REAL WOMEN

[Black Dog]

There are various fractions of feminist movements...and I am not saying that all of them are duibious or with ulterior motives. But there is one that I've read in an article (approx. 4 years ago) that featured one group (I cannot remember exactly what their group is called but the article appeared on either National Post or Ottawa Citizen)...and what struck me was the kind of hostility the spokesperson for the group exhibited towards a man who wrote to them giving his support and calling on men for the end to violence on women.

Why such hostility? I can't help but wonder about that!

Well, in my personal experience, even "femisist" men have a tendancy to barge in and dominate discussions with their views. Sometimes women just get tired of men telling them how to soleve their problems, y'know. I think this post from another discussion board sums it up.

Women are silenced day after day in all kinds of different forums.....and I don't see too many men (even men who believe they are feminists) actively working to ensure that women's voices are heard in meetings, e-lists and other discussion boards. Yet the suggestion that men step aside for a bit and let women do the talking is met with extreme resistance..... It's easy to be oblivious when you're doing all the talking, I guess.

The whole point of a Take Back the Night march, for example, is that women should be able to walk unaccompanied through the streets at night. Since when does unaccompanied mean that they take their friends and partners with them!?!?!? If men are truly supportive of the cause, they'd recognize that this one event needs to be women-only.....by all means, wait for us at the end with goodies, but stay off the streets when we're trying to reclaim them, k?

Well Black Dog, it was pretty clear who knew nada about that argument we had regarding NAMBLA. Your explosive temper tantrum and personal insults sez it all.

Yeah: you spent the entire thread ducking weaving and generally obfuscating like crazy. Your exchange with YankAbroad (I wonder where he went? He was rad.) was the kicker.

As usual...you put words in my post. You know I am not making snap judgements on the ENTIRE feminist movement. I am pissin on the radical lesbian-feminist inspired movement that are bent on being anti-male!

For obvious reasons!

You can't even name a single "anti-male" feminist group. You want to know why this tactic of yours is infuriating? Imagine a discussion on abortion. Now imagine I went on and on about those radical pro-life groups that advocate killing abortion doctors and bombing clinics. People would probably get the impression I was talking about the whole anti-abortion movement and you'd probably respond by pointing out that such groups don't represent the pro-life movement as a whole. But suppose I ignored that and continued to harp on those factions. That's be pretty annoying, hey? (But even I can name one violent anti-abortion group).

[betsy]

What kind of people would take the opportunity to turn these unfortunate situations to their own advantage?

This is not SUPPORT. THis is ABUSE! Abuse of authority or power over someone who's desperate or traumatized or troubled or all of the above! Despicable!

And I suppose you're similarly outraged by conservative groups, ministers, and the like who counsel abused and terrified women to return to their marriages, oh, and drop some money in the collection box on the way out...(?)

I read through your litany of terrors that await women in shelters and, maybe it's the lawyer in me, but it strikes as a huge pile of horse-sh*t. Anyone can find a handful of examples of bad behavior or corrupt individuals within institutional structures and report that "some" are this, that, and the other. The fact remains that 99% of shelters provide life-saving services to abused women and kids and those victims need the services and welcome the support these shelters provide. Would you rather we shut down these places (heaven forbid some of the social workers in them should be -- gasp! -- lesbians!!) and send women back to a life of intimidation, and back to verbal and physical abuse and possibly death?

Who sez anything about shut downs?

As a lawyer, I'm sure you're familiar with things such as "enquiry"...or investigations to allegations?

Would you rather we don't talk about it?

That we as tax-payers do not question where or how our money is spent? If it's really helping the people that are meant to be helped?

Why, just because some popular highly protected species might be involved?

[betsy]

There are various fractions of feminist movements...and I am not saying that all of them are duibious or with ulterior motives. But there is one that I've read in an article (approx. 4 years ago) that featured one group (I cannot remember exactly what their group is called but the article appeared on either National Post or Ottawa Citizen)...and what struck me was the kind of hostility the spokesperson for the group exhibited towards a man who wrote to them giving his support and calling on men for the end to violence on women.

