Red Mosquito

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 3:52 am**

malice wrote:I can only apply the idea of 'getting the fuck out' to 'any self respecting woman' if A) a marriage is being held together for the benefit of the children, B) if the husband is physically violent (and that would be regardless of all other considerations, including any benefit to children, actually) or C) the marriage was a mistake, and in that case, there's no need to determine if you're financially dependent on your significant other regardless - if it's a mistake, that's what it is, and using anyone for financial gain (or scholastic achievement that allows for financial gain) is pretty despicable as well - although I know this isn't an uncommon thing to happen - using someone for their cash, but I don't think it's restricted only to women. in fact, I know it from experience, myself so

I took the author to mean A).

The part I found unsettling was "any self-respecting woman with means will GET THE FUCK OUT, especially if she had her children really young and missed a bunch of her youth". Both parents had their youth, they just spent large chunks of it parenting. The writer obviously looks at parenting with disdain. I can only hope she doesn't have nor ever had kids.

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 11:28 am**

Yeah, A makes sense. I just didn't know if that was a thing now with the modern Feminist crowd; that marriage was so disdained that no self-respecting woman would choose it unless under duress. Most of my exposure to the Wonkette viewpoint point comes from reading the closed captions to Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC (which is not that bad if you can get over that almost every discussion is about how things are 'gendered') while on the elliptical every Saturday and Sunday morning, so I gotta ask about this kinda stuff.

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 12:09 pm**

I think it's important to note that there isn't one single homogenous "feminist crowd"; there are dozens of permutations of feminism, some of which are militant and radicalized while others fit quite comfortably in the prevailing gender narrative, and all the shades in between.

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 2:17 pm**

broken iris wrote:
harmless wrote:It's so much easier to blame poor people for their own economic instability than to blame the capitalist system which creates the systemic conditions for their economic instability (which one participates in).
Take it to the economy thread.

Hey bucko, let Harmless have his word.

harmless wrote:It's so much easier to blame poor people for their own economic instability than to blame the capitalist system which creates the systemic conditions for their economic instability (which one participates in).

Oh no, he was specific about singling out single moms. It was nothing about abstinence, birth control, or the age at which women are having babies or under what conditions they are having them; his answer was GET MARRIED.

Like a magic trick. Poof, you're married now and all your financial troubles are no longer "our" problem.

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 2:24 pm**

theplatypus wrote:I think it's important to note that there isn't one single homogenous "feminist crowd"; there are dozens of permutations of feminism, some of which are militant and radicalized while others fit quite comfortably in the prevailing gender narrative, and all the shades in between.

Obviously, but in social movements there tend to be prevailing thoughts about certain topics (like the one I am not allowed to mention in this thread) and their tend to be minority, sometimes upwardly trending, opinions that those on the outside are not exposed to. So without asking, how is one to know?

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 6:16 pm**

broken iris wrote:Yeah, A makes sense. I just didn't know if that was a thing now with the modern Feminist crowd; that marriage was so disdained that no self-respecting woman would choose it unless under duress. Most of my exposure to the Wonkette viewpoint point comes from reading the closed captions to Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC (which is not that bad if you can get over that almost every discussion is about how things are 'gendered') while on the elliptical every Saturday and Sunday morning, so I gotta ask about this kinda stuff.

I hope you're being facetious - otherwise it reads very much like - what do you black folk like to eat with your fried chicken these days?

did you think there's some secret pact that women who identify themselves as feminist make to hate marriage?

and the entire tone of the article, as well as the initial one from whatshername palin - both came across to me as a half step above gossip magazine quality- why read that tripe?

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 6:30 pm**

malice wrote: did you think there's some secret pact that women who identify themselves as feminist make to hate marriage?

No, or course not, sorry if it came across that way.

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 6:38 pm**

broken iris wrote:
malice wrote: did you think there's some secret pact that women who identify themselves as feminist make to hate marriage?
No, or course not, sorry if it came across that way.

look, if you're not going to take the bait I'm just going to stop arguing with you.

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 6:39 pm**

broken iris wrote:
malice wrote: did you think there's some secret pact that women who identify themselves as feminist make to hate marriage?
No, or course not, sorry if it came across that way.

Posted: **Mon January 27, 2014 11:38 pm**

"What are you feminists' opinions now? You guys still have opinions, right?"

Posted: **Wed January 29, 2014 7:41 pm**

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/2 ... 81743.html

not that anyone actually gives a shit about this

Posted: **Wed January 29, 2014 7:47 pm**

malice wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/no-taxpayer-funding-for-abortion-act_n_4681743.html

not that anyone actually gives a shit about this

jesus christ!

Posted: **Wed January 29, 2014 7:49 pm**

Alex wrote:
malice wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/no-taxpayer-funding-for-abortion-act_n_4681743.html

not that anyone actually gives a shit about this
jesus christ!

when did you move to dublin?

Posted: **Wed January 29, 2014 7:52 pm**

malice wrote:
Alex wrote:
malice wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/no-taxpayer-funding-for-abortion-act_n_4681743.html

not that anyone actually gives a shit about this
jesus christ!
when did you move to dublin?

when i was transported through the grey alien vortex

Posted: **Wed January 29, 2014 9:48 pm**

malice wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/no-taxpayer-funding-for-abortion-act_n_4681743.html

not that anyone actually gives a shit about this

America is so screwed up with its fight over abortion. In Canada abortion is covered by your mandatory government health plan. I can't say I'm wild about tax dollars being used to fund abortions but I am for abortion being legal. I'd rather fund birth control, which isn't covered by the government plan and have abortion be paid out of pocket or covered by private insurance (as most peoples birth control is). But it's far from the worst use of government money there is and I think abortion needs to be available, it just seems an odd side of the ledger for our government to be funding.

Posted: **Wed January 29, 2014 9:54 pm**

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/29/fox_new ... yre_worth/

Posted: **Wed January 29, 2014 10:58 pm**

surfndestroy wrote:
malice wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/no-taxpayer-funding-for-abortion-act_n_4681743.html

not that anyone actually gives a shit about this
America is so screwed up with its fight over abortion. In Canada abortion is covered by your mandatory government health plan. I can't say I'm wild about tax dollars being used to fund abortions but I am for abortion being legal. I'd rather fund birth control, which isn't covered by the government plan and have abortion be paid out of pocket or covered by private insurance (as most peoples birth control is). But it's far from the worst use of government money there is and I think abortion needs to be available, it just seems an odd side of the ledger for our government to be funding.

This could be your most reasonable post in this thread. Something for me to aspire to.

Posted: **Thu January 30, 2014 12:48 am**

broken iris wrote:
surfndestroy wrote:
malice wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/no-taxpayer-funding-for-abortion-act_n_4681743.html

not that anyone actually gives a shit about this
America is so screwed up with its fight over abortion. In Canada abortion is covered by your mandatory government health plan. I can't say I'm wild about tax dollars being used to fund abortions but I am for abortion being legal. I'd rather fund birth control, which isn't covered by the government plan and have abortion be paid out of pocket or covered by private insurance (as most peoples birth control is). But it's far from the worst use of government money there is and I think abortion needs to be available, it just seems an odd side of the ledger for our government to be funding.
This could be your most reasonable post in this thread. Something for me to aspire to.

I feel I've let you down or led you astray.

Posted: **Mon February 03, 2014 8:11 pm**

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/20 ... cause.html

Posted: **Mon February 03, 2014 8:12 pm**

kind of sucks that this is the only thread I felt the above article should go into...

Red Mosquito

Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism

Re: Feminism