Wifely Duties
POSTED BY: piratenews
UPDATED: Saturday, January 9, 2010 04:47
VIEWED: 62964
PAGE 3 of 19
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Crime was virtually non-existant, the Second Amendment was not infringed, houses cost under 50 grand, cars and gas were likewise cheap....
People believed in things, and MADE their dreams a reality. Folks worked hard and had the things to show for it.
And all of this because of housewives? Hmm. GOOD, attentive parenting plays a role in creating optimistic, law-abiding citizens, but neither do I think that the 1950's were thecrime-free, happy paradise you make it out to be, nor that women staying at home had ALL that much to do with it.
Try and look at this image you paint from the perspective of a 1950's woman. Even ignoring the blatant inequality before the law, and the blatant sexism in society alive in those days. Stay. At. Home. No job. No independent income. Your children HAVE to be your entire focus. The house HAS to be spotless. Your interaction with other adults is limited and as is your involvement in intellectual pursuits and current affairs. And it's the same thing day after day.
Yes, it has its rewarding aspects, but I think there is a big reason why not all women strive for this and it is just as valid a negative aspect of the 1950's as all those positive aspects you describe and should always be taken into account.Quote:
Children grew up with their Moms making them breakfast, lunch AND dinner. Families sat down together to eat.
If a kid got in trouble, he was punished by his parents. You could count on your neightbors.
Sounds like a slice of heaven to me,
Yes, sounds like heaven if you're the kid or the husband. Try and view this image as the one making breakfast, lunch and dinner and doing the dishes, cleaning up afterwards, every time, every day. While the others do not. That home-y feeling the husband and children experience is not what a housewife necessarily experiences because she is surrounded by her job 24/7. She doesn't get to leave work and then relax.Quote:
Granted, I believe a woman should be allowed to work, if she wants to. NOT because she has to, tho.
Nor do I think there is anything wrong with a woman who is a stay-at-home mom.
Neither do I have something against stay-at-home moms. If this is the life they want, more power to them, I'm sure they will have a beautiful family life.
BUT doesn't your argument contain an inherent blame toward working moms (who choose it and are not forced to do it) because their choice not to be at home negates all those positive things you ascribe to the existence of housewives? Or are you willing to cede that there are uniquely positive aspects to working mothers?
Yes, I do blame "working" mothers, ESPECIALLY when they don't have to.
The lack of caring, loving parents, is where a LOT of the problems in our society come from.
There is so much bullshit in this thread that the smell is sky high. But this has got to be the topper. In case you had not nticed WOMEN for the most part raise their kids......Men tend to have a nasty habit of forgetting that their 30 seconds of pleasure last a liftime, so don't give me any of this crap that working mothers are the root of the problem.
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
FORSAKEN original
Trolls Against McCain
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I can't believe the BS posted here.
Women have NEVER had a free ride, historically or during evolution.
Look at more primitive societies - you will find females provide roughly 80%+ of the food through gathering and primitive agriculture, males provide 20% or less through hunting.
It is common for women to do all the farming AND cooking AND child minding AND fetching - water, firewood, goods - women are often treated as beasts of burden.
Girls are treated as trade goods, sold into prostitution, often to fund the father's drug habits.
Islam is the driving force of female mutilation. Hey guys, how would you like to have YOUR parts dug out with a rusty razor blade in order to be considered 'clean' ?
As for Islam - the more restrictive it is - in say Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Morocco, Nigeria, Western Sahara - the higher the female suicide rates, mutilation rates, abuse rates. Uuhhm, yeah, women really must like that.
When it comes to childcare, in Fiji today (an egalitarian society) the older people look after the children, men fish, and women plant, harvest and cook taro and other vegetables. Food is too hard to come by to waste the time of able-bodied adults in looking after children.
The idea of the delicate flower staying at home is a recent Western notion, spawned in the late 1800's, and only for high class consumption, as women in lower classes still did the farming, worked in mills and sweatshops, as housemaids etc.
And y'all need to read the book 'Mother Love'. It's historically common (in Europe through the 1200's to currently, for which data is available) that when females have social opportunities other than child-bearing, they choose those things other than child-bearing.
Female choice is the driving force of the 'demographic transition' - the reliable change to smaller family size as overall prosperity goes up, education goes up, and people move to cities.
A male dominated society in which females are restricted has never been a good things for women. And given the choice, women choose otherwise.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Ahhh, that's so big of you. I'm sure all the women of the world bow down and thank you for so condescendingly granting them permission to live their own lives!
