marketing gimmick! They’ve gone to great lengths to get inside a woman's head to love shiny little rocks!
Why are abortions also called a woman's best friend? It’s a marketing gimmick! They’ve gone to great lengths to get inside a woman's head who love to think having an abortion is not killing their baby!
Eliot Spitzer lived in a fantasy world and thought he could always buy his seven-diamond woman! Planned Parenthood buys people by lobbying and women by clever marketing gimmicks!
Beverly M
This poem is done by a black woman poet for all of you pro abortionists who think tbat men should not have a say so in the abortion decision. That is sexism personified.
The Mother
by Gwendolyn Brooks
Abortions will not let you forget.
You remember the children you got that you did not get,
The damp small pulps with a little or with no hair,
The singers and workers that never handled the air.
You will never neglect or beat
Them, or silence or buy with a sweet.
You will never wind up the sucking-thumb
Or scuttle off ghosts that come.
You will never leave them, controlling your luscious sigh,
Return for a snack of them, with gobbling mother-eye.
I have heard in the voices of the wind the voices of my dim killed
children.
I have contracted. I have eased
My dim dears at the breasts they could never suck.
I have said, Sweets, if I sinned, if I seized
Your luck
And your lives from your unfinished reach,
If I stole your births and your names,
Your straight baby tears and your games,
Your stilted or lovely loves, your tumults, your marriages, aches,
and your deaths,
If I poisoned the beginnings of your breaths,
Believe that even in my deliberateness I was not deliberate.
Though why should I whine,
Whine that the crime was other than mine?–
Since anyhow you are dead.
Or rather, or instead,
You were never made.
But that too, I am afraid,
Is faulty: oh, what shall I say, how is the truth to be said?
You were born, you had body, you died.
It is just that you never giggled or planned or cried.
Believe me, I loved you all.
Believe me, I knew you, though faintly, and I loved, I loved you
All.
To Joan F., Your quote, “I am pro wanted babies. I am anti unwanted babies.” Child abuse (and abuse of humans in general especially domestic violence) has gone up since abortion was legalized and there are reasons for this. Pro-abortionists claimed (and obviously some still do in spite of adoption waiting lists) “Every Child Wanted.”
What if someone decides that parenting is not what they expected after the child is born? (it never is by the way). There are days AFTER humans are born that we all have feelings of wanting to be separate from them but we don’t have the option to kill them. Actually we do, but a guilty conscience would not be the only consequence if caught. What is truly frightening is that guilty consciences seem to be becoming more and more rare in our society.
“Johnny Teenager just totalled my car.” “Baby Betty just puked on a clean shirt for the third time today.” “Grandpa Pete’s nursing home is costing me too much money.” “I don’t want to get Wacked-out Wade to his shrink appointment.” “Mommy Millie won’t buy me more clothes.” “Brother Bong needs bail money.”
“Freddie Fetus just doesn’t fit into my life at this time.” Oh woe is me, what to do?
The Culture of Death was predicted and is upon us.
P.S. Dear John Wilder – Please know that many women believe that men should have the absolute right to be involved regarding their unborn children. We see it as totally hypocritical for women to fight for equal rights then turn around and say men should have no rights when it comes to their unborn children. We realize that there are men who would raise the child if given the chance. My cousin got on his knees begging his girlfriend not to abort and told her that he would raise the child alone. She agreed and once the child was born, she realized how much she loved their baby. They did not stay together but shared custody. This child is now a compassionate contributing member of society. Some of us do realize that legalized abortion further oppressed women and consequently all of humanity.
Thank you Ruth. You never know who you will influence on this blog, but I was conscience bound to be the voice of reason. More and more women are devaluing men as well as unborn children. Because of this culture of death, more and more women are killing their babies after they are born.
There is a principle that these women don’t want to face:
“What you sow, so shall you reap”.
Here is a site for those who may want to think a bit deeper about the abortion issue.
http://deepsoftime.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/interview-with-fr-pacholczyk/
seems I’ve missed a bit in whoop whoop … hope you are well and happy when all is said and done. Life goes on after all is said and done. My best to you, le
Life Goes On after all is said and done. Unless of course you are a fetus living inside of Penelope–then it probably will end.
Whoop. Whoop.
God. All I can say is: Freaking Use Birth Control. What the hell is wrong with you?!?!? I mean it- what is actually wrong with you? Can you figure out why you do such insanely stupid things when you’re not a stupid person? Then you try to justify your horrible choices in your blog by using bullshit figures (not an uncommon habit of yours, btw.). There is no justification for your choices here. I am honestly shocked that you would be so careless, and more shocked that you seem surprised by the hoopla. You give pro-choice a bad name. I’m about as pro-choice as it gets, and your behavior disgusts me.
Jenny,
I laugh at your remark “You give pro-choice a bad name.”
English contains a rich supply of figures of speech, but few have as many amusing possibilities as an oxymoron. That is an oxymoron.
Lisa
Ms. Trunk, you are one callous bitch. “Modern women” like you are a disgrace to civilization. If one of your surviving children is someday horribly injured in an accident, will you have him or her bumped off, too, so that the inconvenience doesn’t interfere with your career? I wonder how your children will treat you when you are too old and feeble to exist without help, and become an inconvenience to them. You had better hope they have more compassion than you do.
P.S. If I were you. I would seriously reevaluate my priorities.
O.K., sorry I used the word “bitch”. That was inappropriate. And I went off on a tangent; we’re not discussing euthanasia. But i don’t understand how you can be so apathetic to anybody, let alone your own flesh and blood. I swear, feminism has turned women into sociopaths.
Hillary Clinton tells the New York Times, “parents are able to use sonograms to determine the sex of a baby, and to abort girl children simply because they'd rather have a boy.”
Hey Hillary? Is it still unfortunate if women abort “girl children” because:
…they have a holiday planned and simply don’t want to “ruin” their bikini body by carrying a daughter?
…a daughter would mean one of their kids would simply have to share a bedroom?
…another daughter would mean needing to simply trade their car in for a mini-van?
…their daughter would simply be born under the wrong star sign?
…after they tried to conceive this daughter, the boyfriend simply got cold feet?
…a daughter would simply require mom to defer her studies for a semester (while all her medical bills were being paid for her)?
