does the existence of men preclude the absolute freedom of women?

Answer 1

Cath C's answer is probably the most blind answer I have ever seen on this board and it is the sort of stuff which will keep women forever in the dark ages.
"Absolute freedom" does not exist! It is a myth to suppose that it exists for any being. Men are not free. Women have made great strides towards eqality with men, but they need to learn from history that no entity in a position of strength or power, gives up that power willingly. I am a single dad. I fought my ex-wife for the custody of our child and won. Under normal circumstances custody of the children goes to the mother. At least it does in this country. I am still fighting the CSA to get money out of her, even though she works, is shacked up with a guy who earns good money and goes on holiday 3 times a year. She gets 3 days out of 14 with our daughter but has yet to contribute a penny towards her welfare. If the situation wee reversed te CSA would be down on me like a sack of coal. So why, by imputation in your question, do you think that men are more free than women? Many small minorities struggle to achieve their rights, Women have a majority yet continue to whinge about their being oppressed .

Answer 2

I think the existence of others precludes the absolute freedom of the individual. That's not a bad thing.

The notion of the social-contract fits in well with our existence as a prosocial species. I curb my own rights so that I continue to get the support of the community. I don't tell my family that I don't feel like going home for Christmas because it would hurt their feelings. Instead I go. The upside is that I can still depend on their support when I need it.

Back to the nub of your question though, a couple of societies have been documented where women ran the show. If that indicates "absolute freedom" to you then no, the existence of men doesn't impinge on that.

Answer 3

If you would have asked the people in India, for example, this same question, "Does the existence of British in your lands preclude the absolute freedom of Indians?", many would have answered "yes". If you would have asked Black slaves in the U.S., "Does the existence of White people preclude the absolute freedom of Blacks?", many would have answered "yes". And, if you had asked the common man in France during the French Revolution, "Does the existence of an aristocracy preclude the absolute freedom of everyone else?", the answer would have been "yes. So, there have been wars among men. The rise of women, though, is the first rise in our history of a segment of suppressed humankind in which there was no war. Nor will there be and that is because, from a psychological perspective, we are all part of our mothers and part of our fathers. As much as war is madness in any situation, to war against what is so fundamentally a part of us as our mothers is unacceptable to us. The suppression and domination of that part of ourselves has sickened us, as evidenced by our polarized animosities and exploitations of each other in our societies and wars. To continue to suppress a part of ourselves is masochistic and hobbles the rise of all of us above savagery.

Freedom for women is something that is right and healthy, and most people sense that. Freedom for women allows ALL of us to rise and benefits ALL of us. I believe that until we treat well both the mother and father within us, we will remain out of balanced as individuals and as societies and will continue to war and suffer such mental and social disease. And, any notion of either-or "men" or "women", or British" or Indians" , for example, having freedom is a symptom of that mental and social disease of polarization.

Answer 4

Not really sure what you mean by "absolute freedom", I don't think something like that is a gender thing. But it would be nice if everyone got the same opportunities and same pay for the same work no matter who they were. It would also be nice if women could walk down the street without having guys stare at them or make horrible comments. Men who do things like that should be made to wear shock collars. In general I would say both sexes restrict the other since we differ a lot in a general view of both. Of course many things are more serious for women due to how intimidating men can be, but then there is a lot of women who use psychological intimidation to bully men. Its a far too broad and varied subject to make any real suggestion as to how things could be. All we can do is try to be decent human beings to each other despite our differences and past problems, if we do that then maybe one day everyone will actually be equal.

Answer 5

Yes, cause without men women would not be where they are today. That's a fact. If you have noticed, which I am sure you have they're still fighting. The feminists that is. You want to know something I don't believe in this silly equality thing, except for that which is naturally endowed, such as you pee I pee.
Before I go and forget to mention this some more men cannot exist without women and cannot have men without men helping them.

Answer 6

The only true absolute freedom is anarchy. I doubt that anybody but feminists want that. And I say feminists because any kind of restraint on their actions they believe to be oppression. Society and the human race would not survive long without rules to keep thing from getting out of hand.

Answer 7

Of course not. Men aren't vile oppressors, at least not by nature (heh). Some men can learn to be jack@sses, just like women can, but there doesn't have to be a war between the sexes. There are egalitarian societies out there even today. We're able to change our own society, and have come a long way with it already. It can totally happen!

Answer 8

Of course. Because men will not allow the freedom of women to walk all over them, then that precludes total freedom to women to do what they want.

The opposite it true as well.

Answer 9

I completely disagree. i'm woman and if I liked a guy i might make it nicely-known, there are no no longer elementary and rapid regulations as you're saying the place with the intention to get a guy you will possibly desire to stroll as much as them. Smiling and flirting is merely as smart and it advantageous factors a similar consequence. i'm no longer constrained in what proportion adult males i date or meet as i can do issues in my very own way and am no longer constrained to having to stroll at as quickly as over and ask them. i do no longer think of its a mans job to come lower back over and that i don't experience desperate if i'm the only finest the way. If i are not getting the consequence i wanted then i might desire to experience that its no longer my proudest 2d and somewhat down approximately it or stupid yet so does all and sundry. Its no longer a woman element. i think of you have preconceived suggestions and can desire to think of exterior of the container.

Answer 10

No. Women are free. We all have the choice to conform or not in any given situation.

Life is about bondage. Bondage to each other, and to the land is what gives us identity. Absolute freedom would be soul destroying, so we always shy away from it.