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Granted, I believe a woman should be allowed to work, if she wants to.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
As for free rides, house-wives, cherishing motherhood and the 1950's.. I think we can all agree that there are many good and complex reason things changed. They are not perfect now but neither were they necessarily better before.
Aaron Russo said it was to increase the tax base. My analysis would be that it was to increase the labor pool, and thereby decrease the price of labor.
mindless hordes always follow their self-appointed representatives.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:Quote:
As for free rides, house-wives, cherishing motherhood and the 1950's.. I think we can all agree that there are many good and complex reason things changed. They are not perfect now but neither were they necessarily better before.
Aaron Russo said it was to increase the tax base. My analysis would be that it was to increase the labor pool, and thereby decrease the price of labor.
mindless hordes always follow their self-appointed representatives.
So women chose to work in order to increase the tax base..? How could such a thing be dictated from above? If the 1950's were as golden as some of here claim, why would women willingly change this?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Swish,
Shut-up.
My point was not that women should be barefoot. pregnant, and in the kitchen.
But rather,
SOMEONE NEEDS TO BE HOME WITH THE CHILDREN.
Whether its the father, or the mother.... if you have kids, someone needs to be there for them.
Stop allowing schools, and expensive day-care to raise them.
The problem, as I see it, is that people have forgotten that it is a RESPONSIBILITY to have children. Not a right, or a status symbol.
You are responsible for bringing the child up to adult-hood.
NOT just by buying them the best toys. But by raising/teaching them to be GOOD people.
Fucking socialists think that the government can raise their kids for them. They forget that a kid needs more than a PS3 to grow up right. He/she needs loving PARENTS, to grow.
No wonder our society is so screwed up. You have a bunch of kids raised by the streets, or by schools, or just left to fend for themselves.
You fucking make them, you better fucking raise them right.
Dammit, why is this concept so hard for you lazy bastards?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And why are you not responding to the questions people ask you? (I.e., my question of whether you would be perfectly happy to be a housekeeper who cleans and guards the house all day and nothing else.)
And I think you would find a whole lot more common ground with people if you had not focused specifically on mothers before. That naturally drew some irritation from others and now you react aggressively to that irritation as if people are arguing against the concept of responsible parenting as a whole.
People asking about where you place the role of working fathers or shared responsibility, like both parents working part time, or possible alternatives to the housewife syndrome you can envision.. that's not an unjustified request.
Calm down, employ some benefit of doubt and you might be surprised that most people DO agree with your concept that parents should spend more time with their kids.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Aaron Russo said it was to increase the tax base. My analysis would be that it was to increase the labor pool, and thereby decrease the price of labor.
The trillionaire NWO kingpins who own the private central banks, that keep all income taxes (thus owning all governments and taxslaves), pick and choose what they want their slaves to do. Their program has been in effect for over 200 years, according to their own published confessions.
This also doubles the labor pool to cut wages by over 50%, as Detroit is finding out this week as Congress nationalizes (Communizes) the automobile industry. Instead of raising wages of working folk to $30/hour, They want to cut everyone down to $5/hour. The Jap car plants in USA only ASSEMBLE with unskilled labor, they don't manufacture with machinists, fabricators, engineers and steelworkers, and even their office workers are in Japan.
Read what the Rockefellers and Rothschilds write, and you realize thay want to destroy our families. Communism and fascism were their creation to that endgame. They started World Wars 1 and 2, that genocided 100-million people.
When you have 300-Trillion in your private piggybank, you can pretty much buy whoever you want, which buys a lot of brainwashing from the media mafia whores.
For example, when they wanted to get women to get addicted to tobacco, they when to Jewish adman and CIA agent Edward Bernays, Sigmond Freud's nephew, who first brainwashed women to smoke, "by making them want a penis".
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=bbc+century+of+the+self#
Joe Camel is a penis/vagina
My grandmother died of throat cancer from smoking at age 32, so I never met her. Great genocide program that costs each tobacco addict over $100,000 in tobacco over their lifetime, plus $100,000 in medical bills, which the Rockefellers also profit from. Tobacco is a great tool to destroy families, when they can't even afford to buy houses due to tobacco expenses, which is more expensive than a gambling addiction.
Sheeple think their thoughts are their own, but in reality they're brainwashed by 10,000s hours of TeeVee and skoolin.
We've all been duped. Is it too late to fix it?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by piratenews:
We've all been duped. Is it too late to fix it?
I feel pretty happy, but maybe it's the just my tap water. What do you mean by "fix it?" Maybe if you paint a picture of what you see life would be without these New World Order kingpins pulling all the levers we could understand what we're missing?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Stop it, my sides are splitting.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME