2006-12-19 04:48:50 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
it never occurred to me but maybe bisexuals can have it all! i dont mean the sex...i mean the unisex nature of their minds means that they are not forever seeking the an "other half" to complete themselves. maybe someone else can use that as an idea for a post!
2006-12-19 06:17:56 · update #1
i didnt realise how antiquated my question was.
i didnt realise things have gotten so grim between the sexes!
i didnt realise how much ive been being undermined without my even being aware of it.
2006-12-19 09:03:58 · update #2
Interesting ovservation. The difference between men and women, in this case, is that men never had a group (feminists) trying to convince them that what they DID have was worthless. Men are happy with what they have, unlike many women these days. What feminism has succeeded in doing is making women unhappy with who they are and what they DO have. Many feminists don't just hate men...they also hate women who don't believe as they do.
opalina - The reality is that there are some things that men will never have, just as there are some things a woman will never have. Fostering the idea that either can "have it all" is a recipe for unhappiness.
opalina - Dreams are not ripped away because of your gender. Dreamers who are unrealistic will find their dreams unachievable. This is true for feminists as well as everybody else. Recent history has shown that the odds are against raising well-adjusted kids without at least one parent in the house at all times. When faced with having to make a choice based in this, the kids usually end up suffering because some "dreamer" refused to acknowledge that having both a career and well-adjusted kids are usually not possible in a dual-income house-hold. Try "almost impossible" in the case of a single-parent. The bottom line is that your fallacy in reasoning as to what it takes to raise kids properly is common among feminists...which is perhaps why there are many (including myself) who see feminists as wanting to "have it all" in spite of their words to the contrary. It's my experience that feminists ignore the facts when they might be prohibitive to their agenda. In other words, pushing feminism is more important to them than their children. Children are our future, and feminists sacrifice the future of all because they think they have something to prove or "deserve" to have it all just because feminism says so in spite of the facts to the contrary. The state of children in this country today proves them wrong...every time.
opalina - Your info is wrong...kids need to be viewed over time into adulthood to understand the full impact of not having both parents around. Taking this into account, you quickly see that both parents are needed. Kids without role-models of each gender almost unilaterally have issues with relating to the missing gender when they become adults. And foisting the kids off on a nursery when a mother has the opportunity to stay with them so that she may instead persue her selfish desires deprives the children of the kind of nurturing only a mother can provide...one of those things that feminism teaches is not valuable.
2006-12-19 05:09:54 · answer #1 · answered by fishman 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's not really about "having it all" it's about having the oportunity to "have it all" There is a difference that some men just don't see. A woman often doesn't have that opportunity, regardless if it's a reality or not. Choices are made for her where as men are much freeer to make that choice.
when women said " I want it all" and men said "go on then" women took the bull by the horns and started doing something about it. Men on the other hand just stood by and watch as we worked 9 to 5, looked after the family, looked after the home, did "wifely" duties on top of all that too and just sat on their a**es and didn't change a thing. (obviously a little generalised here) but that is certainly what happens in most hoseholds that I know where the women works full time.
The workload at home never really got shared out equally. At least not in a the majority of cases.
My idea of equality is where both men AND women take equal responsibility for the house, garden, kids, work, social life, planning of christmas etc etc. But in my experience this does not happen, and can't untill employers and men take a different attitude.
When going to work, who had the responsibility of picking the kids up from school if they are sick? Usually it's still the mum, so how can employers take a woman seriously and really be seen as equal to men? An employer wouldn't take too kindly to a man nipping home at 3pm because the childminder is sick! Not on a regular basis anyway.
That's where we really can say "I have it all" and that goes for both men and women.
Fishman: maybe I haven't made it clear enough in my post, but I know that No-one can "have it all" It's not what we want, not "everything" but just the opportunity to "try" and acheive this. Having that freedom to choose instead of being met with "sorry, you have a family, there is no child care facility, go be a mum" Well, I know I can have careerr AND family, and make a bloomin good success at both. For me that is "having it all", but I now have to go another route, On my terms. Unfortunately many women do not have this. No one can ever "have it all" but don't we all want to strive for it? dreams are there to be followed not ripped away because of your gender.
