Women's Suffrage -- an immoral movement and an immoral party

[Unkotare]

I see so when I point out major hypocrisy of a supposed equality movement, I should somehow have surgery? Thank you for that BRILLIANT INSIGHT INTO THE HUMAN CONDITION!!! This eternal verity which you have bestowed on us has made us all the better for it. We anxiously await your next profundity with baited breath...

Hey, you find being man too challenging, you don't have to keep suffering. Just STFU about it.

You silver tongued devil!! JESUS I wish I'd though to say that!!!

I guess you haven't "though" about much at all - ever.

 

[waltky]

Uncle Ferd says, "Yea...

... womens wasn't meant to run things...

... dey oughta be at home...

... doin' the cookin' an' cleanin' an' washin'...

... an' takin' care o' the babies."

 

[Kelamity]

Well, dang, the system of registering for military service (to the best of my knowledge) didn't come into being until the "Selective Training and Service Act of 1940"... so on this count, I think the women of the 20's and 30's, at least, might get a bye. Add to that, they didn't exactly have a whole lot of say in the rule making at the time... so, you're going to have to pin that one on the dudes, dude.

Well actually, since women convinced men to change things in women's favor back in 1913 or whenever that was passed, they could have convinced men to let women serve in combat and be drafted. At least an equality movement would have done that...

You know what, Dorkazoid? I think you might be onto something...all the things you talk about very well could be one of the greatest conspiracies of all time on the part of women through the centuries -- at a level perhaps unknown before or since. It's remarkable. Good on you for bringing it to light. I was never really into this whole feminist thing, but I'm starting to get impressed. Thanks so much for inspiring my way of thinking - for overcoming my disinterest on the whole gender thing. I hadn't given it much mind before, but you really are a champion for the power that women can have. I applaud you for that. I had no idea. I'm going to have to pay more attention... and I really appreciate you for that. Thank you!

 

[Noomi]

I noticed somebody claimed liberals were behind women's suffrage. I wouldn't claim credit for this movement. It basically amounted to women getting the rights of men without the responsibiliites. Specifically, women got the right to vote without the responsibility to serve in combat or even be drafted which continued to be male only burdens. What is embarassing about the movement, is that at the very time men were dying in WWI by the thousands, the supposed equality movement claimed victory with women's right to vote. We see echoes of the suffrage's virulent anti-man rhetoric for the past 100 years.

During the Vietnam War, AGAIN a period of extreme male burdens, people like Betty Friedan were talking about how women needed equality. Really? So you have a family where the 21 year old brother goes to Nam and comes back in a box, and his 20 year old sister is screaming about how men have all the power. Apparently the unintended irony of her statement never dawns on her feminist tainted brain.

Then after the war, feminists were screaming about how there should have been a Vietnam Memorial for women. 50,000 plus men died in Vietnam and 8 women. So rather than admit the massive sexism against men thru these casualty numbers, feminists focused on the victimhood of 8 women and supporting women...

In short, feminism , the offspring of suffrage, continues to exaggerate women's burdens and understate men's. Phony statistics like the glass ceiling and rape statistics continue to demonize men to this day. The kicker is the movement does this all the while, claiming self righteously to be about equality. The Democratic Party has embraced this ever expanding inequality against men and then pretended they were the champion of the average person. That is why whoever the liberal was on one of these threads who touted the suffrage movement as some great liberal victory, may want to think again. Or simply chalk it up to the sacrifices being a bunch of dead males and specifically dead white males so who cares...

So basically this is just a rant about how much you hate women.

We have enough of those people here. Move along.

 

[Agit8r]

Maybe Saudi Arabia will give you refugee status

 

[Sallow]

I noticed somebody claimed liberals were behind women's suffrage. I wouldn't claim credit for this movement. It basically amounted to women getting the rights of men without the responsibiliites. Specifically, women got the right to vote without the responsibility to serve in combat or even be drafted which continued to be male only burdens. What is embarassing about the movement, is that at the very time men were dying in WWI by the thousands, the supposed equality movement claimed victory with women's right to vote. We see echoes of the suffrage's virulent anti-man rhetoric for the past 100 years.

During the Vietnam War, AGAIN a period of extreme male burdens, people like Betty Friedan were talking about how women needed equality. Really? So you have a family where the 21 year old brother goes to Nam and comes back in a box, and his 20 year old sister is screaming about how men have all the power. Apparently the unintended irony of her statement never dawns on her feminist tainted brain.

Then after the war, feminists were screaming about how there should have been a Vietnam Memorial for women. 50,000 plus men died in Vietnam and 8 women. So rather than admit the massive sexism against men thru these casualty numbers, feminists focused on the victimhood of 8 women and supporting women...

