Do you think feminism has been a net positive or net negative for relationships?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

That's because they are still doing the lion's share of the unpaid work. Women thought men would step up at home when women stepped up as wage earners. Instead, women are now expected to be primary parents, maintain the home, AND earn an income.

Exactly. We were sold a bill of goods that women can have it all. That's the big lie. The bonds that used to hold a marriage together are flimsy. Everyone can just go off and make their own money and the kids can just shuttle back and forth between the homes and hopefully turn out ok. There's not much incentive to get married or stay married so why bother?

We're not going back to the kitchen. Ever. So, you men can catch up and stop being spoiled losers or you can own the society that results from your failures.

People who disagree with you aren't men. We're women with eyes wide open. We were told we could have it all and what a farce that was.

If that's the case, then you are a stupid creature unworthy of the sacrifices our foremothers made. If things were as you think they should be, you wouldn't have the education to use a computer or smartphone to type your screeds, if your husband even allowed you to own them. Feminism is why your silly behind has the bandwidth to stare at this screen right now instead of being pregnant with your 6th child while in the middle of breastfeeding your newborn 5th child as your other four kids all under 7 years old scream around you.

Yawn. There is zero chance you are actively in the trenches married, raising kids, working. You are hopelessly out of touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

That's because they are still doing the lion's share of the unpaid work. Women thought men would step up at home when women stepped up as wage earners. Instead, women are now expected to be primary parents, maintain the home, AND earn an income.

Exactly. We were sold a bill of goods that women can have it all. That's the big lie. The bonds that used to hold a marriage together are flimsy. Everyone can just go off and make their own money and the kids can just shuttle back and forth between the homes and hopefully turn out ok. There's not much incentive to get married or stay married so why bother?

We're not going back to the kitchen. Ever. So, you men can catch up and stop being spoiled losers or you can own the society that results from your failures.

People who disagree with you aren't men. We're women with eyes wide open. We were told we could have it all and what a farce that was.

If that's the case, then you are a stupid creature unworthy of the sacrifices our foremothers made. If things were as you think they should be, you wouldn't have the education to use a computer or smartphone to type your screeds, if your husband even allowed you to own them. Feminism is why your silly behind has the bandwidth to stare at this screen right now instead of being pregnant with your 6th child while in the middle of breastfeeding your newborn 5th child as your other four kids all under 7 years old scream around you.

Hyperbolic BS.

Get to the kitchen, Harriet. This very day, you too can be a housewife. What's stopping you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

Happiness is complicated. A huge component to happiness is expectations.

Women might have self-identified as happier before feminism gave them more opportunities, because they were raised to believe the most they could hope for was marriage to a man who didn't beat them and could afford to house and feed them, and a life of service to their husband and kids. If you have been taught your entire life that this is your *best* prospect, and you achieve some version of it, you are fairly likely to tell a poll you are happy because according to societal standards and your own expectations, you have no reason to claim unhappiness.

Yet, we know from individual stories of individual women that it was more complicated than that. It was normalized for housewives to go to the doctor with what could only be called ennui, prescribed some kind of drug to numb whatever it was that was bothering them, and soldier on. Domestic violence was common, and rape within marriage was legal and considered a non issue. The worst stories are of the women who had it bad enough that they tried to leave, because society so condemned their choice to do so. Battered women were encouraged to return to their husbands as long as those men were willing to take them. When women sought to escape, they were reminded to think of their children, since a single woman with kids would have very limited work opportunities and might literally struggle to feed and house them (and may be disallowed from renting an apartment or house at all, even if she had the money to do so, or of opening a bank account or writing checks in her own name).

The prospect of that was so terrifying that I am sure it made a lot of women who didn't have it quite so bad to count their blessings and "be happy." Because hey, maybe they were working at unpaid labor all day long, maybe they had few choices in life and didn't really like their husbands, but at least they weren't destitute, right? There but for the grace of God go I.

