I think feminism as an ideology doesn't speak for all women. It is a radical, rebellious idea that disrupts social order and aims to uproot women from the roles that they had traditionally taken on as a result of biology and social norms.

There will always be some women who do not want to be mothers, or who do not care for makeup, clothes or finding husband.

Most women, despite all the feminist propaganda from the left, at their hearts and souls want to bear children and marry rich alpha men who can take care of their families.

We need to stop this liberal illusion that women want to be like men. They do not.

Maybe an adjustment would be to stop the push to get girls into coding and STEM. Make it an attractive option for them to take up interior design or baking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have absolutely no problems with SAHM. I grew up in a home with a SAHM and I know that I turned out the way I did cause she was home. I am not married, no kids and great job. My mom did have issues later, divorced had to find job, little education so low paying job. Now in her 80's she lives on SS and me and siblings help out the best we can financially. So to the SAHM I say, do it but make sure you are covered if something goes south in the future. Big income husband with good lawyer can leave you penniless with minimal child support if it is assumed you can work. Stash a little away for a rainy day. If it never comes spending on something fun. Just take care that you are covered under ALL circumstances

None of this shit would've happened if that dear mother of yours had bothered to get even a clerical job . Hence, the confusion and disappointment towards SAHMS

We definitely need women to work. The government can make it mandatory to get all women in buses to take them to work in factories, power plants and farms. Babies and children will be left in day orphanages. Choice should be eliminated. Bring back soviet Russia and communist China.

A white woman's place is in the bedroom and kitchen . Civil rights be damned, equality movement be damned, gender parity be damned, feminism be damned , equal pay be damned . Why bother? Being a homemaker in the 21st century is still an attractive proposition . Bring back the patriarchy , while you're at it start asking for your husband's approval to get a credit card, a manicure , a bra . Who am I kidding ? You already depend him for that

The patriarchy never left. Just in your imagination.

The patriarchy might never have left , however weee not in 1750 anymore despite the treasonous efforts of some of you white women to take us back there under the disguise of raising 'kids'

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a social worker and am unlikely to ever break $75K. My husband is a lawyer and makes several times that. My lifestyle would be *very* different if it were just my kids and me (or just me). No SFH with a 20 minute commute, no international travel, no "top" school pyramid for the kids, no being OK with the fact my 10 year old lost her very nice winter jacket and we had to get her a new one (I was annoyed, yes, but it was not something that put us back significantly in terms of finances), no camps for the kids, etc.

Can I not consider myself a feminist, given that I "depend" on my husband for almost all of the luxuries our family enjoys, even though I work?

I wonder about this too. Public school teacher, husband in finance who makes over TEN times what I make. My salary is a drop in the bucket. We pay several times what I make in federal income taxes alone. No way could I have my current lifestyle without his money. We absolutely depend on his income and bonuses and prioritize his career over mine. Given the salary discrepancy, we'd be fools not to.

Public school teacher you say? That means you take your butt to work din you? If yes, then why are you so concerned? We're talking SAHMS here. All of a sudden I feel quite uneasy about you teaching anybody's child

It's obvious her previous employment was teacher, she stays home now. But the real question is if she was strategic in career choice: she knew it was a lowpaying career and likely pursued it with the expectation that a future DH would be paying the bills. Her DH is in finance, in sure she filtered for that when she was dating. Classic MRS degree. She is probably attractive and counted on her looks to ensure a breadwinner DH.

Omg now teaching is not a legit career ffs

Hmm that's not what I got from PP argument , she might have gone into teaching but eventually she probably thought nothing of dropping her career once a 'sponsor' came along

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a social worker and am unlikely to ever break $75K. My husband is a lawyer and makes several times that. My lifestyle would be *very* different if it were just my kids and me (or just me). No SFH with a 20 minute commute, no international travel, no "top" school pyramid for the kids, no being OK with the fact my 10 year old lost her very nice winter jacket and we had to get her a new one (I was annoyed, yes, but it was not something that put us back significantly in terms of finances), no camps for the kids, etc.

Can I not consider myself a feminist, given that I "depend" on my husband for almost all of the luxuries our family enjoys, even though I work?

