Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Romance

You all need lessons in objective discussion.

Many western societies fail to see the immense damage the feminist movement has caused , you are all focusing only on one side of the equation, refer back to my post about all the ills of society , then if you have an answer to them we can continue the discussion

A little derailment of the topic with the question

Why has it been a "man's world" in the first place, seriously. Some might put it down to religon but even before the advent of major religions, much much before. It was basicaly a man's world. Why was/is it so, ever wondered ?

Historically were there any civilisations or socities which were it was a "woman's world" ? Have there been major women personalities in history other than the few we are fimilair with like Cleopetra, Joan of Arc etc etc.

I'm thinking more along the lines where govt or rule was dominated by women or even where men played a much less dominat role or even submissive.

And if not, why not ? Women as equals why did they let men make it into a mans world in the first place ?

I don't have an answer, maybe someone else does ?

desertdudeshj wrote:A little derailment of the topic with the question

Why has it been a "man's world" in the first place, seriously. Some might put it down to religon but even before the advent of major religions, much much before. It was basicaly a man's world. Why was/is it so, ever wondered ?

Historically were there any civilisations or socities which were it was a "woman's world" ? Have there been major women personalities in history other than the few we are fimilair with like Cleopetra, Joan of Arc etc etc.

I'm thinking more along the lines where govt or rule was dominated by women or even where men played a much less dominat role or even submissive.

And if not, why not ? Women as equals why did they let men make it into a mans world in the first place ?

I don't have an answer, maybe someone else does ?

Historically it goes back to the cave man. He provided for the family, she took care of the family and that was the standard. And there seems to be some still roaming the earth.

I don't think zubber was going that far back in history, but these women were exceptions, but still lived in a man's world. It is only through evolution and revolution that brought men and women to an equal footing.

The old cave man cartoons of pulling their women by the hair into their caves although entertaining ( Can imagine the uproar if those cartoons were ever shown today ! ) but I think there isn't any historical eveidence of that, is there ?

-- Fri Jan 07, 2011 8:30 pm --

OK, fast forward. Cowboys and Indians, as in Native American Indians - but without the clubs. The men were the hunters, the providers, the protectors, the builders. Women tended to the "garden", children, housing, and, of course, the needs of the men.

OK. So why didn't the women say, go screw yourself I'm going to be doing all the hunting gathering from now while you look after the house and kids ?

zubber wrote:You all need lessons in objective discussion.

Many western societies fail to see the immense damage the feminist movement has caused , you are all focusing only on one side of the equation, refer back to my post about all the ills of society , then if you have an answer to them we can continue the discussion

Objective?? You need to re-read your posts and see where you just may have gone wrong, or could have possibly worded it differently. Apparently there was something wrong because posters found it offensive Zubber.

zubber wrote:You all need lessons in objective discussion.

You need lessons to stop being chauvinist in a civilized world!

"Many western societies fail to see the immense damage the feminist movement has caused , you are all focusing only on one side of the equation, refer back to my post about all the ills of society , then if you have an answer to them we can continue the discussion"

^^^The only one who is focusing on one side of equation (JUST MEN) is you! we are looking for equal rights for both sides of equation!

desertdudeshj wrote:OK. So why didn't the women say, go screw yourself I'm going to be doing all the hunting gathering from now while you look after the house and kids ?

Fast forward. Now we do!!!!

Only in the last 50 years 100 max but even that actually. Why not earlier specially since human civilisation has been around literally for thousands of years ?

What, women didn't realise their potential for thousands of years or just let men boss them around for sh!ts and giggles ?

The statement men opressed them, my question why did women let them ? What is so different now that wasn't there a 5000 years back. In realtion to this subject ?

Oppression of any other kind hasn't lasted this long through the centuries. I'm thinking there is more to this than what is on the surface.

DDS, the reason is in those times life was mostly based on physical powers. Farming, hunting, building etc ets were the jobs that could bring the necessities of the family to a household, which were being done better by men, because of physical differences. Nowadays making money doesnt need that much power, so women are as strong as men!

melika969 wrote:DDS, the reason is is those times life was mostly based on physical powers. Faring, hunting, building etc ets were the jobs that could bring the necessities of the family to a household, which were being done better by men, because of physical differences. Nowadays making money doesnt need that much power, so women are as strong as men!

Very true Mel. Most developed countries today where there is equality for women are based on intellect and knowledge. If women knew then, what they know now it would have changed long ago.

Unfortunately there are still countries where women know better, but they are forced to live under the rules set by a male-dominated society. To do otherwise they know that there are consequences to their actions.

melika969 wrote:DDS, the reason is in those times life was mostly based on physical powers. Farming, hunting, building etc ets were the jobs that could bring the necessities of the family to a household, which were being done better by men, because of physical differences. Nowadays making money doesnt need that much power, so women are as strong as men!