Once those dire consequences for women were minimized due to women's liberation, women's opportunities opened way up. Suddenly the sky is the limit. Maybe you can be a lawyer or a doctor! Maybe you can run a company. Maybe you can "have it all" -- the kids, the husband, the house with the white picket fence, AND a career all your own you can be proud of! Maybe?

The minute cultural opportunities and expectations for women expanded, so too would their propensity for unhappiness. Because all of a sudden, having an okay marriage to a not terrible man, a place to live, and a few kids to keep them occupied wasn't the pinnacle of their lives. It was not enough. So women sought careers. Is this enough? What about this? But culturally we've always been ambivalent about career women, and no matter how successful a woman is professionally, if she's not ALSO married with children, people will pity her. In fact even if she is married with kids, people will still pity her because they'll say she doesn't spend enough time at home with her kids.

So women kept reaching and keep reaching, trying to find that perfect balance of career and family that would be the new best case scenario for women. No matter what, people tell them they should be dissatisfied. Someone, somewhere is disappointed in them. Some women give up and just go all in on career or family, intentionally shrink their own possibilities in order to feel more satisfied with what they have, and these women tend to report being "happier." Whether it's the unmarried and childless career woman vacationing with friends for there 50th while winning awards at work, or the trad wife making cereal from scratch for 5 kids dressed in beige, these women seem to be more satisfied than the rest of us because at least they get to pick one thing and do it well. Of course trying to do everything all at once is a recipe for unhappiness -- our husbands who are actually bothering to try to be great dads and partners are also unhappy because they are in the same boat. I know so many unhappy 40 something married parents who are like "wtf is this, why is it set up this way?" It's not because feminism ruined everything for us, it's because feminism changed or opportunities and expectations but society otherwise kept everything else the same -- childcare, work expectations, career paths, school schedules, etc. Of course we're unhappy, we are trying to live a more egalitarian lifestyle in a world designed for the 1950s nuclear family with a breadwinner dad and a SAHM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

This is a typically stupid response. Life is stressful and anxiety inducing. Being an adult and carrying adult responsibilities is hard. It's disgusting and sociopathic to suggest that means things were better when women were living in fear in our own homes and being beaten, robbed of inheritances and savings, raped, impregnated repeatedly to the point of permanent physical disabilities, forcibly committed to asylums so their husbands could marry someone else etc. People like you don't think women's lives have any value beyond how we can be used by men. Drop dead.

DP: Sounds like you have a lot of family trauma to process. I assure you that every woman in the world did not experience what you describe. There are actual happy families out there and loving relationships too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

That's because they are still doing the lion's share of the unpaid work. Women thought men would step up at home when women stepped up as wage earners. Instead, women are now expected to be primary parents, maintain the home, AND earn an income.

Exactly. We were sold a bill of goods that women can have it all. That's the big lie. The bonds that used to hold a marriage together are flimsy. Everyone can just go off and make their own money and the kids can just shuttle back and forth between the homes and hopefully turn out ok. There's not much incentive to get married or stay married so why bother?

We're not going back to the kitchen. Ever. So, you men can catch up and stop being spoiled losers or you can own the society that results from your failures.

People who disagree with you aren't men. We're women with eyes wide open. We were told we could have it all and what a farce that was.

If that's the case, then you are a stupid creature unworthy of the sacrifices our foremothers made. If things were as you think they should be, you wouldn't have the education to use a computer or smartphone to type your screeds, if your husband even allowed you to own them. Feminism is why your silly behind has the bandwidth to stare at this screen right now instead of being pregnant with your 6th child while in the middle of breastfeeding your newborn 5th child as your other four kids all under 7 years old scream around you.

Yawn. There is zero chance you are actively in the trenches married, raising kids, working. You are hopelessly out of touch.

The added irony is that it's very feminist of you to be here debating ideas with me instead of leaving the thinking to men and hiding your (admittedly meager) intellect. Look at you helping to bring down society! You shrew!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

That's because they are still doing the lion's share of the unpaid work. Women thought men would step up at home when women stepped up as wage earners. Instead, women are now expected to be primary parents, maintain the home, AND earn an income.