Fishman: Sorry but you are so wrong. I have suffered from deep depression, my kids have not had the best of me. Now that I am back working my kids do have the best of me. Ironically I have more time for them, because I have to make time. When at home 24/7 I just got on with other things, ironically again because my husband thought me not working would mean me being able to do ALL the housework too. And I know many many women in this position. Looking after the kids actually becomes secondary to "keeping house" in the mind of many men. In fact I know many of my friends husbands who quite literally moan when they hear that the mother has been to the park with the kids all morning. Many men still don't see this as valuable time and actually use it against their wives. Yet also state as you have done that going back to work will rob the kids of this time. Double standards and an effective guilt trip for any mother.
And studies have not concluded that children have better lives or are any more adjusted comming from two parent families rather than single or working parent ones. Quite the contrary actually, with children in full time nursery from a young age being among the happiest and socially better adjusted. Probably for the very reason I stated above.
2006-12-19 05:05:46 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The questions about "feminists" a couple of weeks before 2007 kind of amaze me..
Women know men never did have it all. It has often been women who try to make sure things are better for their sons. It has often been women who try to find ways to make things better for their husbands or fathers because they know men don't have it all.
You know what, though? The work place is changing because of women. Companies are sending people home with laptops (not just women, but men - single men, young men). There are people trying to encourage changes because lawyers and doctors are staying home, and people studying this issue realize there is a huge loss of talent when some women choose to stay home with their babies. The result is a changing work force, and I believe in time there will be more flexibility for whoever works (men or women); and because of changes that will be made as a result of so many professionals being women it won't be long before women CAN have it all (and - by the way - men will also finally be able to have it all, and they will have femininsts to thank for that).
2006-12-19 05:00:13 · answer #3 · answered by WhiteLilac1 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I noted as a feminist and agnostic at the same time as i develop into 19, have not replaced that view in 30 years. yet I also develop into very quiet and introverted till my 30's, after I were given more beneficial confident, did not care what maximum human beings idea anymore, and instead of being a quiet feminist, I grew to develop into an outspoken feminist. I grew up earlier abortion develop into criminal, earlier the pill develop into exceptionally dispensed, at the same time as there have been women's jobs and adult men's jobs, and also you should no longer be conscious for the different gender's activity. I keep in ideas at the same time as "in effortless words undesirable human beings were raped, incest and baby molestation infrequently if ever got here about, and in effortless words undesirable human beings were batterers", or so it develop into stated..... i'd not in any respect opt for to have lived earlier feminists replaced our society.
2016-11-27 20:10:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
An interesting question. I grew up in the 60's and 70's. The attitude was that women were ornaments, their duty was to look after men and to have children. They were treated with disrespect, paid less for the same job and had to fight for education. My own mother thought I should leave school before I had finished my education ("You're just a girl") and I knew a few other girls this happened to, too.
The pity of it is that choice has been removed. It is now expected that women work, as well as do the housework and the childcare. Women still haven't got it all. Our respect is measured by the work we do, not about how much we contribute towards society.
Did men have it all - my father came home from work, my mother brought him drinks and his dinner. He did no housework at all, no childcare (therefore he had no bond iwth his children) and seemed to live in a permanent haze of resentment and impatience. Women have never had that luxury. We come home from work to clean, cook, do the housework etc.
The one thing that has come out of all this is security. My grandfather left my grandmother and her children were taken into care as he refused to pay maintenance. My grandmother couldn't afford to keep her children. The same thing happened to my mother. Her lack of education meant she couldn't have a job that provided for her children.
times have changed, I'm glad to say. It's still not ideal, but at least women can provide for their families if they have to.
2006-12-19 05:35:50 · answer #5 · answered by True Blue Brit 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I am only young but i do think older feminists realise men didn't have it all and i dont think most older feminists or younger feminists dont want it all but just want things to be equal. Although i think we are getting closer to equality i dont think we are quite there. Although i dont think either gender should or ever could have it all.
2006-12-19 05:50:42 · answer #6 · answered by passport_to_heaven1210 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nope. Being a feminist has helped me to get what I want from life and to go for it - no regrets whatsoever!
2006-12-19 05:48:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the best quote about feminists is: "Women are realizing that they CAN have it all, just not all at once."
Which is still a better deal than men have ever or ever will have.
2006-12-19 04:59:23 · answer #8 · answered by regenhund 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
feminists are only feminists because they havent had sex yet. Have you noticed there are never any hot feminist leaders? They take out their anger by calling all men stupid.
Just a word to all you laides out there, men do respect women. We just dont respect feminist acitivists who ***** all the time.
2006-12-19 07:22:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's never been about having it all, just having some of the same choices as men. What, have you been watching too many 1970's "perfume commercials"?
2006-12-19 08:05:34 · answer #10 · answered by wendy g 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