In short, feminism , the offspring of suffrage, continues to exaggerate women's burdens and understate men's. Phony statistics like the glass ceiling and rape statistics continue to demonize men to this day. The kicker is the movement does this all the while, claiming self righteously to be about equality. The Democratic Party has embraced this ever expanding inequality against men and then pretended they were the champion of the average person. That is why whoever the liberal was on one of these threads who touted the suffrage movement as some great liberal victory, may want to think again. Or simply chalk it up to the sacrifices being a bunch of dead males and specifically dead white males so who cares...

 

[editec]

IF a DRAFT is reconstituted, THEN I quite agree that women ought to be included in the fun.

Complaining about the fact that women got the vote?

That's crazy talk.

 

[Pogo]

"Baited" breath - I shudder to think what it's "baited" with...

Dork's whole hangup seems to be with gender roles in combat (which is a male thing anyway). Brings to mind this old saw:

"Why do men go to war?"
" - Because the women are watching."​

 

[hoosier88]

Well, dang, the system of registering for military service (to the best of my knowledge) didn't come into being until the "Selective Training and Service Act of 1940"... so on this count, I think the women of the 20's and 30's, at least, might get a bye. Add to that, they didn't exactly have a whole lot of say in the rule making at the time... so, you're going to have to pin that one on the dudes, dude.

Well actually, since women convinced men to change things in women's favor back in 1913 or whenever that was passed, they could have convinced men to let women serve in combat and be drafted. At least an equality movement would have done that...

(My bold)

No, enfranchisement of women was a political move. It was meant to move the country on temperance, foreign policy (put brakes on warfare), clean up politics, put more attention on family issues. Although women played up their physical endurance - marches, bicycle races, etc. - the issue wasn't combat arms.

More pragmatically, the franchise for women was viewed as favoring the liberal agenda - education, breaking up trusts & holding companies, FDA, sewage, water, public health issues.

 

[racewright]

As we move forward in history you will find those who will reap the reward of those who made things possible.
The white male made it possible for the white female and all the minorities both male and female
to live a better life. The problems started when the foolish white male made so much possible for others that minorities and women now believe they are intitled to all the hundreds of years of hard times and work the white male preformed .

Even today the Massia needed the white male vote to get elected and the women and minorities take the credit. So I submit the stupid white male made his own bed and will have to lay in it untill he realizes his labors caused his own demise. But he is also the group that will be asked to save society from it self AGAIN.

A white male

 

[Dorkazoid_Jones]

Well, dang, the system of registering for military service (to the best of my knowledge) didn't come into being until the "Selective Training and Service Act of 1940"... so on this count, I think the women of the 20's and 30's, at least, might get a bye. Add to that, they didn't exactly have a whole lot of say in the rule making at the time... so, you're going to have to pin that one on the dudes, dude.

Well actually, since women convinced men to change things in women's favor back in 1913 or whenever that was passed, they could have convinced men to let women serve in combat and be drafted. At least an equality movement would have done that...

You know what, Dorkazoid? I think you might be onto something...all the things you talk about very well could be one of the greatest conspiracies of all time on the part of women through the centuries -- at a level perhaps unknown before or since. It's remarkable. Good on you for bringing it to light. I was never really into this whole feminist thing, but I'm starting to get impressed. Thanks so much for inspiring my way of thinking - for overcoming my disinterest on the whole gender thing. I hadn't given it much mind before, but you really are a champion for the power that women can have. I applaud you for that. I had no idea. I'm going to have to pay more attention... and I really appreciate you for that. Thank you!

Yeah, conspiracy theories never started with feminists. Thousands of women are beaten every two minutes during the Super Bowl, men are forcing women at gunpoint to read grocery line magazines which show women with unrealistic body shapes, Scooby Doo was a patriarchal conspiracy. Women on airlines are subliminally oppressed EVEN NOW by the phallic shaped planes leaving them helpless for days after any flight... Yeah, like anyone could match the feminists when it comes to THOSE PEOPLE who are oppressing us at every turn...

 

[Dorkazoid_Jones]

I noticed somebody claimed liberals were behind women's suffrage. I wouldn't claim credit for this movement. It basically amounted to women getting the rights of men without the responsibiliites. Specifically, women got the right to vote without the responsibility to serve in combat or even be drafted which continued to be male only burdens. What is embarassing about the movement, is that at the very time men were dying in WWI by the thousands, the supposed equality movement claimed victory with women's right to vote. We see echoes of the suffrage's virulent anti-man rhetoric for the past 100 years.