Exactly. We were sold a bill of goods that women can have it all. That's the big lie. The bonds that used to hold a marriage together are flimsy. Everyone can just go off and make their own money and the kids can just shuttle back and forth between the homes and hopefully turn out ok. There's not much incentive to get married or stay married so why bother?

We're not going back to the kitchen. Ever. So, you men can catch up and stop being spoiled losers or you can own the society that results from your failures.

People who disagree with you aren't men. We're women with eyes wide open. We were told we could have it all and what a farce that was.

Hm, that sounds more like a you problem. Perhaps you just lack executive functioning skills?

I was a SAHM with zero job skills when I got divorced in 2019. I went from making $10/hour at an entry level position to making well into 6 figures, all while raising 2 kids. It was hard, but not harder than being a housewife. And I had the freedom to make my own choices, rather than being treated like a servant.

Now I work for a great company with huge amounts of flexibility and my work helps people in need. My kids have a great role model for what women can accomplish. I'm financially comfortable. I have a smoking hot, 10-years-younger BF who dotes on me and spoils me.

I'd be literally insane to want to trade that for marriage and being barefoot in the kitchen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

That's because they are still doing the lion's share of the unpaid work. Women thought men would step up at home when women stepped up as wage earners. Instead, women are now expected to be primary parents, maintain the home, AND earn an income.

Exactly. We were sold a bill of goods that women can have it all. That's the big lie. The bonds that used to hold a marriage together are flimsy. Everyone can just go off and make their own money and the kids can just shuttle back and forth between the homes and hopefully turn out ok. There's not much incentive to get married or stay married so why bother?

We're not going back to the kitchen. Ever. So, you men can catch up and stop being spoiled losers or you can own the society that results from your failures.

People who disagree with you aren't men. We're women with eyes wide open. We were told we could have it all and what a farce that was.

If that's the case, then you are a stupid creature unworthy of the sacrifices our foremothers made. If things were as you think they should be, you wouldn't have the education to use a computer or smartphone to type your screeds, if your husband even allowed you to own them. Feminism is why your silly behind has the bandwidth to stare at this screen right now instead of being pregnant with your 6th child while in the middle of breastfeeding your newborn 5th child as your other four kids all under 7 years old scream around you.

DP: You really need therapy for this level of anger. You should understand that other people can be happy in ways that would not make you happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

That's because they are still doing the lion's share of the unpaid work. Women thought men would step up at home when women stepped up as wage earners. Instead, women are now expected to be primary parents, maintain the home, AND earn an income.

Exactly. We were sold a bill of goods that women can have it all. That's the big lie. The bonds that used to hold a marriage together are flimsy. Everyone can just go off and make their own money and the kids can just shuttle back and forth between the homes and hopefully turn out ok. There's not much incentive to get married or stay married so why bother?

We're not going back to the kitchen. Ever. So, you men can catch up and stop being spoiled losers or you can own the society that results from your failures.

People who disagree with you aren't men. We're women with eyes wide open. We were told we could have it all and what a farce that was.

Hm, that sounds more like a you problem. Perhaps you just lack executive functioning skills?

I was a SAHM with zero job skills when I got divorced in 2019. I went from making $10/hour at an entry level position to making well into 6 figures, all while raising 2 kids. It was hard, but not harder than being a housewife. And I had the freedom to make my own choices, rather than being treated like a servant.

Now I work for a great company with huge amounts of flexibility and my work helps people in need. My kids have a great role model for what women can accomplish. I'm financially comfortable. I have a smoking hot, 10-years-younger BF who dotes on me and spoils me.

I'd be literally insane to want to trade that for marriage and being barefoot in the kitchen.

That's your story. Others have different stories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

I remember reading a horrifying account of someone who worked in hospice, and the stories elderly women would share with her. How women had no rights and were forcibly impregnanted over and over, and they eventually got to the point where they would just kill their babies. Throw them in the river, leave them in the woods, suffocate them. Because they already had SO many kids, they just couldn't mentally or physically handle another one.

So grateful we have rights now, although not so great we're losing access to abortion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Net positive. And the conservative women who make a career out of saying otherwise are the biggest beneficiaries.