…mom simply feels like she’s “not ready to have a daughter” (at 26, married, home owner, no major issues)?
…mom simply thinks aborting her daughter would be easier to deal with than another miscarriage, because at least she gets to choose this time?
…mom simply chose to have a one-night stand with another man and (irrationally, according to medical science) fears her daughter may not be her husband’s?
In which of these situations did an innocent girl child “unfortunately” have to die?
Would it have mattered less if these children were boys?
What if it was twin girls – was it twice as bad?
Is it only “unfortunate” when a baby girl dies simply because she was a baby girl and not because of any of these other petty, selfish, or insane so-called reasons?
It’s so refreshing to hear Hillary admit that sex-selection abortions often involve “girl children” but so sickening to be reminded how contradictory the feminist pro-abortion mentality has to be.
Beth V.
Gina
What do you mean when you say feminism? Feminism exists across a spectrum in terms of what i means and is multi-vocal in terms of its discourse. What you propose as feminism reads as originating in a misogynistic and antagonistic fantasy of what some BELIEVE feminism to mean. You will need to put more thought and research into your queries if you are to be taken seriously.
AgnesW,
This Blog is a simple “media business to make money.”
Defining “Feminism” is like “Anything, Everything, and Forever.”
It is like Facebook’s terms of service (TOS) used to say that when you closed an account on their network, any rights they claimed to the original content you uploaded would expire. Not anymore.
Now, anything you upload to Facebook can be used by Facebook in any way they deem fit, forever, no matter what you do later.* Want to close your account? Good for you, but Facebook still has the right to do whatever it wants with your old content. They can even sublicense it if they want.
You hereby grant Facebook an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to (a) use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works and distribute (through multiple tiers), any User Content you (i) Post on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof subject only to your privacy settings or (ii) enable a user to Post, including by offering a Share Link on your website and (b) to use your name, likeness and image for any purpose, including commercial or advertising, each of (a) and (b) on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof.
Simple terms:
Facebook’s New Terms Of Service: “We Can Do Anything We Want With Your Content. Forever.”
My question to AgnesW, is why do we “women” make things so complicated?
Beth V.
Agnes W:
In an attempt to appear intelligent, you fractured the english language in your post. Your syntax, word usage and general tone was virtually unitelligible.
Feminism is frought with problems. They have long ago ceased wanting equality but instead demand more than equal rights. The leaders have degenerated into promoting hatred of men. This is explained in Wikipedia under the heading of MISANDRY (hatred of men)
The magazine, MS could not get advertising and is down to 150,000 paid subscribers published on just a quarterly basis. Other women’s magazines have circulations in the millions.
So tell us some more about your views on feminism since you claim to be an authority.
Agnes W,
Let me propose, “Feminism is your worst enemy.”
All this freedom is making you miserable, unmarriageable, infertile, and unstable. Go home, bake a cake, quit pounding on the doors of public life, and all your troubles will go away.
A recent author chronicle that the backlash began in 1986, after major magazines and newspapers trumpeted stories on an unpublished Harvard-Yale marriage study. The researchers claimed that a college-educated woman of 30 had only a 20% chance of finding a husband; by age 35 it was 5%, by 40 she was “more likely to be killed by a terrorist” than make it to the altar, in a magazine’s memorable analogy. Reading the article on an airplane on the way to a friend’s wedding, she recalls, “I hadn’t been worrying about marriage, but suddenly I felt glum and grouchy.”
The recent author is right that there is no man shortage for young women. But according to Barbara Lovenheim, who pored over census data for her book Beating the Marriage Odds, the ratio begins to reverse after 35: between the ages of 40 and 44, there are 75 single men for every 100 unmarried women.
The author George Gilder, who describes himself as “America’s No. 1 antifeminist.” On the contrary, Gilder argues, the media and politicians are all in the ideological thrall of the feminists, “because feminism and sexual liberation are the religion of the intellectual class in America.”
The reason more women do not hold elected office as a result, he adds, is because “women don’t vote for feminists. The people don’t want feminism. Only the elite does.”
Beth V.
“women don’t vote for feminists. The people don’t want feminism. Only the elite does.”
That is almost the biggest piece of garbage I’ve ever read.
And I have to say that I don’t regret commenting on this post, but I do seriously regret subscribing to the comments. What a bunch of hypocrites. Listen, if you don’t believe in abortion, fine. Don’t have one. And if you don’t like what the writer has to say, don’t read her blog.
Feminism is about equality pure & simple. Anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is either selling something or trying to cover up their own feelings of inadequacy.
Meghan Harvey,
Your argument against feminism makes as much sense as using a birthday cake recipe to show that the war in Iraq has been a mistake. You don't need a liberal arts education (or even a middle-school education) to see that equality “does not equal” feminism harming anyone!
You state “Feminism is about equality pure & simple.”
We have a “right” to be “equal and express our opinion.”
Beth V.
Let me also propose, “Feminists are inherently illogical.”
The reason for this is that “feminism” is essentially an “emotionally” based ideology as opposed to a “logic” based ideology.
All feminist arguments essentially boil down to one of two statements:
1. I don’t like this so its wrong, or
2. I say its wrong so its wrong.
No matter how much they may attempt to dress their arguments up in a veneer of rationality or logic, that’s all it is!
Since I see many of these illogical fallacies passed off as truths on a regular basis, I will suggest the various feminist fallacies, and how not to fall for them.
“How I look doesn’t validate or invalidate what I’m saying.”
You’ll usually hear this hoary old chestnut when pointing out to a 400lb woman (think Ragnell) that her views on the depiction of women in comics and the media might not be as valid as another woman’s who isn’t a huge beast. Now while its a very bold statement, like most bold statements its also bullshit.
Jealousy is in fact a powerful motivator and it isn’t unreasonable, in a situation where comments are probably motivated by jealousy to view said comments as sour grapes.
I mean lets face it, If Roseanne Barr were to say “any woman who wears a thong is a slut” would it really be unrealistic to think the views are predicated on the fact that they don’t make thongs that big?
Lets put this in other terms, say a friend of yours had recently tried out for the football team and hadn’t made the cut. Would you view his statement that “only brain dead morons play high school football” as anything other than sour grapes?
So why then is it “invalid” To point out that a women who could not be described as attractive if you were being more charitable than Bill Gates might just be criticising the way Powergirl is portrayed due to jealousy?
