Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (4954)	11/6/2005 10:29:43 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541988

I disagree with that snippet. What the snippet fails to realize is that now if women choose to work outside the home, most of the work inside the home falls on them too. There is a lot of room for some feminist agitprop against that. I don't know ANY women who work who are getting the kind of support from their husbands that husbands get from their wives. That's a critical piece of the puzzle. If women choose to work, they can either not have children, or have them and be forced to farm them out to others- they aren't usually going to be able to have a "wife"- unless they are lesbians (lucky lesbians). As I see it the next frontier of the feminist movement (but really, it's a movement for everyone, because what is happening now seems to be hurting children)- is to address the fact that women can be anything- as long as they do all the other work they used to do as wives- if they are so silly as to want to have a family. That's bullshit, imo- and I can understand if women are pissed off about it. chronicle.com "Designing our work ideals around men's bodies, and their life patterns -- their relative immunity from child care, their felt entitlement to move their families to take a better job -- discriminates against mothers. And, because 90 percent of women become mothers during their working lives, discrimination against mothers reflects discrimination against women as a group. " Because women have been second class citizens for such a long time (heck, we STILL have never had a woman VP or Pres- gosh we're SO equal, aren't we?) people don't even notice that the very system itself (built by men), discriminates against women- and not just women, it discriminates against the raising of the next generation- which is stupid, because when we are in our nursing home beds the folks who will be changing our diapers, and giving us our meds, are the children being born now. If we don't make sure their mothers can have them, and that their mothers and fathers can take care of them well, and that they are decently educated, the people who take care of us might not be so wonderful.

To: Lane3 who wrote (4954)	11/6/2005 10:30:41 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541988

Sorry, I don't feel like debating feminism today. I've finished my coffee so I need to finish detailing my Rover while the weather's warm, so I can sell it. We can bookmark it and come back to it another day when it's cold outside or raining or something.

To: Lane3 who wrote (4954)	11/6/2005 11:55:20 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541988

The bad news is that the Feminist Movement never realized that the mission had been mostly accomplished. The women who want to become professionals--or do anything for that matter--can do it--including becoming wives and mothers if they choose. The war is won, but the Feminist Movement continues to battle on, oblivious to that fact Sheesh. When did these four other women get nominated to the supreme court? I must be oblivious. I had read somewhere, the President of Harvard University questioning whether for some innate reasons women had to prove they could make it in the study of science. I must be oblivious. George W Bush is the 43 President of the United States. How many before him were women. I must have missed it.