Yes! (I'm a man)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

This is a typically stupid response. Life is stressful and anxiety inducing. Being an adult and carrying adult responsibilities is hard. It's disgusting and sociopathic to suggest that means things were better when women were living in fear in our own homes and being beaten, robbed of inheritances and savings, raped, impregnated repeatedly to the point of permanent physical disabilities, forcibly committed to asylums so their husbands could marry someone else etc. People like you don't think women's lives have any value beyond how we can be used by men. Drop dead.

DP: Sounds like you have a lot of family trauma to process. I assure you that every woman in the world did not experience what you describe. There are actual happy families out there and loving relationships too.

Ah, yes, it's just my family. All other women back then were deeply happy with their servile positions... which is why, across the world, they created movements to end the old system and wrest equality for themselves, even going so far as to perpetrate bombings in England in order to get the right to vote.

The women of the silent and Boomer generations were the feminists who created the world we have today, but they were definitely incredibly happy with exactly how things were.

Makes sense!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

That's because they are still doing the lion's share of the unpaid work. Women thought men would step up at home when women stepped up as wage earners. Instead, women are now expected to be primary parents, maintain the home, AND earn an income.

Exactly. We were sold a bill of goods that women can have it all. That's the big lie. The bonds that used to hold a marriage together are flimsy. Everyone can just go off and make their own money and the kids can just shuttle back and forth between the homes and hopefully turn out ok. There's not much incentive to get married or stay married so why bother?

We're not going back to the kitchen. Ever. So, you men can catch up and stop being spoiled losers or you can own the society that results from your failures.

People who disagree with you aren't men. We're women with eyes wide open. We were told we could have it all and what a farce that was.

Hm, that sounds more like a you problem. Perhaps you just lack executive functioning skills?

I was a SAHM with zero job skills when I got divorced in 2019. I went from making $10/hour at an entry level position to making well into 6 figures, all while raising 2 kids. It was hard, but not harder than being a housewife. And I had the freedom to make my own choices, rather than being treated like a servant.

Now I work for a great company with huge amounts of flexibility and my work helps people in need. My kids have a great role model for what women can accomplish. I'm financially comfortable. I have a smoking hot, 10-years-younger BF who dotes on me and spoils me.

I'd be literally insane to want to trade that for marriage and being barefoot in the kitchen.

That's your story. Others have different stories.

And feminism is what allows each of us to choose what we want to do with our lives.

If work is too difficult for you and you're happy in the kitchen, great! You can make that choice for yourself.

But as you said, others have different stories, and many women are not happy with that life. The great news is we all get to choose for ourselves. Many of us are able to have it all and are quite happy with it.

But thinking ALL women would be happier as housewives is just plain wrong. The vast majority aren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

That's because they are still doing the lion's share of the unpaid work. Women thought men would step up at home when women stepped up as wage earners. Instead, women are now expected to be primary parents, maintain the home, AND earn an income.

Exactly. We were sold a bill of goods that women can have it all. That's the big lie. The bonds that used to hold a marriage together are flimsy. Everyone can just go off and make their own money and the kids can just shuttle back and forth between the homes and hopefully turn out ok. There's not much incentive to get married or stay married so why bother?

We're not going back to the kitchen. Ever. So, you men can catch up and stop being spoiled losers or you can own the society that results from your failures.

People who disagree with you aren't men. We're women with eyes wide open. We were told we could have it all and what a farce that was.

If that's the case, then you are a stupid creature unworthy of the sacrifices our foremothers made. If things were as you think they should be, you wouldn't have the education to use a computer or smartphone to type your screeds, if your husband even allowed you to own them. Feminism is why your silly behind has the bandwidth to stare at this screen right now instead of being pregnant with your 6th child while in the middle of breastfeeding your newborn 5th child as your other four kids all under 7 years old scream around you.

DP: You really need therapy for this level of anger. You should understand that other people can be happy in ways that would not make you happy.