Is it truly unreasonable to think a woman who would look like a beached whale in a swimsuit has a different perspective on attractive women in skimpy outfits that a woman who is herself attractive?
And if this woman, due to her “body issues” wouldn’t feel comfortable wearing said outfit herself, why should we take her statement that “no woman would do X in Y” outfit seriously?
Like it or not, statements made due to jealousy should not be taken at face value.
Another example “Women earn X % less than men, which is proof of sexism.”
This is a fallacy based on people misunderstanding of statistics, and on the refusal to take into account personal choice.
Yes if you compare the median income of all men in the US, with the median income of all women in the US, women as a whole earn less than men do.
This is not due to sexism, its due primarily to women’s lower labor participation rates over their lifetime, the fact that women are more likely to suspend or end their careers early to care for their family, the fact that women are less likely to sacrifice time with their family to get ahead in their career while they are still working, and the fact that men are more likely to go into high risk, high stress (and thus high paying) career’s.
The fact is when you compare men and women with the same or similar experience, education, and work habits, there is no “wage gap.”
Beth V.
Let me also propose another feminists fallacy, “Abortion is a woman’s issue.”
This is one of the most prevalent and wrong headed fallacies out there. Its so prevalent that many men will tell you “My opinion on abortion doesn’t matter because I’m not a woman” others will even go so far as to state no man has any right to express an opinion on abortion at all.
This is pure unadulterated bullshit!
Abortion and whether it should be legal or not is a human issue. Like it or not it takes two to create a life, one man and one woman.
Granted that life spends its first nine months in a woman’s womb, but the idea that its a part of her body is simply biologically inaccurate. Human life begins at conception. From the moment of fertilisation on that life is separate from, though dependent upon the mother.
You will also often hear fallacy, “Its wrong to force a woman to be a mother.”
This is wrong for several reasons. One knows every woman already has reproductive freedom. She has the choice whether or not to engage in sexual intercourse.
Unless she was raped, the issue of reproductive freedom became moot the moment she consented to sex. Second the same women who claim its wrong to force a woman to be a mother have no issue whatsoever with forcing a man to be a father.
Many times you’ll hear the statement “You can’t compare nine months of suffering to paying child support” except that for one, its not nine months of suffering, for the first three at least, the pregnancy has little or no effect on the woman whatsoever. Second they fail to take into account the massive burden child support for an unwanted child takes on the average man.
Assuming a median income and median child support payments, the average man will have to work between 10-20 hours a week extra in order to meet those obligation.
At ten hours a week, over 18 years, that equals over one year of additional labor in order to pay for a child he never wanted.
If its wrong to force a woman to carry a child she doesn’t want its also wrong to force a man to support a child he never wanted. Conversely if its OK to force a man to meet the financial obligations of fatherhood then there’s nothing wrong with not allowing a woman to slaughter a human life because she doesn’t want it.
Bottom line if two people consent to have sex together then they both must be willing to live with the consequences, if not then you both need to keep your damn legs shut!
Also and its sad I even have to say this, but MURDER IS NOT A RIGHT.
Its sexist that as a woman my ability to do a job, think clearly, react rationally etc is sometimes questioned due to what time of the month it is yet no one ever question a man because of the calender.
Now the problem with this fallacy is that women do in fact become less rational, and more emotional at certain times of the month. Granted this effects some women more than others, but it effects all women to some degree.
This isn’t a “sexist” view, its a “biological” view.
At certain times of the month a woman’s body is flooded with hormones which increase emotion and decrease reason.
It does in fact make them more irritable, less able to use whatever native intelligence they have, less able to think clearly without emotion clouding their judgement, and less capable of handling stress. Yet despite these unarguable facts, they want you to believe that its “sexist” to recognise this!
Let me also propose another feminists fallacy, “Pressuring” a woman to have sex is the same as rape.”
This one is a bit more tricky as it depends on how they define pressuring.
For example the line “If you really loved me you would sleep with me. Now there’s no doubt its a bit of a scuzzy tactic, but to claim its rape is ridiculous. The fact is in many relationships there are those who attempt to guilt or coerce their partner into getting what they want.
There no real difference between a woman “withholding sex” in order to get what she wants, and a man using “emotional pressure” to get what he wants. Both are tactics which show you really don’t care about the other person but neither can be considered anything more than that.
The problem is many feminists want to conflate “buyers remorse” with rape!
You say you got drunk and had sex with a guy your embarrassed to admit you had sex with?
He “raped” you by using chemical means.
Your boyfriend told you he’d break up with you if you didn’t put out? he just “raped” you through emotional coercion.
Now that’s not to say that actual rapes don’t happen, but when a woman is actually raped there’s no ambiguity, rape is rape, pressure is not!
I still suggest “Feminists are inherently illogical.”
Beth V.
Kudos to you Beth V and well spoken.
To meaghan, you are delusional if you think that feminism is about equality. Women have way more rights than men.
Let me give you an example. The Saint Paul fire department was sued by women who claimed that the physical requirements were designed to discriminate against women. The reality is that the physical requirements were designed to weed out men who were not strong enough to do the job like throwing a 200 lb man across their shoulder in a fireman’s carry and running down a flight of stairs.
The women took the fire department to court and actually got the court to find in their favor. Now two women firefighters can drag a man downstairs putting 3 people’s lives in danger. The old equal pay for equal work went out the window. The women could not do the work by themnselves so now it takes two women who make the same pay to do the work of one man. That is more than equal, it is also dangerous. I could give you many more examples.
Equality means that women can apply for the job, but they have to be able to do the job like any other man or they are not capable and should not be hired.
Let me suggest, “The Worst Lessons of Feminism.”
The worst lessons of feminism – and the lessons that almost all American women have learned too well – is that women “deserve it all” without commensurate levels of “sacrifice.” It is the lesson that compromise is weakness!
It is the lesson that they “deserve” affluence, the perfect family, the perfect man, and a life of entitlement without any cost to her!
Most men know better. They know that there is no "having it all." There is no free lunch. They know that corporate success requires great sacrifice. Friends, relationships, hobbies, all play second fiddle to the climb up the corporate ladder. This they know. This they accept. They know that being an involved father usually means not getting all the promotions at work!
