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:It really depends on what you consider “feminism”.

Negatives (I concede that many people here disagree and don’t consider these as negative):
More fatherless children
More promiscuous sexual behaviors
Lower levels of happiness, especially among women
Lower birth rates
DEI
Proliferation and normalization of prostitution and pornography
Insane social justice nonsense

Positives:
Higher GDP per capita
Access Larger talent pools
Larger workforce
Economic self-determination for women
Higher income households for dual earner households
Less pressure on men to be sole provider for a household

I have some terrible news for you about ancient Rome.

Women were barely above slaves in ancient Rome. Two societies with horrible men have a pornography problem in common? What a surprise!

Those darn seductive statues!
You sound bitter. Maybe get into shape for once, drop the naggy grouchy demeanor, lose the lesbian short hair, and men might pay attention to you and make you more joyful.

Like most women nowadays, I'd much rather have no attention at all from the likes of you. You can die mad about it.

You are the one lashing out, constantly replying with nonsense and wanting attention. I'd say you have some issues.

Your responding to multiple posters, honey. The handful of brain cells in your mostly empty head couldn't keep up, huh?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really depends on what you consider “feminism”.

Negatives (I concede that many people here disagree and don’t consider these as negative):
More fatherless children
More promiscuous sexual behaviors
Lower levels of happiness, especially among women
Lower birth rates
DEI
Proliferation and normalization of prostitution and pornography
Insane social justice nonsense

Positives:
Higher GDP per capita
Access Larger talent pools
Larger workforce
Economic self-determination for women
Higher income households for dual earner households
Less pressure on men to be sole provider for a household

I have some terrible news for you about ancient Rome.

Women were barely above slaves in ancient Rome. Two societies with horrible men have a pornography problem in common? What a surprise!

Those darn seductive statues!
You sound bitter. Maybe get into shape for once, drop the naggy grouchy demeanor, lose the lesbian short hair, and men might pay attention to you and make you more joyful.

Like most women nowadays, I'd much rather have no attention at all from the likes of you. You can die mad about it.

You are the one lashing out, constantly replying with nonsense and wanting attention. I'd say you have some issues.

By any chance are you the poster who believed marital rape was outlawed in the 1800s? Fact checking on “nonsense…”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really depends on what you consider “feminism”.

Negatives (I concede that many people here disagree and don’t consider these as negative):
More fatherless children
More promiscuous sexual behaviors
Lower levels of happiness, especially among women
Lower birth rates
DEI
Proliferation and normalization of prostitution and pornography
Insane social justice nonsense

Positives:
Higher GDP per capita
Access Larger talent pools
Larger workforce
Economic self-determination for women
Higher income households for dual earner households
Less pressure on men to be sole provider for a household

I have some terrible news for you about ancient Rome.

Women were barely above slaves in ancient Rome. Two societies with horrible men have a pornography problem in common? What a surprise!

My point was we can hardly blame feminism for the legal prostitution and pornography in ancient Rome, as the PP is trying to do presently.

Oh, my apologies, I didn't read that idiot's post.

Pretty sure we're dealing with someone with schizophrenia or some form of paranoid delusions at this point, not just dumb.

Yea, I took one look at that troglodyte's manifesto and kept scrolling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really depends on what you consider “feminism”.

Negatives (I concede that many people here disagree and don’t consider these as negative):
More fatherless children
More promiscuous sexual behaviors
Lower levels of happiness, especially among women
Lower birth rates
DEI
Proliferation and normalization of prostitution and pornography
Insane social justice nonsense

Positives:
Higher GDP per capita
Access Larger talent pools
Larger workforce
Economic self-determination for women
Higher income households for dual earner households
Less pressure on men to be sole provider for a household

I have some terrible news for you about ancient Rome.

Women were barely above slaves in ancient Rome. Two societies with horrible men have a pornography problem in common? What a surprise!

