This rekindled an observation I had in the never-to-be-solved arena of courting, marriage and men and women. And that observation is despite being villianized, degraded and shamed, activities that were traditionally considered “woman’s work” were and still are vitally important to the family and society. Ergo, why were they villianized in the first place?
Clearly the only way to beat the commies is to beat your wife!
Female dominated professions pay substantially less than male dominated professions (childcare providers, social workers, housekeepers, elementary school teachers, cashiers, etc). I could never figure out why the feminists did not demand more pay for the professions that women are naturally drawn to, instead feminists put all their energy and resources into encouraging women to enter the male dominated professions. I have nothing against women entering male dominated professions as my first career and educational pursuit was in the engineering field back in the early 80’s.
Disintegration of the traditional family was socially engineered in part, I think, to boost the economy. Two can live cheaper than one, which is not a good thing from a supply demand perspective. A family break up meant 2 residences and 2 of everything else would be required, which obviously had a huge impact on the demand for both goods and services.
“Clearly the only way to beat the commies is to beat your wife!”
Thanks for sharing the emptiness of your head and your heart Alex.
trappedinTrudeaupia 1:06 pm
I would really like to discuss your questions, but I’m unable to–mostly because I don’t get the vocabulary (my intellectual laziness). For example, I really don’t understand “imperialistic theofacism”. So if I wander way off topic, you will know why. I’m not sure that feminism is silent on the subject. Perhaps the academics avoid it because it would require an act of courage or independent thought and I’m not convinced that they’re capable of it. There are feminists (and humanists) who protest certain acts in repressive countries and who put their very lives on the line to do so. A name that comes to mind is Hirsi Ali, but there are others. And Margaret Atwood, who irritates me immensely at times, spoke out against the introduction of Sharia Law in Ontario.
Your point about the disparities between the private and public sectors is well-taken but I’m not sure where it takes the discussion. How is feminism involved and how does it relate to the homemaker’s role–which is how the original discussion began? If I understand your point it is that the taxation burden is so heavy (because of day-care, maternity leaves, etc.) that the only way to sustain the system is to import people from places who do not share the same values.
Moral equivalency is a coward’s way of avoiding thorny issues. To claim that cultural considerations exempts certain groups from doing better with their women and children is getting pretty tawdry. I don’t think people buy that anymore. Cases like that of Aqsa Parvez, strangled in a so-called honor killing by her father, have shown us that.
Feminism Explained, via GayPatriot:
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/12/feminism-explained-she-said-it-not-me.html
Whenever an elite class begins to sprout, they inevitably come face to face with trying to maintain their status as elites, not for lack of opportunities to prove their worth, but out of a desire to maintain their standard of living.
Going from being tended on hand and foot by a bevy of servants because one of your ancestors was reputed to have yanked a piece of silverware out of a chunk of pottery, or had it tossed out of a lake by some watery tart, is a bit much to maintain when the “lesser people” can fend for themselves outside your castle keep. The answer is to instill enough fear in the great unwashed that without the status quo being kept in place they will starve to death without a benevolent big government to feed them, clothe them, tend to them in sickness and in health, raise and eventually procreate the children (with a say so over how many and by whom), and deciding eventually how long the lesser beings get to live.
The fall from grace is exponential to the extent the elites have gone to keep the great unwashed convinced that they are incapable of doing the most mundane things without the say so of the elites (see fall of Berlin Wall).
The elephant in the room is that those “elites” seem to have a hard time doing those mundane tasks that result in getting dirt under the finger nails, or that cause one to perspire.
Feminism Explained: LOL, Black Mamba! Right on.
What a ditzy dame.