Frustratingly, American “feminist women” have not learned this lesson. So, they vent their frustrations at home and in the workplace, making for both difficult colleagues and second-rate mothers!
“Feminism” cannot accept that women cannot both be strong and independent while at the same time being the perpetual victim.
Oh righteous feminist, which is it? Are women strong? Or are they weak? Do we hold open to door for the strong female executive?
Do we not help a mother with young children by helping her with her grocery bags?
You, “righteous feminist,” have recast the cultural rules yet you “refuse” to follow them. Is it any wonder why so many millions of men eschew marriage and relationships with American women?
Can you not see the “unintended consequences” of your actions? Perhaps men are asking too much of women?
When an American man pitches woo to a foreign woman, it is a direct and bold statement that the man is not going to play the game that the “American feminists” so desperately want. A foreign woman is not (yet) burdened by the clash of expectations that American woman “cannot” cope with!
A foreign woman typically has no problem with making a man happy because her culture tells her that a man's happiness reflects well on her own “success” as a woman. Foreign women know that if they give love, they will receive love. They know that the “unintended consequence” of independence is loneliness!
The sad stereotype of the shrill, unfriendly, independent American “career woman” is becoming stronger and stronger!
The equally repellent “stereotype” of the overwrought and “unfriendly” soccer mom shuttling her kids around while trying to keep her independence is also becoming part of our cultural landscape!
The “scowling American woman” is all too common. It's not men making her scowl! It's her “inability” to see reality and choose appropriately that is making her scowl!
I am not angry with American “feminist” women. I merely pity them.
I pity them for “embracing feminism” without any “critical” thought. I “pity” them for making men the enemy and not loving partners. I “pity” them for their unsuccessful struggle with their own rules. I “pity” them for not understanding that life is about compromise and that compromise is not weakness!
When an American woman asks a man about his job, his car, his home I can only sigh in dismay. Men are not simply “wallets” to be looted!
Nor are men all rapists and gorillas. Men are complex and interesting humans who need respect and love, as do women.
Pathetically, American women have been “brainwashed” into thinking that giving love and respecting men is somehow evil and wrong! No matter, American “feminist” women can wallow in misery as much as they want!
Men will happily and respectfully court his Latin girlfriend and let “independent and unfriendly American women” enjoy their cats!
I still suggest “Feminists are inherently illogical.”
Beth V.
PT: how do you unsubscribe from comments without unsubscribing from the whole blog? I want off this particular comment thread!
Never mind: Just figured it out.
Well, this is a decent way to do it. Or you can send an email to me. I’ll forward your address to the guy who manages this stuff on my blog. I think he has to do it by hand.
-Penelope
Dear Beth V.
Your two previous points come to mind after reading that Dee wants off this thread:
1. I don’t like this so its wrong, or
2. I say its wrong so its wrong.
(“I’m taking my ball and my bat and I’m going home!”)
Out of so many great comments and thoughts, Penelope responds to Dee–who is a paying subscriber. Anyway, thanks for showing that there are other ways to think and better ways to live.
Let me suggest, "Feminists Are Cons."
The “feminist movement” as we have come to know it in recent decades is fundamentally a “con.”
It is as filled with falsehood, inaccuracy, and foolishness as astrology or parapsychology. As it is considered "treasonous to criticize a sister feminist," no standards of "accuracy" or "honesty" are ever enforced!
Hyperbole and "deceit" thus become the formula for success, “peer review” playing no role in reining in "misinformation." Any would-be feminist who raises scholarly objections to the "rampant misinformation" is branded an "enemy of women" and is drummed out of the movement!
Various feminists proclaim that women are "under siege", that a monstrous social bias against them, if not a virtual war, is going on, that women have little respect or power.
Yet the notion of the American woman as a powerless “victim” is one of the most "absurd notions" ever foisted upon anyone. American women live, on average, seven years longer than men!
76% of Americans “believe” that men control more wealth than women. But a new survey of Federal Reserve Board data reveals that women “actually” control 51.3% of personal wealth in the United States. Women controlled 86% of all personal wealth in 1990 according to another study, and make up 55% of current college graduates.
According to information released by another study reveals "women" 18 years and older control about half of the investment wealth in the United States. Women cast 54% of the votes in Presidential elections, so they can hardly claim to be left out of the political decision-making process!
They win almost automatically in child custody disputes. Women suffer only 6% of the work-related fatalities (the other 94% are suffered by men).
Most conclude that “women have" the problem and “men are” the problem. I think men, though, have a different experience. A man who has seen his marriage become alimony payments, his home become his “wife's home,” and his children become “child-support payments” for those who have been “turned against” him psychologically feels he is spending his life working for people who “hate” him!
When he is called a "commitment-phobic" he doesn't feel understood! When a man tries to keep up with payments by “working overtime” and he is told he is “insensitive,” or tries to handle the stress by drinking and is told he is a drunkard, he doesn't feel powerful, but powerless!
He feels desperate for someone to love but fears that another mortgage payment, another set of children turned against him, and a deeper desperation!
Women are the victim of only about 35% of violent crimes, and only about 25% of all murders, yet because of our society’s "exaggerated" concern and respect for them, special legislation has been passed to punish “violence against women” as if it were a “more heinous” crime than “violence against men!”
Feminists claim to want “equality”, and this is an example of what “equality” means to them, i.e., preferential treatment to address their concerns!
Two out of every three dollars spent on health care is spent on women, and even if you don’t count pregnancy-related care, women still receive “more” medical care than men – yet feminists still "holler" that women's health is being “neglected”, and far too many people “credulously believe” them!
Of the 25 worst jobs, as ranked by the Jobs Related Almanac based on a combination of salary, stress, security, and physical demands, 24 of them are predominantly, if not almost entirely, male, which might explain why men commit over 80% of all suicides.
Now, if it were really the case, as feminists claim, that men have selfishly arranged everything to be wonderful for themselves, absolutely ignoring women's’ legitimate concerns and needs, would the above be true?
Of course it is not!
It is much more realistic to suggest that “we women” have cleverly seized the upper hand by "pretending" to be "helplessly trapped" below!