During the Vietnam War, AGAIN a period of extreme male burdens, people like Betty Friedan were talking about how women needed equality. Really? So you have a family where the 21 year old brother goes to Nam and comes back in a box, and his 20 year old sister is screaming about how men have all the power. Apparently the unintended irony of her statement never dawns on her feminist tainted brain.

Then after the war, feminists were screaming about how there should have been a Vietnam Memorial for women. 50,000 plus men died in Vietnam and 8 women. So rather than admit the massive sexism against men thru these casualty numbers, feminists focused on the victimhood of 8 women and supporting women...

In short, feminism , the offspring of suffrage, continues to exaggerate women's burdens and understate men's. Phony statistics like the glass ceiling and rape statistics continue to demonize men to this day. The kicker is the movement does this all the while, claiming self righteously to be about equality. The Democratic Party has embraced this ever expanding inequality against men and then pretended they were the champion of the average person. That is why whoever the liberal was on one of these threads who touted the suffrage movement as some great liberal victory, may want to think again. Or simply chalk it up to the sacrifices being a bunch of dead males and specifically dead white males so who cares...

So basically this is just a rant about how much you hate women.

We have enough of those people here. Move along.

Because I want equality for men I hate women??? Because I point out that feminism is and never was about equality you can't address that issue SPECIFICALLY?? Ok, thanks for playing. OH HOLD ON!! Dam, I just got a memo from Patriarchy HQ. I was supposed to be forcing women to pay more for dry cleaning costs at the local place. Dam, you know how unreliable we men are...

 

[Dorkazoid_Jones]

IF a DRAFT is reconstituted, THEN I quite agree that women ought to be included in the fun.

Complaining about the fact that women got the vote?

That's crazy talk.

You mischaracterize my point. Of course I want women to vote. What I don't want is a bunch of hypocritical feminists running around shrieking about equality when, if they really wanted it, the right to vote should have been tied to the responsibilities that men have to make things equal. Not sure exactly how difficult a concept this is to some people...

 

[Dorkazoid_Jones]

"Baited" breath - I shudder to think what it's "baited" with...

Dork's whole hangup seems to be with gender roles in combat (which is a male thing anyway). Brings to mind this old saw:

"Why do men go to war?"
" - Because the women are watching."​

No that's not my hangup. It's fascinating that none of you can admit that feminism spends immense amount of time looking for any tiny theoretical disadvantage women have, but blithely ignore men dying by the millions as a male burden that women haven't faced. This is why the Democratic party doesn't have a whole lot of men voting for it, because it contains a bunch of wacko feminists who do what you do. Basically act massively stupid or willfully blind. Not sure which it is...

 

[Dorkazoid_Jones]

Well, dang, the system of registering for military service (to the best of my knowledge) didn't come into being until the "Selective Training and Service Act of 1940"... so on this count, I think the women of the 20's and 30's, at least, might get a bye. Add to that, they didn't exactly have a whole lot of say in the rule making at the time... so, you're going to have to pin that one on the dudes, dude.

Well actually, since women convinced men to change things in women's favor back in 1913 or whenever that was passed, they could have convinced men to let women serve in combat and be drafted. At least an equality movement would have done that...

(My bold)

No, enfranchisement of women was a political move. It was meant to move the country on temperance, foreign policy (put brakes on warfare), clean up politics, put more attention on family issues. Although women played up their physical endurance - marches, bicycle races, etc. - the issue wasn't combat arms.

More pragmatically, the franchise for women was viewed as favoring the liberal agenda - education, breaking up trusts & holding companies, FDA, sewage, water, public health issues.[/QUOT

Doesn't matter if it's a political, religious, gay rights inspired movement or whatever. Suffrage as said by many feminists, was a move TOWARD EQUALITY. But clearly it wasn't or women would have picked up male responsibilities to go with male rights... The fact that 100 years later or so women still aren't expected to do the difficult things in the male role makes it fairly clear that it's NOT an equality movement. And it case you all haven't grasped the implications of this situation, if a movement is really about inequality then it has simply made things less just, less rational and less moral.

 

[Dorkazoid_Jones]

As we move forward in history you will find those who will reap the reward of those who made things possible.
The white male made it possible for the white female and all the minorities both male and female
to live a better life. The problems started when the foolish white male made so much possible for others that minorities and women now believe they are intitled to all the hundreds of years of hard times and work the white male preformed .

Even today the Massia needed the white male vote to get elected and the women and minorities take the credit. So I submit the stupid white male made his own bed and will have to lay in it untill he realizes his labors caused his own demise. But he is also the group that will be asked to save society from it self AGAIN.