Why such hostility? I can't help but wonder about that!

Well, in my personal experience, even "femisist" men have a tendancy to barge in and dominate discussions with their views. Sometimes women just get tired of men telling them how to soleve their problems, y'know. I think this post from another discussion board sums it up.

Women are silenced day after day in all kinds of different forums.....and I don't see too many men (even men who believe they are feminists) actively working to ensure that women's voices are heard in meetings, e-lists and other discussion boards. Yet the suggestion that men step aside for a bit and let women do the talking is met with extreme resistance..... It's easy to be oblivious when you're doing all the talking, I guess.

The whole point of a Take Back the Night march, for example, is that women should be able to walk unaccompanied through the streets at night. Since when does unaccompanied mean that they take their friends and partners with them!?!?!? If men are truly supportive of the cause, they'd recognize that this one event needs to be women-only.....by all means, wait for us at the end with goodies, but stay off the streets when we're trying to reclaim them, k?

Well Black Dog, it was pretty clear who knew nada about that argument we had regarding NAMBLA. Your explosive temper tantrum and personal insults sez it all.

Yeah: you spent the entire thread ducking weaving and generally obfuscating like crazy. Your exchange with YankAbroad (I wonder where he went? He was rad.) was the kicker.

As usual...you put words in my post. You know I am not making snap judgements on the ENTIRE feminist movement. I am pissin on the radical lesbian-feminist inspired movement that are bent on being anti-male!

For obvious reasons!

You can't even name a single "anti-male" feminist group. You want to know why this tactic of yours is infuriating? Imagine a discussion on abortion. Now imagine I went on and on about those radical pro-life groups that advocate killing abortion doctors and bombing clinics. People would probably get the impression I was talking about the whole anti-abortion movement and you'd probably respond by pointing out that such groups don't represent the pro-life movement as a whole. But suppose I ignored that and continued to harp on those factions. That's be pretty annoying, hey? (But even I can name one violent anti-abortion group).

What's this hang-ups and obsession about specific names? Your entire beef is about , all the way from the NAMBLA thread, "Name a particular group!"

I know there is or are violent anti-abortion group or individuals around...and I don't know the name of the group or individual(s). But just because I can't name this violent anti-abortion groups by name doesn't mean they don't exist!

[betsy]

I'm not Canadian, but this "Real" Women group sounds strikingly familiar to a radical right wing group here in the US: The Concerned Women for America. No one on the right sees the irony behind the fact that the CWA is headed up by a man. Essentially, it acts like a counter-reformation to the feminist movement whereby it seems that its underlying tenet is that women are equal (white, Christian, anti-Darwinist, anti-gay, anti-choice, pro-barefoot-and-pregnant women, that is).

I don't know about your CWA.

I am a Canadian and REAL WOMEN shares most of my views.

[Black Dog]

What's this hang-ups and obsession about specific names? Your entire beef is about , all the way from the NAMBLA thread, "Name a particular group!"

I know there is or are violent anti-abortion group or individuals around...and I don't know the name of the group or individual(s). But just because I can't name this violent anti-abortion groups by name doesn't mean they don't exist!

Listen, if you're going to make statements like:

Although I support some of the things that women fight for...I cannot say that I agree with some Women's Rights agenda. Some radical groups have turned it into a man-hating machine. I do not support any groups that believe in having their so-called "rights" by taking away from another.

expect to be called on it. The fact you can't support your allegations wih any evidence is telling indeed.

[betsy]

Or maybe you can't because, as I suspect, you rely on misinformation from anti-feminist groups like REAL women and "father's rights" groups.

Whoa, that's a heavy statement against REAL WOMEN.

Regarding "Father's Rights " groups that you've mentioned giving misinformation, name the particular groups please.

I expect you to support your allegation(s).

Link please.

[Black Dog]

So you concede my points, then. Awesome.