So there is an inequality abiet a physical one and the one that holds power is the one who has money, so if there was a Nuclear fall out would it return to being a mans world just because of these physical inequalities ?

If women knew then, what they know now it would have changed long ago.

Thats whats basically I'm asking, why did it take women all these years to find this out ?

Unfortunately there are still countries where women know better, but they are forced to live under the rules set by a male-dominated society. To do otherwise they know that there are consequences to their actions

Well to bring radical change one needs to able to stand up to its consquences. History tells us this. Thousands have shed blood to bring change. So what is lacking here.

Wow Dude, deep stuff.................

So your reply is ?

desertdudeshj wrote:So your reply is ?

What part of the above did you not understand?

Ah ok..got it....you don't have one.

Seeing as how you are going on with your silly questions, here is an answer:

Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer (assuming one can come up with one).

Or maybe just easier to blame men for anything and everything without having to take zero resposibilty ?

Just like the blacks of America of yonder years. If they just kept quite and kept taking the schtick the white man was handing them you think'd there would be a civil rights movements or the white man would finally say no this is not right we are going have equal rights for everyone from now on ?

Aparthied in S.Africa was abolished just as recently as the early 1990's so to think that if there wasn't a civil rights movent America would still be segregated isn't far from the realm of reality. Which ended just a few decades before aparthied in SA did.

desertdudeshj wrote:
So there is an inequality abiet a physical one and the one that holds power is the one who has money, so if there was a Nuclear fall out would it return to being a mans world just because of these physical inequalities ?

Your question is flawed! what do you mean if there is a nuclear fall? What is the consequences? All the species will extinct or just the humankind? so there is going to be new evolution? what would their growth and life will be based on?

The point is, living on the earth, needed physical strength for food, security and health. That's why the men had power over women, it is not just known by women! but as I mentioned earlier, in this time, life doesnt just based on physical power. Brain power is important (at least for some of us! ) and now women can fight for their rights. And I m gonna repeat it, they didnt just realize this yesterday, before this they had now power to go for their rights.

melika969 wrote:

desertdudeshj wrote:
So there is an inequality abiet a physical one and the one that holds power is the one who has money, so if there was a Nuclear fall out would it return to being a mans world just because of these physical inequalities ?

Your question is flawed! what do you mean if there is a nuclear fall? What is the consequences? All the species will extinct or just the humankind? so there is going to be new evolution? what would their growth and life will be based on?

The point is, living on the earth, needed physical strength for food, security and health. That's why the men had power over women, it is not just known by women! but as I mentioned earlier, in this time, life doesnt just based on physical power. Brain power is important (at least for some of us! ) and now women can fight for their rights. And I m gonna repeat it, they didnt just realize this yesterday, before this they had now power to go for their rights.

No no no, you misunderstood me or maybe I didn't phrase it properly. What I meant was there was somekind of global catastrophe ( i.e somewhat like a nuclear war...circa all those post apoclyptical movies ) and modern society/ life as we know it cease to exist and we had to go back to our old ways of existance.

Would it then again become a mans world due to the physical inequalities you stated. As once again it would be the survial of the fittest in a hunter gather type of situation.

zubber wrote:You all need lessons in objective discussion.

Many western societies fail to see the immense damage the feminist movement has caused , you are all focusing only on one side of the equation, refer back to my post about all the ills of society , then if you have an answer to them we can continue the discussion

How do you have an objective discussion with a person who isn't even aware of the history of women throughout time?

Damage? Does this look like damage to you?

1. Educated women gain opportunities to rise out of poverty and support themselves.
2. Educated women have a better ability to look out for the health of the family through proper nutrition, exercise, medical treatment, and avoiding the causes of diseases and ailments.
3. Educated women encourage their daughters to study so that they can have a better life too.
4. Educated women take control of family planning and tend to use birth control when they've had enough children and therefore do not have to suffer any unwanted pregnancies and ill health.
5. Educated women participate actively in the social, cultural and political spheres in society instead of focusing only on the domestic sphere.
6. Educated women have the ability to nurture the family on higher levels than just providing clean clothes, clean house and meals.
7. Educated women tend to have higher self-esteem and more direction for their family, career, and personal life.

It is true that well educated women tend to have fewer children, but this allows for better quality of life for the family because of more quality time for each other, less financial strain for feeding clothing and educating, and increased ability to help pay for kids to reach a higher level of education. It is also less of a strain on the planet which suffers from overpopulation. In the old days women had kids early and died early, in many cases from childbirth. It is definitely better for women get an education first before starting a family and then plan their family size. As for highly educated women choosing not to marry, or men not wanting to marry a highly educated woman - so what? People have to do what makes them happy.

I'm still searching for the negative effects of "feminism" on society.