A white male

Here is what happened. Women took advantage of men's inclination to offer protection. Men didn't really question the inequality of the movement because they thought they were somehow protecting women more. Now many women quickly say they are NOT feminists because they see how one sided the movement really is...

 

[hoosier88]

Well actually, since women convinced men to change things in women's favor back in 1913 or whenever that was passed, they could have convinced men to let women serve in combat and be drafted. At least an equality movement would have done that...

(My bold)

No, enfranchisement of women was a political move. It was meant to move the country on temperance, foreign policy (put brakes on warfare), clean up politics, put more attention on family issues. Although women played up their physical endurance - marches, bicycle races, etc. - the issue wasn't combat arms.

More pragmatically, the franchise for women was viewed as favoring the liberal agenda - education, breaking up trusts & holding companies, FDA, sewage, water, public health issues.[/QUOT

Doesn't matter if it's a political, religious, gay rights inspired movement or whatever. Suffrage as said by many feminists, was a move TOWARD EQUALITY. But clearly it wasn't or women would have picked up male responsibilities to go with male rights... The fact that 100 years later or so women still aren't expected to do the difficult things in the male role makes it fairly clear that it's NOT an equality movement. And it case you all haven't grasped the implications of this situation, if a movement is really about inequality then it has simply made things less just, less rational and less moral.

(My bold)

No, it was a move towards political participation, towards civic equality for women before the electoral urns. This was the cutting edge on land ownership, political candidacy, aspiration to the professions, higher education. I don't know that it was ever intended that men & women would be interchangeable, when clearly they are not.

Just in the most basic function, a man still cannot, despite surgical & biochemical advances, conceive & carry a fetus to term. Should women then be valued above men? In this particular field of endeavor - childbearing - Yes, of course. & yet - although science tells us that women could reproduce without men, evolution would slow to a crawl without the participation of men.

Better, I think, to praise our distinctive gifts, & give of the best of ourselves to each other. I think direct equivalency of the sexes is an interesting goal, but more in the way of perhaps a normative goal, something to aspire to. The actual accomplishment will have to wait for tremendous advances in bioengineering - & I'm not sure then even then, it would be such a good idea. Some random processes merely appear to be random - there may be a deep patterning there, overlaid by apparent chaos.

 

[Michelle420]

Well, thanks for sharing your stupidity and ignorance.

The upside is, this kind of misogynistic attitude will ensure that he'll never get a chance to breed. He's kind of his own Darwin Award.

So if I'm for equality for men, then I'm a misognyist?? OH MY GAWD NOT A MISOGYNIST?!! EVERYBODY HEAD FOR THE HILLS -- A MISOGYNIST??!!!!

You Dems are hilarious. What do you do -- rotate demonizations like a juke box??? Let me guess next time I'll be a RACIST and then a HOMOPHOBE and after that what comes next -- XENOPHOBE??

Are Dems ever able to admit -- even to themselves -- how bizarre their politics have gotten when someone points out basic demonstrable inequalities and the victim lovers suddenly scatter like cockroaches and can't even address the question??

Of course if I was a transvestite nun from Mars having trouble with MULTIPLE ORGASMS then we'd have to have a fast-tracked-we-can't-let-this-stand commission to look into this HURRICANE OF HORROR!!!!

Why are Dems normalophobes, that's really the question. A normal balance of responsibilities between the sexes is beyond the comprehension of Dems.

If you're the average person and you get mugged, Dems will figure out how it's the oppressive society that has DESTROYED the muggers life, meanwhile the mugged person is still lying in the parking lot getting a ticket because they were not mobil enough to take their car for it's yearly emissions test and are GREENPHOBIC...

Not unlike labels some conservatives give to women who want equal rights are called femi-nazis. Labels go both ways and so does name calling.

Although you are the one who chooses to call yourself a dorkazoid

 

[Pogo]

"Baited" breath - I shudder to think what it's "baited" with...

Dork's whole hangup seems to be with gender roles in combat (which is a male thing anyway). Brings to mind this old saw:

"Why do men go to war?"
" - Because the women are watching."​

No that's not my hangup. It's fascinating that none of you can admit that feminism spends immense amount of time looking for any tiny theoretical disadvantage women have, but blithely ignore men dying by the millions as a male burden that women haven't faced. This is why the Democratic party doesn't have a whole lot of men voting for it, because it contains a bunch of wacko feminists who do what you do. Basically act massively stupid or willfully blind. Not sure which it is...

-- as a male burden that women haven't created.

Duh...

 

[racewright]

Major cause of USA problems

Women and weak men who can not control there women