Yes, everyone who makes you look like a fool on the internet is angry. Airtight argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

This is a typically stupid response. Life is stressful and anxiety inducing. Being an adult and carrying adult responsibilities is hard. It's disgusting and sociopathic to suggest that means things were better when women were living in fear in our own homes and being beaten, robbed of inheritances and savings, raped, impregnated repeatedly to the point of permanent physical disabilities, forcibly committed to asylums so their husbands could marry someone else etc. People like you don't think women's lives have any value beyond how we can be used by men. Drop dead.

Sorry facts bother you. Women like you haven't improved the lives of other women.

Sorry to burst your bubble but my entire morning was improved by PP putting you in your place. I'm literally sitting here in my office, in the business I started from scratch, enjoying you getting owned by PP. By all means keep going, I'm enjoying this entire discourse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously it's a negative for relationships. That doesn't meant there aren't other positives. But for relationships, no. Now women don't need men and men don't need women.

Do you think relationships are better when they reflect “needs“? I think the fact that I don’t “need” my husband to support me financially, sign for any business deal I do, or give me permission for medical treatment makes our relationship much better. Is your hypothesis that in places where women do not have rights, relationship relationships are better? Because, at least a news reporting, there seem to be a lot of murders and suicides of women being abused.

The question one is it better for relationships. No. It's not. Men can get the sex they want by never marrying and women can support themselves and kids if they want them. Neither "needs" a relationship to get their needs met.

People should never need to be together. They should want to be together.

Except that was the point of the social contract between men and women that worked for eons. And now that's broken. Men can get sex whenever they want and women can support themselves. There really is no point to a relationship for most people. Soon there will be bots so men won't even need a real woman. You can decide if that's better or not.

I don't think this is true, because men as a group haven't done the work to become more balanced people, but women have. Men can't get sex whenever they want because it requires a woman to want to have sex with them (and women have more choice than ever now), and it seems like there are things a lot of men want and either can only get in relationships or vastly prefer to get them in relationships (kids, societal connections and belonging, stability, etc.). Women also seem to prefer getting these in relationships, though it seems on the whole, women who don't find marriage are better able to attain these things than men do.

I think of my BIL who is never married, quite bitter about it, and very lonely. He lacks a lot of social skills that would enable him to build and maintain friendships, doesn't really know how to make his home nice, and absolutely could not raise kids on his own. Then I think of the half dozen female friends I have who are also never married, but still have really lovely lives. They are financially stable and work to give their lives structure and meaning without a spouse. Several of them have had kids on their own and done a good job of figuring out how to make that work (often living near family to ensure greater stability, making enough to afford nannies and other supports to cover childcare gaps). Others instead focus on friendships, travel, and hobbies. They are all very happy. I think all of them would have been happy to marry IF they had found the right person at the right time, but they didn't and demonstrated a lot of resiliency in figuring out how to make it work for them anyway.

Meanwhile my BIL sits around angry at the world for not providing him with a wife to compensate for all his shortcomings. He wanted someone who would not only give him sex, but also children and create a comfortable home for him and manage his social life and cook his meals. He also would have needed a woman who would do all that while also earning an income, because he's a low earner who is often unemployed and would not have been able to support a family on his own. My MIL often laments his "bad luck" in not finding a partner but the truth is that I've never met a woman who would be willing to take all that on. He has had several lengthy and somewhat serious relationships but they don't last because he'll start out on his best behavior and then as he reveals himself to her, she realizes what she's taking on and leaves. One of his ex girlfriends was a single mom in her 40s -- she chose to stay a single mom rather than take on BIL as essentially a second dependent. More recently he dated a woman in her late 40s who never had kids and likely didn't have a ton of other romantic prospects. That one lasted two years but ultimately she decided she'd rather be alone than deal with BIL. And I've heard of other stories like this for other men. The women who reject them do fine even if it means being alone. The men don't.

