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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Negative. Feminism has moved from equal opportunity to we are all the same. It is creating confused and weak men or removing men completely from the family. That is bad in my opinion.

Women should not be considered property and should be treated with respect. Same goes for men.

I'm not seeing men removed from familes. At my kids schools all the working dads are just as involved as the working moms. They aren't confused. And the families that choose ot have one parnet stay at home are also involved. The working parent isn't checked out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s been an absolute net positive. It helped me to open my eyes to how lame so many men are, and how they aren’t worth my time. Once my eyes were opened there was no turning back. No amount of propaganda in the world will turn me back. Call me a bitter old cat lady all you want. I could care less.

I live a life filled with peace and contentment. I go where I want to go, when I want to go. I have an amazing career that brings me job and pays big bucks. It’s an area that’s supposed to for men. But so what…. I like money too. I have fabulous group of friends, a beloved cat, and a boy toy to meet physical needs who I NEVER let live with me and start dirtying up my house.

Same here. 50/50 custody has allowed me to advance my career and I'm better off financially now than when I was married. Plus I'm not spending hours a week cooking and cleaning up after a man, so I have so much more free time. I have a BF who knows he needs to be a net positive in my life, and he does more for me, my kids, and my house than my xH ever did.

Reality is men don't "prioritize" marriage in the sense their marriage isn't a top priority for them. They're the main character, and everyone is there to help them out. No thanks.

What you are saying is your first husband was a dud. Reality is many men DO prioritize marriage and family.

Some do. But reality is that most men are duds.

This is what I don’t get about the anti-feminist weirdos. If you say most men suck as husbands, they say “no you picked him!” but if you say cool, I won’t pick any man, then they flip out “but you’re not prioritizing marriage and kids! The men are so lonely! Your standards are too high!”

No matter what, you can’t win. So just do whatever you want. Get married, don’t get married, have kids, don’t have kids, get divorced a million times. Doesn’t matter because someone will always say you’re doing it wrong.

You can win by not picking losers and teaching your kids how to pick good partners. But you're right, if you have bad judgment, you probably can't win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Negative. Feminism has moved from equal opportunity to we are all the same. It is creating confused and weak men or removing men completely from the family. That is bad in my opinion.

Women should not be considered property and should be treated with respect. Same goes for men.

I'm not seeing men removed from familes. At my kids schools all the working dads are just as involved as the working moms. They aren't confused. And the families that choose ot have one parnet stay at home are also involved. The working parent isn't checked out.

Right - who are the weirdos in this thread who seem to know nothing but horror stories? There are probably who believe that MOST men are bad partners and parents, and that MOST women have experienced serious dysfunction in their relationships. I really don't see it in my broad social circle, and certainly not widespread. My guess is that people who find themselves in bad relationships tend to assume the same of others, or are telling themselves that it is common so they don't feel like losers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do think there are some positives, but I worry it’s pushed women to prioritize careers over marriage and children.

Mixed bag. There is still a need for better balance for things to work well for both partners and children. Misogynistic chauvinism is one extreme but feminism in many ways can be the other extreme. Feminism itself is fine, feminist aren't necessarily always doing it right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s been an absolute net positive. It helped me to open my eyes to how lame so many men are, and how they aren’t worth my time. Once my eyes were opened there was no turning back. No amount of propaganda in the world will turn me back. Call me a bitter old cat lady all you want. I could care less.

I live a life filled with peace and contentment. I go where I want to go, when I want to go. I have an amazing career that brings me job and pays big bucks. It’s an area that’s supposed to for men. But so what…. I like money too. I have fabulous group of friends, a beloved cat, and a boy toy to meet physical needs who I NEVER let live with me and start dirtying up my house.

Same here. 50/50 custody has allowed me to advance my career and I'm better off financially now than when I was married. Plus I'm not spending hours a week cooking and cleaning up after a man, so I have so much more free time. I have a BF who knows he needs to be a net positive in my life, and he does more for me, my kids, and my house than my xH ever did.

Reality is men don't "prioritize" marriage in the sense their marriage isn't a top priority for them. They're the main character, and everyone is there to help them out. No thanks.

What you are saying is your first husband was a dud. Reality is many men DO prioritize marriage and family.

Some do. But reality is that most men are duds.

This is what I don’t get about the anti-feminist weirdos. If you say most men suck as husbands, they say “no you picked him!” but if you say cool, I won’t pick any man, then they flip out “but you’re not prioritizing marriage and kids! The men are so lonely! Your standards are too high!”

No matter what, you can’t win. So just do whatever you want. Get married, don’t get married, have kids, don’t have kids, get divorced a million times. Doesn’t matter because someone will always say you’re doing it wrong.

You can win by not picking losers and teaching your kids how to pick good partners. But you're right, if you have bad judgment, you probably can't win.

See, the thing is, there just aren’t enough decent guys to go around. You can say pick better all you want but the reality is not every woman is going to get a decent man. It’s just the math.

I do have an amazing partner, and he really is one in a million. I dated dozens of guys and probably 95% of them didn’t meet my standards. And it’s by FAR better to be alone than with a man who is beneath you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do think there are some positives, but I worry it’s pushed women to prioritize careers over marriage and children.

That's what society is pushing them to do. Companies need workers, men need earning partners and ultra feminist want to party so women are getting pulled in all directions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s been an absolute net positive. It helped me to open my eyes to how lame so many men are, and how they aren’t worth my time. Once my eyes were opened there was no turning back. No amount of propaganda in the world will turn me back. Call me a bitter old cat lady all you want. I could care less.