Looking at the “full” picture, and not the tiny, distorted one that feminists and those they have duped present, we see a very different picture: The American woman emerges as perhaps the “most privileged large group” in history, enjoying a never-before-seen level of affluence, power, leisure, and health, supported by the work, discipline, and self-effacing, life-destroying exertions of a group they have bamboozled – their men – into believing their cries of “victimization!"
Most men know better. They know that there is no "having it all." No free lunch. Unless you are a con artist!
I still suggest “Feminists are inherently illogical.”
Beth V.
Okay, Beth V, admit it, you are a man using a woman’s name to post on here. It is hard to believe that a woman could so directly confront women with the facts and logic and seeing from a man’s point of view.
I am not at angry about it, I say kudos to you. Whether you are a man or a woman, I say kudos to you again for an outstanding post.
Beth V
Since statements made on this open forum fall under public domain, that means that they can be copied and used elsewhere in print, I wanted you to know that I am going to quote you exactly word for word in my chapter on Why Feminists are Ruining Marriages from my soon to be completed book entitled: YOU CAN ACHIEVE HAPPILY EVER AFTER AND IMPROVE YOUR LOVE LIFE TOO. What I would like is for you to contact me at my email and give me your full name so that you can get a publishing credit for your work.
I offer that to any other women who want to make similar statements about how feminists are not representative of women in general. You can email me at marriagecoach 1 at yahoodotcom. Thanks
I can only give you my perspective as a woman who knows firsthand the oppression of her gender and state my belief that legalized abortion further oppresses both genders (as does pornography).
I was abused by men in my teens/early adulthood (sexually and physically–3 different men who were all known to me) as have been about 1/3 of the women I have gotten to know in my lifetime. I have also seen firsthand the systematic differential poor treatment of women in many different workplaces — to the point of women turning on each other. I will take NO blame for the terrible things that men have chosen to do to me nor is any woman (or child) ever to blame for the terrible things that have happened to them at the hands of others. Women who are abused by men are more likely to abuse their children thereby causing more and more violence in our society.
After re-reading Beth Vs posts, I too believe it is highly likely that Beth is a man. John, why would you say, “Whether you are a man or a woman, I say kudos to you again for an outstanding post.” If Beth is a man, then he would not have the experiences in life that women do (not to say he wouldn’t have his own experiences dealing with the opposite side) however, his posts would be a sham and come from the point of view of someone who believes it is OK to express their views as someone they could never be. Would it be “kudos” if a woman was posing on this thread as a man? Maybe only if they were saying what you want to hear? John, as a woman, I also cannot feel comfortable listing my full, real name on these threads — not something you seem to have worries about. Before you finish your book, I hope you check history where you will find out that marriages were on the whole terrible for women even before feminism came about. Currently, single women live longer than married women but married men live longer than single men. — Good stat to add to your book in the area where you will quote Beth’s stat about women living longer than men. Just make sure you fully research all the surrounding issues before you finish your chapter about feminists ruining marriages.
Why would you say “kudos” to posts before you know whether they represent the truth or not? This has also caused me to rethink where your claims are truly coming from. I believe if you were truly for the wellbeing of humanity and not just your own gender you would see how outrageous it is to express such views under the cover of the opposite gender. Beth calls feminists cons but if Beth is a man, this would be a BIG CON that you John obviously think is OK.
If Beth is a man,I personally could not take anything previously said by him seriously. Beth doesn’t seem to even have the basic experiences of a woman in our country–to say nothing of our world. Beth doesn’t mention the obvious differences between men and women–that being, on the average, men are larger and stronger than women and therefore are able to use this “upper hand” to their advantage when they so wish. Beth points out that only 35% of violence and 25% of murders are done to women but Beth doesn’t point out what gender is committing these acts or what gender is committing the remaining percentages of violence and murders. Are feminists to blame for men blowing away other men?
I have never felt physically in danger when expressing my views to another women (one who calls herself a feminist or one who doesn’t, one who is larger and stronger or one who isn’t); unfortunately, I wish I could say this was true for expressing my views to some men, especially those who hold positions of power and authority.
Beth, please tell us some of the negative experiences you have had with men just for the mere fact of your being female (all women have had them starting at early ages). This way, any woman still reading this thread will be able to decide if you can in any way relate to our gender. If you can, I am interested in learning more about your life experiences that have led to your way of thinking. If you can’t, you are another example of a man who continues to manipulate and exploit my gender. This is not “Kudos to you” but “Shame on you”. Food for thought — Could shame be a reason for the higher suicide rates of men?
There are differences between the genders that we should be aware of and then try to love and cherish these differences in everyone. This does not mean we should ever condone the inequality or mistreatment of either gender and we should always speak up for those who cannot due to the imbalance of power or size.
I do find it very sad and hypocritical when women choose abortion thereby perpetuating the cycles of violence that most women know already exist. This doesn’t mean that as a women I don’t understand the feelings that lead to the choice to abort, it just means that I don’t believe it is ever the right choice in the long run (kinda like suicide — a permanent fix to a temporary “problem”). I also believe humans are becoming immune to violence in our society due to such disrespect of all human life and that we are becoming so flippant about issues of life/death. Leaving men out of the abortion issue further alienates the genders from one other and goes against everything women have previously and continue to fight for. Violence begets violence — and abortion is a violent act.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse, it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”
G.K. Chesterton
Hey Barb:
I appreciate your sharing your thoughtful introspection in response to my post. I understand that you might have problems if Beth V is indeed a man. Let me give you some reasons that I believe that it is okay that he did if in fact he did.
Nora Roberts is one of the most famous and best selling romance writers of all time. She also writes under a male pen name of JD Robb assuming a male persona. Is it not okay for her but you are saying she can but Beth V can’t.
There are reasons that I am aurmising why this was written like this. If you read back over the posts, all of the hate speech that I can recall was by women who were self proclaiming to be feminists. Those feminists predominantly directed that hate speech to men in general and directed at men who dared to post on here. So Beth V figured that as a man, he would be considered irrelevant but as a woman he would be heeded by other women. Regardless of the sex of the author, it does not negate the factual statements made on the post.
Maureen Dowd penned an article last year positing that the only thing that men are good for today is being sperm donors and she was accepted instead of being castigated. Imagine if a man penned a column proclaiming that the only thing women are good for is bearing children.
I have been in fights with men but the real lasting emotional damage has been done to me by women who verbally shredded me and my emotions.