The biggest problem with feminism is that some men have not stepped up to the plate and bettered themselves to make themselves worthy of women and marriage. When women have the choice to support themselves and be alone, it might not be their first choice but they can make it work and some even really enjoy it. And men suffer because before feminism, those women would have HAD to marry. Independence was not an option and they would have been really exposed and in danger of starvation or physical harm without a husband. That single mom especially would likely never have chosen to give up the protection of a husband, even one as burdensome as my BIL, because her prospects would have been so bad.

Feminism is a net positive for women in relationships because it has allowed us to choose, and offered us an alternative to marriage if we can't find a man we want to marry. For reasons I frankly don't understand, men have not seized the opportunity to make that same choice for themselves, and there are too many men (see the incel movement if you are looking for examples) still view access to women and a wife as a god-given right even though they've done nothing to earn the love of a woman.

[phone] YES

That's great that you keep telling us why women don't need men. But men don't need women either. If you think this is a plus for society then we'll have to agree to disagree. If you have children you might be wondering what the future will look like for them.

Do you have sons or daughters?

I have daughters so obviously I am grateful they now have the choice on whether they want to get married or not. I’m grateful they can earn their own money so they aren’t tethered to a bad man. We spend a lot of time talking about the behavior of boys in their class and men that we know, and I teach them how to spot the red flags and what they mean.

Above everything I want them to be happy. If that means marriage, great. If it doesn’t, that’s fine, too. I don’t want either to feel like they HAVE to get married and have kids, like I did.

Now, boy parents are different from what I’ve observed. Their parents ARE worried because they know their sons want a relationship and really needs a mommy figure to take care of their little boy, and nobody wants them. But rather than self-reflect on why they raised their son to be entitled and useless, they want to trap a woman. It’s pretty disgusting.

NP. Every generation of women has been less happy than their mothers since the 70s. The women people keep describing as hostages were, statistically, happier than their grandchildren with the free choice. That obviously doesn't mean that feminism is bad or that we should undo it (which we can't), but it's also something that I don't think people in this conversation are really acknowledging. As someone with a daughter, I'm concerned about that, even as I think feminism has been, on balance a good thing.

You know the old generations of women you're referring to are still alive, right? Clearly, you don't talk to your female relatives (probably because they might say something inconvenient for your false narrative about the good old days). Those of us who talk to our grandmothers, grand aunts, and elderly women in our communities have heard all the horrible stories. Even among those who had decent husbands, not a single one would have married when she did and most would not have married whom they did if they had the choices we do today. There are so many heartbreaking stories of being forced to quit jobs at which they were succeeding, being fired when of "marriageable age," being denied an equal education, being impregnated against their will (rape!), and otherwise being forced into financial dependence and how that shaped their entire lives. Ferk you and your lies. We're showing you the middle fingers our grandmothers wish they could have waved.

The big lie is all that paid work didn't make women happier or less stressed and anxious.

That's because they are still doing the lion's share of the unpaid work. Women thought men would step up at home when women stepped up as wage earners. Instead, women are now expected to be primary parents, maintain the home, AND earn an income.

Exactly. We were sold a bill of goods that women can have it all. That's the big lie. The bonds that used to hold a marriage together are flimsy. Everyone can just go off and make their own money and the kids can just shuttle back and forth between the homes and hopefully turn out ok. There's not much incentive to get married or stay married so why bother?

We're not going back to the kitchen. Ever. So, you men can catch up and stop being spoiled losers or you can own the society that results from your failures.

People who disagree with you aren't men. We're women with eyes wide open. We were told we could have it all and what a farce that was.

If that's the case, then you are a stupid creature unworthy of the sacrifices our foremothers made. If things were as you think they should be, you wouldn't have the education to use a computer or smartphone to type your screeds, if your husband even allowed you to own them. Feminism is why your silly behind has the bandwidth to stare at this screen right now instead of being pregnant with your 6th child while in the middle of breastfeeding your newborn 5th child as your other four kids all under 7 years old scream around you.

Yawn. There is zero chance you are actively in the trenches married, raising kids, working. You are hopelessly out of touch.

The added irony is that it's very feminist of you to be here debating ideas with me instead of leaving the thinking to men and hiding your (admittedly meager) intellect. Look at you helping to bring down society! You shrew!

+1000