Those darn seductive statues!
You sound bitter. Maybe get into shape for once, drop the naggy grouchy demeanor, lose the lesbian short hair, and men might pay attention to you and make you more joyful.

Like most women nowadays, I'd much rather have no attention at all from the likes of you. You can die mad about it.

You are the one lashing out, constantly replying with nonsense and wanting attention. I'd say you have some issues.

Your responding to multiple posters, honey. The handful of brain cells in your mostly empty head couldn't keep up, huh?

Pretty sure only one person on this forum is claiming the internet and people's own experience of discrimination is some kind of corporate conspiracy.

And if you aren't just a weirdo troll, I'm dead serious, you need to see a doctor. My uncle started ranting about everything being a conspiracy and it turned out to be a brain tumor.

[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.

Why is it wrong for women to prioritize financial independence and personal fulfillment over marriage and children? Don't men do the same? Or is it that you think women should be a servile class at men's disposal?

I am not arguing to the fact that anyone could call it quits anytime but all these issues were probably discussed and understood way before the marriage so not sure what happened along the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Why is it wrong for women to prioritize financial independence and personal fulfillment over marriage and children? Don't men do the same? Or is it that you think women should be a servile class at men's disposal?

I am not arguing to the fact that anyone could call it quits anytime but all these issues were probably discussed and understood way before the marriage so not sure what happened along the way.

How is this a response to the questions I asked you? Not trying to be a jerk, but can you try again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It really depends on what you consider “feminism”.

Negatives (I concede that many people here disagree and don’t consider these as negative):
More fatherless children
More promiscuous sexual behaviors
Lower levels of happiness, especially among women
Lower birth rates
DEI
Proliferation and normalization of prostitution and pornography
Insane social justice nonsense

Positives:
Higher GDP per capita
Access Larger talent pools
Larger workforce

Economic self-determination for women
Higher income households for dual earner households
Less pressure on men to be sole provider for a household

Out of your list of negatives- it seems like you are really being selective??
-fatherless children
without. feminism there were many fatherless children (enslaved children born of rape in the USA being one category) but there were plenty of lower class women, sex workers etc who had fatherless children, in very patriarchal societies there still are armies of these fatherless children (red light districts in Asia). Unmarried women now have the capacity to work different jobs than sex work which used to be the only option for many single mothers.
-social justice nonsense/DEI? I mean maybe I dont agree with all of it but surely everyone agrees with suffrage for Blacks and increased career opportunity and educational opportunities regardless of color. even if you stop social justice developments to the 1980s, none of that would've happened without massive amounts of progress & the feminists who started their work in the 1860s. there is an argument to be made that the MOST progress was made between the integration of the armed forces in the 1940s through the establishment of credit for women (1970s)
- pornographic material and loose morals were always around, they haven't grown b/c feminism unless feminism create the internet! There were virtually no male virgins in marriage beds in the west. Anyone who had any money, male or female slept around a LOT more before the war and the advent of 2nd wave feminism. Women of means married to secure those means and slept with whoever they wished (im from a blue blooded family, maybe you are from farmer stock- the lower classes have always had better morals b/c that is all they had). I'd argue that feminism actually encouraged a more "middle class" petit bourgouis sensibility whereby people were affairs were looked down upon and women expected their husbands to be faithful and not indulge in pornography and visit sex workers. Before feminism women just looked the other way.
-lower levels of happiness in women: hmm I think that we have changed the goal posts on what constitutes happiness for all people so its not really comparable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Why is it wrong for women to prioritize financial independence and personal fulfillment over marriage and children? Don't men do the same? Or is it that you think women should be a servile class at men's disposal?

I am not arguing to the fact that anyone could call it quits anytime but all these issues were probably discussed and understood way before the marriage so not sure what happened along the way.

People lie.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Social media has done to women what video games did to young men. Staring at screens all day creates miserable humans.

Children in a two parent household with a father present become the most stable adults, least behavioral issues, better grades…….

Children in households with no male presence fair the worst.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

My freedom has nothing to do with relationships.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.