As a marriage and relationship coach, one of my biggest problems in dealing with women is getting them to realize that part of the problem is that they don’t make it safe for men to be truthful with them when the man has a legitimate complaint about her. Women typically go into attack mode turning on vicious hate speech often at upper decibel levels and going on sexual strike for lengths of time. Never is the man allowed to make his case much as less actually dealing with the problem. This was illustrated by a famous playwright Thornton Wilder (no relation) in his smash play Our Town with the iconic line: “Most men lead lives of quiet desparation”.
I choose not to hide behind pen names on here. I believe that if people had to be responsible for their speech where their names were known, that there would be far less hate speech committed. By the way, hate speech legislation is a favorite issue advocated by liberals but ironically by an overwhelming margin, it is the liberals who are the most egregious offenders and practitioners of hate speech.
So I say, kudos to Beth V whether she is man or a woman because she countered all of the ugliness printed on here towards men on this post.
The reason that I believe that she is a man is that she factually and logically made her case whereas the majority of women have made feeling statements on here lacking facts and logic. Those feelings were hateful and attacking in nature. If you think about it much of the violence towards women has been by men who have been verbally attacked by women and responded back with violence. I don’t condone or excuse violence towards women, but women many times can be instigators of their own victimhood. I know this from personal exsperience and working with other couples. While I did not hit my wife who would scream at me, call me names and scream the ultimate put down f..k you. I took her to five different marriage counselors and none of them could or would confront her over her verbal violence.
Women need to understand that men have feelings and understand men’s feelings as well as their own to be taken seriously.
John Wilder,
I have never heard of Nora Roberts since I’m not into romance novels but if I were trying to form a personal opinion about her based on her writings, I would want to know her gender if it were relevant to the discussions. The comparison of using a pen name when writing about romance to hiding your gender when you are writing about gender issues is not logical thinking to me.
I’m still waiting to hear from Beth V. I’m not saying Beth’s real name is an issue but if Beth is speaking as a woman and is really not a woman,then it will affect how seriously I take Beth’s comments. As I’ve stated, I totally understand the fears of using a real name (for both men and women) and do realize there are many verbally abusive women in our world.
However, I see no reason to cover up your gender (especially with the topics that have been discussed here) unless you have some major issues with the opposite sex and want to manipulate them in some way to your advantage. Being fearful of some anonomous verbal abuse is WAY different than being fearful of rape or fearing for your life.
Beth can use any name she wants; I’m saying that if Beth is a man operating under the guise of a woman, he has not earned my trust. Looking back, I don’t see anything near a balance in Beth’s writings. This is not to say that I saw a balance in some of the women that wrote on this thread either. My argument has been that abortion is totally hypocritical and has caused further abuse of women, not less, to say nothing of causing a greater rift between men and women. The abuse and objectification of women by men has in turn caused women to objectify and abuse their unborn (and sadly now abuse of born children by both genders is climbing).
I am offended by and disagree with your statement that “much of the violence towards women has been by men who have been verbally attacked by women and responded back with violence.”
After I started talking about the violence in my own marriage(verbal and physical), I was asked by others, “Why did you stay so long?” Other than my wonderful marriage counselor, no one asked, “Why doesn’t he stop?”
I ask you the same, “Why did you stay married to a woman who you “took to five different marriage counselors and none of them could or would confront her over her verbal violence.”?
I propose that “much of the verbal violence towards men has been by women who have been physically attacked by men and then respond back with verbal abuse.” Many men are instigators of their own victimhood. Logical?
After pointing the finger for so long, most people eventually realize there are three fingers pointing back at themselves.
You don’t address the fact that abuse and murder of men is also primarily caused by men. Both verbal and physical abuse (and rape) is about control (i.e. the “upper hand”). What gender has historically had the majority of control in our country? On the whole, what gender has the physical ability to abuse the other? I’m not saying that there are not cases of all types of abuse of women towards men; however, these are the exceptions. Since you are a marriage counselor, I am sure you know all about control issues even if you don’t address them with the couples you counsel.
Did I cause my own rape as a teen because of what I talked about, drank or wore that evening? Did I deserve a broken bone because I came home 15 minutes later than he told me to come home? Did I cause my own victimhood because I said “hello” to an ex-boyfriend and then was called a “slut” by my husband?
As a counselor I am sure you hear about the verbal abuse that men have historically used to control women in attempts to “keep them in their place”(bitch, cunt, whore, slut, fat cow, etc.) You can walk into any school in the country and hear the verbal abuse of girls by boys. Over the years, young women have started to use this language when talking to and about other girls. I see nowhere near the verbal abuse of young women towards young men (again, not to say it doesn’t exist). Women hurt themselves much more than most of them are aware when they fell into the trap (set up by men on the whole)of killing their own babies in the name of equality. I can see how the abuse of women led to the legalization of abortion — the ultimate child abuse. It saddens me that because the woman has the “upper hand” over her unborn, she would choose violence over other life-affirming choices.
I in no way condone any kind of verbal, mental, emotional, sexual or physical abuse towards anyone but do controllers ever admit that they condone control and abuse?
Your last statement reads, “Women need to understand that men have feelings and understand men’s feelings as well as their own to be taken seriously.” Why do you not say “People need to understand that other people have feelings and understand other’s feelings as well as their own to be taken seriously.”?
It only took one marriage counselor for me to see what was best for me and how I had been slowly brainwashed. Once I distanced myself from an abusive marriage, I was able to get in touch with my own feelings (and I was able to retain my logical thinking).
Unfortunately, it still takes me awhile to see through abusive personalities but eventually I can figure out who they are when I listen or read a little closer. Best wishes on your book.
Barb:
Let me say that I am deeply sorry for your hurtful past. I know and understand better than you think. I was brutalized beyond belief by a father who was sadistic and enjoyed hurting people. I ran away from home at the age of 14 and was returned home and sent to the parish priest “for counseling” who then sexually abused me. Of course your abuse was not your fault nor was my abuse my fault.
All of the abuse in your life was by men as well as mine. However, I also had a drunken mother who agreed with all of the beatings my father dished out since he was beating on me and my brothers instead of her.
Now as to Nora Roberts she is a multi millionaire. I don’t read romance novels either, but I am a writer and recognize other writers. She writes under the male pen name of JD Robb writing murder mysteries because this is a good old boy’s network.