I live a life filled with peace and contentment. I go where I want to go, when I want to go. I have an amazing career that brings me job and pays big bucks. It’s an area that’s supposed to for men. But so what…. I like money too. I have fabulous group of friends, a beloved cat, and a boy toy to meet physical needs who I NEVER let live with me and start dirtying up my house.

Same here. 50/50 custody has allowed me to advance my career and I'm better off financially now than when I was married. Plus I'm not spending hours a week cooking and cleaning up after a man, so I have so much more free time. I have a BF who knows he needs to be a net positive in my life, and he does more for me, my kids, and my house than my xH ever did.

Reality is men don't "prioritize" marriage in the sense their marriage isn't a top priority for them. They're the main character, and everyone is there to help them out. No thanks.

What you are saying is your first husband was a dud. Reality is many men DO prioritize marriage and family.

Some do. But reality is that most men are duds.

This is what I don’t get about the anti-feminist weirdos. If you say most men suck as husbands, they say “no you picked him!” but if you say cool, I won’t pick any man, then they flip out “but you’re not prioritizing marriage and kids! The men are so lonely! Your standards are too high!”

No matter what, you can’t win. So just do whatever you want. Get married, don’t get married, have kids, don’t have kids, get divorced a million times. Doesn’t matter because someone will always say you’re doing it wrong.

You can win by not picking losers and teaching your kids how to pick good partners. But you're right, if you have bad judgment, you probably can't win.

See, the thing is, there just aren’t enough decent guys to go around. You can say pick better all you want but the reality is not every woman is going to get a decent man. It’s just the math.

I do have an amazing partner, and he really is one in a million. I dated dozens of guys and probably 95% of them didn’t meet my standards. And it’s by FAR better to be alone than with a man who is beneath you.

It is amazingly narcissistic to believe that because someone didn't work for you, they wouldn't be a good partner to someone else. But untreated narcissism seems to be endemic around these parts.

[Anonymous]

In some cases men are being asked to earn 80% of the money and do 50% of the chores while in other cases women are being asked to earn 50% of the money and do 80% of the chores. In more balanced ego free situations men and women are flexible and make adjustments per required by jobs, finances and family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think there are some positives, but I worry it’s pushed women to prioritize careers over marriage and children.

That's what society is pushing them to do. Companies need workers, men need earning partners and ultra feminist want to party so women are getting pulled in all directions.

It is obvious that the capitalist society benefits from having women in the workforce in greater numbers. It increases the number of workers, which pushes down wages and increases output. It increases household income, which gives both the means and motive to consume more. It disproportionately helps highly educated women from wealthy families. Companies realized that this would be a huge boost to the bottom line during WW2, and the societal changes started shortly thereafter. It is good that women got more agency over their own lives, but nothing was done to make sure that families didn't suffer from less parental involvement in children's lives, fewer people caring for their own elderly relatives, and fewer people involved in local community efforts. We might argue that this is a net good to society, but to ignore the downsides is really dumb.

[Anonymous]

In good marriages you can't be chauvinists or feminists, both are required to care for each other and work as a team.

[Anonymous]

Imo most important achievement of feminism is to free women from being caregivers for children, men, sick and elderly in the family. Its a woman's job to birth a child but men are equally capable of doing the rest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll also point out that the same people who badmouth feminists tend to support the same politicians that refuse to raise wages, gut the social safety net, and make healthcare more unaffordable. Those things make it economically impossible to afford a SAHP.

So if you want women to have the option of being SAHMs, support living wages, child tax credits, affordable healthcare and unions.

Raising wages, just increases the price of everything. The value of wages stems from the value of our currency and neither party is tight with the purse strings despite their rhetoric. If they are growing Government then the value of our dollar drops. Just a PSA from someone who spends money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Imo most important achievement of feminism is to free women from being caregivers for children, men, sick and elderly in the family. Its a woman's job to birth a child but men are equally capable of doing the rest.

But particularly among the educated and relatively wealthy classes, that hasn't resulted in partners sharing work and home care more, but rather, both working more and hiring people to do the care. I don't think society benefits by having the caring for children and elderly outsourced to working class labor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imo most important achievement of feminism is to free women from being caregivers for children, men, sick and elderly in the family. Its a woman's job to birth a child but men are equally capable of doing the rest.

But particularly among the educated and relatively wealthy classes, that hasn't resulted in partners sharing work and home care more, but rather, both working more and hiring people to do the care. I don't think society benefits by having the caring for children and elderly outsourced to working class labor.

So what do you think would be more optimal for them? What should happen?

Sounds like you're suggesting that women should just go back home and take care of the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll also point out that the same people who badmouth feminists tend to support the same politicians that refuse to raise wages, gut the social safety net, and make healthcare more unaffordable. Those things make it economically impossible to afford a SAHP.

So if you want women to have the option of being SAHMs, support living wages, child tax credits, affordable healthcare and unions.

Raising wages, just increases the price of everything. The value of wages stems from the value of our currency and neither party is tight with the purse strings despite their rhetoric. If they are growing Government then the value of our dollar drops. Just a PSA from someone who spends money.

That's not really true. Raising wages can increase the share of returns going to labor versus capital, but only if there is competition in the market for the goods being sold. In a competitive market, a company cannot simply raise prices just because wages increase. And "the value of wages stems from the value of our currency" doesn't even make sense. The dollar was strong under Biden and is getting weaker under Trump. This has nothing to do with whether "they are growing Government." Where do people even get these crackpot ideas?