I wonder about this too. Public school teacher, husband in finance who makes over TEN times what I make. My salary is a drop in the bucket. We pay several times what I make in federal income taxes alone. No way could I have my current lifestyle without his money. We absolutely depend on his income and bonuses and prioritize his career over mine. Given the salary discrepancy, we'd be fools not to.

Public school teacher you say? That means you take your butt to work din you? If yes, then why are you so concerned? We're talking SAHMS here. All of a sudden I feel quite uneasy about you teaching anybody's child

It's obvious her previous employment was teacher, she stays home now. But the real question is if she was strategic in career choice: she knew it was a lowpaying career and likely pursued it with the expectation that a future DH would be paying the bills. Her DH is in finance, in sure she filtered for that when she was dating. Classic MRS degree. She is probably attractive and counted on her looks to ensure a breadwinner DH.

Omg now teaching is not a legit career ffs

Good lord, 39 pages of triggering from a master troll. Well done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a social worker and am unlikely to ever break $75K. My husband is a lawyer and makes several times that. My lifestyle would be *very* different if it were just my kids and me (or just me). No SFH with a 20 minute commute, no international travel, no "top" school pyramid for the kids, no being OK with the fact my 10 year old lost her very nice winter jacket and we had to get her a new one (I was annoyed, yes, but it was not something that put us back significantly in terms of finances), no camps for the kids, etc.

Can I not consider myself a feminist, given that I "depend" on my husband for almost all of the luxuries our family enjoys, even though I work?

I wonder about this too. Public school teacher, husband in finance who makes over TEN times what I make. My salary is a drop in the bucket. We pay several times what I make in federal income taxes alone. No way could I have my current lifestyle without his money. We absolutely depend on his income and bonuses and prioritize his career over mine. Given the salary discrepancy, we'd be fools not to.

Public school teacher you say? That means you take your butt to work din you? If yes, then why are you so concerned? We're talking SAHMS here. All of a sudden I feel quite uneasy about you teaching anybody's child

It's obvious her previous employment was teacher, she stays home now. But the real question is if she was strategic in career choice: she knew it was a lowpaying career and likely pursued it with the expectation that a future DH would be paying the bills. Her DH is in finance, in sure she filtered for that when she was dating. Classic MRS degree. She is probably attractive and counted on her looks to ensure a breadwinner DH.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have absolutely no problems with SAHM. I grew up in a home with a SAHM and I know that I turned out the way I did cause she was home. I am not married, no kids and great job. My mom did have issues later, divorced had to find job, little education so low paying job. Now in her 80's she lives on SS and me and siblings help out the best we can financially. So to the SAHM I say, do it but make sure you are covered if something goes south in the future. Big income husband with good lawyer can leave you penniless with minimal child support if it is assumed you can work. Stash a little away for a rainy day. If it never comes spending on something fun. Just take care that you are covered under ALL circumstances

None of this shit would've happened if that dear mother of yours had bothered to get even a clerical job . Hence, the confusion and disappointment towards SAHMS

We definitely need women to work. The government can make it mandatory to get all women in buses to take them to work in factories, power plants and farms. Babies and children will be left in day orphanages. Choice should be eliminated. Bring back soviet Russia and communist China.

A white woman's place is in the bedroom and kitchen . Civil rights be damned, equality movement be damned, gender parity be damned, feminism be damned , equal pay be damned . Why bother? Being a homemaker in the 21st century is still an attractive proposition . Bring back the patriarchy , while you're at it start asking for your husband's approval to get a credit card, a manicure , a bra . Who am I kidding ? You already depend him for that

The patriarchy never left. Just in your imagination.

Anonymous wrote:

I'm mostly curious how I get a manicure when I have to stay in the kitchen and bedroom all day. Gosh being a white woman is so confusing!

You think you're being ironic but 'au contraire' . Hard fought social changes and this is the thanks you're giving . Depending on a man when you're not physically incapacitated in the name of child rearing . Bravo

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a social worker and am unlikely to ever break $75K. My husband is a lawyer and makes several times that. My lifestyle would be *very* different if it were just my kids and me (or just me). No SFH with a 20 minute commute, no international travel, no "top" school pyramid for the kids, no being OK with the fact my 10 year old lost her very nice winter jacket and we had to get her a new one (I was annoyed, yes, but it was not something that put us back significantly in terms of finances), no camps for the kids, etc.