Mrs. Doubtfire was a man masquerading as a woman because the family courts robbed him of visitation which is not all that uncommon in family courts. You need to stop obsessing on the sex of the writer and heed the message which is true and accurate regardless of the sex of the writer.
As to control, I don’t believe in or condone control in a relationship either. Let us look at that. Men are accused of that and certainly it happens. No one wants to look at contol by women in a relationship. Let me give you an example. No one would condone forcing a woman to have sex with a man if she did not want to. Yet it is perfectly permissable for a wife to force the husband do without sex against his will according to most women. In fact statistics prove that 60% of the women out there have their husbands on a starvation diet of sex once a week or less. Feminists and female colleagues just tell the men to shut up, that they won’t die without sex and that a woman should only have sex when she feels like it. You don’t call that control?
Beth V simply stated all of the inequalities forced upon them by women in this society. Women need to stop playing the victim role and look at what they do to men. Women routinely belittle men. It is even in the commercials on tv where the woman is portrayed as the hero swooping in to save the hapless and helpless husband all the while throwing out sarcasting and condascending and belittling remarks to the man.
As to women instigating their own victimhood, I educate female clients that men are hard wired with testosterone and the Fight or Flight Syndrome. Once she starts yelling at him and putting him down, the Fight or Flight Syndrome kicks in flooding his circulatory system with huge amounts of adrenaline making him feel as if he will explode. When the swcreaming and belittling continues by the woman to the man, he sometimes does explode. What I explain to women is that they need to show respect for the man, not yell at him or curse him but calmly explain her problems with him in a collaborative how can we resolve this problem.
It is also true, that when a man tries to talk to the woman about a legitimate concern that he has about her, she goes on the attack, yelling, screaming name calling and sexual withdrawal. This is not an uncommon syndrome, but tends to be the rule rather than the exception.
Equality is fine and most men would gladly settle for equality. The problem is that women want more than equality. Men should never use their superior strength against women, God gave us that strength to protect them, but on the other hand, there is no way for men to speak up for their rights without being belittled and put down by the vast majority of women. Those are facts regardless of who states them.
I too am very sorry for the abuse you suffered as a child by others.
However, I’m confused. Was it sadistic when your dad beat you or was his behavior a result of his being hard-wired with testosterone? Maybe you and your brothers didn’t talk to him the way he expected you to and it was the huge amounts of adrenaline making him feel as if he would explode. When the screaming and fighting continued between you boys (as it often does with children), your dad sometimes exploded and abused you. If you would have calmly expressed your needs, maybe he wouldn’t have beat you. Or is it just women who are expected to calmly and logically express their feelings in order that they not get beat? What excuse can I use if I choose to punch my teen the next time he tells me how stupid I am? Too much estrogen? Where is the logic?
The fact is that abuse is a learned behavior and your dad beating on you and your siblings was a choice he made and mostly likely learned in his family of origin. My ex-husband’s beating on me was a choice he made which he saw growing up. They abused us because they could (being larger and stronger) and there was something in it for them (control). Abusers of any type or gender operate out of places of fear and abandonment and then share their fears and misery with others (usually those they “love” most), continuing the cycles. My ex-husband never beat his boss who was known to yell and scream but he did beat me and all I did was try to love him. You cannot love someone who does not first love themselves and abuse takes away self-love.
Spouse and child abuse have nothing to do with love. Whether you are a man or a woman, using sex in marriage as a tool to get what you want is also a form of control and has nothing to do with love. However, not wanting to have sex with someone who is in any way abusing you is normal and healthy and should tell you that you are in a relationship that is not in your best interest.
Your statement — “The problem is that women want more than equality.” This is not a fact no matter who states it.
Barb
You are such an intelligent woman. It bothers me that you seem to be deliberately trying to obfuscate the issue.
I am trying to separate the truly dysfunctional people and set them apart from the general population and talk about problems in the general population.
Of course, my father and your husband were bullies and cowards beating on defenseless people. My brothers and I walked around on “eggshells” never knowing when he would explode.
When I talk about women instigating their own victimhood, it is to illustrate that they don’t know about Fight or Flight Syndrome. I am talking about men who are not normally violent being pushed in arguments where the wife won’t let up and continues until he explodes. I don’t excuse it and I teach clients to leave the argument when it gets too heated to avoid this situation. I tell them that it is imperative to cool down and regain composure before resuming the discussion. I also teach them to resolve arguments by talking calmly.
Just because you don’t want more than equality does not mean that you can generalize about all women. The evidence is overwhelming. For you to say that it is not so is simply denial on your part.
Yikes. I agree with the other commenter’s who said that her statements are clearly related to her asberger’s syndrome. Then again… I almost think all of Gen Y has asberger’s. This sense of impropriety & lack of boundaries seems to be a huge problem anymore, with the entire under-30 crowd. I’m not that much older – I count my lucky stars that I can include myself in the tail end of the Gen-X crowd.
There ARE lines that need to be drawn between the public/private and work/private and those lines are there for a reason. It frightens me to see how blurred those lines are becoming and how much this new generation is allowed to get away with at work and how much they expect us to just accept of them.
No. As a 34 year old, professional, staunchly pro-choice woman, I would NEVER A) Twitter or Facebook while at work B) shove my private life in my employer’s faces C) talk about such highly personal issues for every Tom, Dick & Harry (and Jane) that I work with to see. Work is work, personal is personal, and never the twain shall meet.
You’re not a trailblazer, Penelope. You’re just another Gen Y’r who’s tromping all over the trails that were blazed before you, tripping over & breaking everything in your eagerness to tweet about it. Can’t this generation learn to just LIVE for the sake of living, and be in the moment, without having to make a show of it? Are you living for yourselves or for your imagined public?
Let me continue to propose, "Feminists Are Cons."
The “feminist movement” as we have come to know it in recent decades is fundamentally a “con.”
I propose “women” are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men. I only make these statements using valid data and facts!
My views as a “woman” are “simple fact” not merely “wishing the facts” were something different!
Be honest about simple facts!
It is as filled with falsehood, inaccuracy, and foolishness as astrology or parapsychology. As it is considered "treasonous to criticize a sister feminist," no standards of "accuracy" or "honesty" are ever enforced!