@ Kanelli - from my earlier post

Yes feminists aka BraBuners aka ManHaters aka Those who wish that MEN SHOULD HAVE UTERUS'S, the feminist idea is rooted in complete madness , they and the other sexual revolutionists have only contributed to the destruction of the family unit, to the rise in spinsterhood , to the increase in divorce rates, to the increase in bastards , to the moral decay of society. ,

All the advantages women have got , but at what price ?

Destruction of the family unit by not staying with husbands they are not compatible with, who do not treat them properly, who mentally or physically abuse them or the children, who have affairs - yeah, sounds terrible that a woman realizes her value and shows her kids that no one should be mistreated as a human being or live unhappily in a marriage. Everyone should live miserably with each other for the sake of marriage stats. The men are never responsible for divorce, it is those nasty feminists.

What's wrong with a rise in spinsterhood? Is it the assumption that the only useful purpose for women on this earth is to marry and procreate?

So what if a woman wants to be a single mother? Quite many are forced to be when the man takes off on her, married or not.

How is a feminist woman responsible for moral decay of society? I'd really love that one explained! Why is it immoral to want to be equal in rights to a man and free from double standards?

kanelli wrote:Destruction of the family unit by not staying with husbands they are not compatible with, who do not treat them properly, who mentally or physically abuse them or the children, who have affairs - yeah, sounds terrible that a woman realizes her value and shows her kids that no one should be mistreated as a human being or live unhappily in a marriage. Everyone should live miserably with each other for the sake of marriage stats. The men are never responsible for divorce, it is those nasty feminists.

What's wrong with a rise in spinsterhood? Is it the assumption that the only useful purpose for women on this earth is to marry and procreate?

So what if a woman wants to be a single mother? Quite many are forced to be when the man takes off on her, married or not.

How is a feminist woman responsible for moral decay of society? I'd really love that one explained! Why is it immoral to want to be equal in rights to a man and free from double standards?

Although I really appreciate you tryin to give an answer to such a !

desertdudeshj wrote:No no no, you misunderstood me or maybe I didn't phrase it properly. What I meant was there was somekind of global catastrophe ( i.e somewhat like a nuclear war...circa all those post apoclyptical movies ) and modern society/ life as we know it cease to exist and we had to go back to our old ways of existance.

Would it then again become a mans world due to the physical inequalities you stated. As once again it would be the survial of the fittest in a hunter gather type of situation.

It depends on in the new world what is going to be the source for survival. That s why I asked what s going to happen to other species, assuming that it totally is going back to the cave times, IMO men will have power again. But there is a difference, as women in that time know that they had power in the modern times (assuming that the nuclear war didn't erase their memories!) and there have been lots of fights and debates on equality again in modern times, I think it won't get back to "Men are the boss" time!
and as they have been modernized, they can get modernized in much less time ratehr than thousands years.

Although this all is very hypothetical and still I think the question is not factual!

Thanks Mel and yes I never said the question was factual at all, pretty obvious it was a hypothetical one. But I am still looking into the core of the issue as to why it became a mans world in the first place.

The physical inequalities you stated can answer the balance of power in primitive societies but there is a little paradox here. Today women are doing jobs that were very traditionaly men i.e labour intensive. Like truck driver, heavy machine operators, mechanic, builder, carpenter, law enforcement, plumbers etc etc. So I guess its not totally about physical domination.

Agree with Mel that dominance by men since beginning of time was mainly because the physical counted for everything in those days - as a consequence women were not allowed the same rights particularly education and the exclusion continued for a long long time - religion also segregated roles and made the position of women less significant (I don't believe that religion ever meant that to happen but its male biases that created it). This unfortunately is still the case in many countries where men still rule and women are predominantly viewed as JUST mothers, cleaners, cooks, etc. I don't think there is any doubt that its been a mans world for a long time and this has only recently changed with women gaining the same rights and education as men.

On a slightly twisted note however I do also feel that women sometimes place too much wrong on the shoulders of men. I have met many women who go on about how men still view women as sex objects, etc and that they want to be viewed as equals. I fully agree but I think its going to be difficult if women adhere to men's agenda without being forced to in today's world. I mean why do women wear high heels? They look great but are super uncomfortable. What the point of make up and the large amount of plastic surgery? Who are women trying to please by making themselves look better and more attractive? While some may say that women want to look nice just for themselves I think its mainly to be attractive to men. Where is the equality? Apart from being good looking himself a man is usually found attractive in my opinion based on the size of his wallet, albeit a good sense of humour, height, etc also have positive implications. Am I wrong?

Excellent post Joe, that was one of the issues I was going to get to later. Too much of a good thing can also be bad. Just like militant athiests like Hitchens are not helping "the cause" at all, too much in your face femminism has the reverse effect. When certain groups or individual keep lamenting girl power all the time without addressing any actual issue one stops paying attention or simply ignores it or says go screw yourselves. A case of having cried wolf one times too many.