Can I not consider myself a feminist, given that I "depend" on my husband for almost all of the luxuries our family enjoys, even though I work?

I wonder about this too. Public school teacher, husband in finance who makes over TEN times what I make. My salary is a drop in the bucket. We pay several times what I make in federal income taxes alone. No way could I have my current lifestyle without his money. We absolutely depend on his income and bonuses and prioritize his career over mine. Given the salary discrepancy, we'd be fools not to.

Public school teacher you say? That means you take your butt to work din you? If yes, then why are you so concerned? We're talking SAHMS here. All of a sudden I feel quite uneasy about you teaching anybody's child

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You walk your children to their daycare every day?

Actually yes. But I'm saying people need to evaluate the real risks they face. Those PPs are thankfully in therapy but the anxiety they are trying to spread is based on unrealistic evaluations.

You are lucky that you are able to be so rational about "real" risks. The PP with an abusive family member doesn't have that option. The risk of abuse at the hands of a trusted person is REAL FOR EVERYONE. Beauvoir had a pedophile employed as a third grade teacher...for years. Why would you tell people not to be concerned about these things. It's not as rare as you think. People just don't talk about out, or report it in "studies."

Are you dum-dums still at it? Ugh.

Anonymous wrote:I am a social worker and am unlikely to ever break $75K. My husband is a lawyer and makes several times that. My lifestyle would be *very* different if it were just my kids and me (or just me). No SFH with a 20 minute commute, no international travel, no "top" school pyramid for the kids, no being OK with the fact my 10 year old lost her very nice winter jacket and we had to get her a new one (I was annoyed, yes, but it was not something that put us back significantly in terms of finances), no camps for the kids, etc.

Can I not consider myself a feminist, given that I "depend" on my husband for almost all of the luxuries our family enjoys, even though I work?

I wonder about this too. Public school teacher, husband in finance who makes over TEN times what I make. My salary is a drop in the bucket. We pay several times what I make in federal income taxes alone. No way could I have my current lifestyle without his money. We absolutely depend on his income and bonuses and prioritize his career over mine. Given the salary discrepancy, we'd be fools not to.

I'm mostly curious how I get a manicure when I have to stay in the kitchen and bedroom all day. Gosh being a white woman is so confusing!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have absolutely no problems with SAHM. I grew up in a home with a SAHM and I know that I turned out the way I did cause she was home. I am not married, no kids and great job. My mom did have issues later, divorced had to find job, little education so low paying job. Now in her 80's she lives on SS and me and siblings help out the best we can financially. So to the SAHM I say, do it but make sure you are covered if something goes south in the future. Big income husband with good lawyer can leave you penniless with minimal child support if it is assumed you can work. Stash a little away for a rainy day. If it never comes spending on something fun. Just take care that you are covered under ALL circumstances

None of this shit would've happened if that dear mother of yours had bothered to get even a clerical job . Hence, the confusion and disappointment towards SAHMS

We definitely need women to work. The government can make it mandatory to get all women in buses to take them to work in factories, power plants and farms. Babies and children will be left in day orphanages. Choice should be eliminated. Bring back soviet Russia and communist China.

A white woman's place is in the bedroom and kitchen . Civil rights be damned, equality movement be damned, gender parity be damned, feminism be damned , equal pay be damned . Why bother? Being a homemaker in the 21st century is still an attractive proposition . Bring back the patriarchy , while you're at it start asking for your husband's approval to get a credit card, a manicure , a bra . Who am I kidding ? You already depend him for that

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Seems rather straight forward. I left my highly successful career to stay at home and care for my family. It is the most important and underrated job. Having said that, I am secure in who I am and don't really care if you like my role or not. It is my choice and very empowering.

I feel the same way! I just read this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/samantha-johnson/when-i-became-a-mother-feminism-let-me-down/ I thought you (and others who have participated in this thread) might be interested in reading it.