My point is proved again in a scholarly study published by the M. S. Fiebert, Department of Psychology at California State University, Long Beach and references examining assaults by women on their spouses or male partners. There is also an extensive annotated bibliography (July 2009).
In summary: This bibliography examines 256 scholarly investigations: 201 empirical studies and 55 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that "women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men" in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 253,500.
The facts reveal from the scholarly study states, "women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners."
Here are only 2 of the 256 scholarly investigations to illustrate the point!
Anderson, K. L. (2002). Perpetrator or victim? Relationships between intimate partner violence and well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 851-863. (Data consisted of 7,395 married and cohabiting heterosexual couples drawn from wave 1 of the National Survey of Families and Households. In terms of measures: subjects were asked “how many arguments during the past year resulted in ‘you hitting, shoving or throwing things at a partner.’ They were also asked how many arguments ended with their partner, ‘hitting, shoving or throwing things at you.'” Author reports that, “victimization rates are slightly higher among men than women and in cases that involve perpetration by only one partner, more “women” than “men” were identified as perpetrators!
Bernard, M. L., & Bernard, J. L. (1983). Violent intimacy: The family as a model for love relationships. Family Relations, 32, 283-286. (Surveyed 461 college students, 168 men, and 293 women, with regard to dating violence.) Found that 15% of the men admitted to physically abusing their partners, while 21% of women admitted to physically abusing their partners.)
"Feminists" can only get away with claiming that “domestic violence” equals “men beating up women” because people are unaware of the massive documentation of female-instigated domestic violence!
All Human Societies, Without Exception, are Patriarchal, so Feminist Writers Routinely Resort to Obfuscation and even Deceit to Conceal this Embarrassing Fact!
Be honest about simple facts!
I still suggest “Feminists are inherently illogical.”
Beth V.
Thank You Penelope. I just had a miscarriage (I wanted the baby), but I so agree that miscarriage is a reality that needs to be more openly spoken of.
http://artblog06.wordpress.com/2009/11/04/the-pro-choice-debate-again/
You are a selfish, disgusting human being. You were going to go for abortion number 3? Wow….
Beth and John;
I am trying to understand your argument – so let me try to re-state:
Feminism is based on an emotional argument and not a logical one, because if you look at the facts women are really as bad as men:
Women are more violent than men.
There is no difference between male and female wages (no wage gap).
American women, in particular, have been brainwashed into believing that giving love to and respecting men is bad and wrong.
So the mainstream idea that women are always the victim is wrong. So ‘woman’s rights’ is overblown as (again, according to how you have framed your argument) women actually do more ‘bad stuff’ then men?
Is that correct or have I missed something important?
regards,
Will
Hi John (aka Beth V. — “obfuscate” gave you away by the way),
You are such an intelligent man. It bothers me that you seem to be deliberately trying to patronize and manipulate women.
Since you are a marriage counselor, I am sure you realize abuse comes in many forms. Both patronization and manipulation are two traits seen in abusive personalities. It is simply denial on your part, if you say that this is not so.
Never be haughty to the humble; never be humble to the haughty. Wisdom is not based on IQ.
Barb
P.S. Where did you get your counseling degree from?
Hey Will:
I can’t speak for Beth V. I can only make my own points.
The feminists years ago back in the 60’s had legitimate points. Those things are long over.
Penelope herself has made numerous points on her blog on how a lot of women make more money than men. I have known tons of women who make more money than I do.
I have been personally involved with two different women who got violent with me physically.
The victim hood status is a crock. I am certified to conduct CEU seminars on Parental Alienation Sydnrome where the divorced mother turns the kids against the dad and the dad ends up in family court where the prevailing attitude is women good, men bad. Family courts do absolutely nothing to mothers who refuse to give court ordered visitation, but if the dad does not pay child support, they garnishee his wages and tax returns, can have his driver’s license suspended and even put him in jail.
There are no syndicated male advice columnists.
I answered a query from a female reporter wanting to hear comments from real men and professionals about why men were not proposing. She refused to accept any reasons where the woman could be at fault. From her perspective, it had to be the man or other circumstances not related to the woman. She accused me of being a misogynist when I told her about what things women do to sabotage their relationships. Feminsts believe that WOMEN CAN DO NO WRONG, IT IS ALL THE MEN’S FAULT.
Maureeen Dowd even wrote a column explaining that the only thing men are needed for in this society is sperm donors.
I can fill up this page with references to sexual inequality against men in this society.
As to loving and respecting men according to some feminists, all sex is rape, consensual and married sex is still rape and that is from a woman’s studies professor on our college campuses.
So please, take a look around and see how much equality men have. Then look up the word MISANDRY in Wikipedia. It is reverse sexism by women against men. It is beautifully illustrated in Wikipedia which is not known to be a sexist reference work.
John;
I know that there are circumstances where women get preferential treatment over men, but don’t know how this applies to all feminists nor how this invalidates the feminist movement. Many of your examples seem to be very extreme and not at all what I think of when I think of feminism.
After Beth (or maybe you) posted a link to the study that compares female and male aggression and came to the conclusion that women are more aggressive than men, I simply had to understand why. This does not seem to fit with the historical record where men are almost always clearly the dominant sex. But his sample size was very large and he seems top be a respected researcher.
But it didn’t make sense to me, so I pushed further and found that ‘aggressiveness’ for most of these studies is far more broadly defined than most would commonly agree but what is really important here is to understand that while woman may be physical with men, men are much stronger and their abuse leads to a much higher incidence of hospitalization and death.
Furthermore, I don’t think society changes overnight and the historical treatment of women as secondary citizens taints our culture. We seem to be moving away from this, but it still exists and is still representative of the belief that woman are secondary to men.
I also took your advice and looked up MISANDRY in wikipedia. I understand the term, but aren’t there wack-jobs in every movement that are not representative of the movement as a whole? If you look up feminism in wikipedia there seem to be ten different variants, only one of which is the ‘radical’ feminism you seem to most often cite.
So I am still trying to wrap my head around this. Yes there are wack-job feminists that are clearly extreme (and wrong) and there are instances where men get the shaft (no pun intended) but I don’t see how you can paint the whole movement with the actions/beliefs of a vocal minority.
Where did my logic go wrong?
Will