Whoa, that's a heavy statement against REAL WOMEN.

Regarding "Father's Rights " groups that you've mentioned giving misinformation, name the particular groups please.

I expect you to support your allegation(s).

Fathers Canada 4 Justice

www.fathers.ca/

[BubberMiley]

Betsy,

That was a long story, but I don't see how you can damn a large group of people and whatever they stand for based on one person who spoke inappropriately in front of some kids.

Do real women who operate daycares smugly cluck their tongues every time a mom leaves her kids and goes to work?

[betsy]

So you concede my points, then. Awesome.

Whoa, that's a heavy statement against REAL WOMEN.

Regarding "Father's Rights " groups that you've mentioned giving misinformation, name the particular groups please.

I expect you to support your allegation(s).

Fathers Canada 4 Justice

www.fathers.ca/

Thanks for the fathers link.

You've made a sweeping statement about "misinformation" being given by REAL WOMEN and Fathers' Rights Groups. What "misinformation" are you referring to being given by both groups?

Please support your allegations.

[betsy]

Betsy,

That was a long story, but I don't see how you can damn a large group of people and whatever they stand for based on one person who spoke inappropriately in front of some kids.

Do real women who operate daycares smugly cluck their tongues every time a mom leaves her kids and goes to work?

That story regarding one of my children is just ONE EXAMPLE showing that indeed, there are those who operate/manage/supervise tax-funded programs supposed TO SUPPORT people in dire need!

My story not only showed that this boss (who manages a GROUP HOME) could be so incredibly insensitive to these children who are going through one of the roughest times of their lives, (supporting one of the allegations posted by COURTWATCH). My kid attempted suicide!

That this insensitive boss runs a GROUP HOME makes one wonder how that group home is particularly managed and operating.

Is there anything wrong in questioning about these things?

[BubberMiley]

That this insensitive boss runs a GROUP HOME makes one wonder how that group home is particularly managed and operating.

Is there anything wrong in questioning about these things?

Nope, but it's totally irrational to take that to the next level and question all group homes. Just like it's totally irrational to think: that woman's a feminist + she spoke inappropriately = feminism is bad.

But don't you feel that by operating a daycare centre, you're not only appeasing mothers' abandonment of their children, but facilitating it?

[Concerned]

I've mentioned from the topic Scheherezade that women had gained through the movement, but unfortunately we've lost some too.

It seems that now when we've supposedly acquire more "freedom", women seems to have been entrapped into a situation where there's palpable "pressure" to "rise" above that position in the kitchen which, a lot of women, suddenly find so shameful and degrading. Ironically, the pressure doesn't come from the men....but from fellow-women who show contempt and scorn to those who prefer to remain in their kitchens.

Why is it so surprising to find a lot of women preferring home and kitchen? I think it is our natural habitat. We're natural born nurturers.

Way back, it was a big deal that women had finally managed to get men to do their share with house chores. But lately, when you talk to women, most of them admit that they still do the bulk of chores at home. Some even confess that nothing had changed...their husbands still would not lift a finger when it comes to domestic chores, other than the traditional taking-out-the-garbage routine, or handling the BBQ.

The reason why a lot of women end up doing the chores is basically identical. Men are so clueless when it comes to cleaning...that either you put up with a sloppy job or end up doing the chore yourself. A lot of women cannot abide by the former, thereby they end up opting for the latter.

I think we've been had!

Now women do so much more in AND outside the house! They're stressed out and harried more than ever!

I don't know about you Betsy, so many of your posts are in line with Margraces comments above. What are you exactly and what do you really stand for?

Men are good at certain tasks at home and not at others. This is a fact most women have learned...men are not that adaptable around the homes, they have their limitations. However they have their strengths and are very good at certain stuff...mr. fix it stuff , the garbage, the remote control, you know what I mean.

For the rest of it you hire a housekeeper at 10 bucks an hour. Get an education and go out into the workplace and make $30 plus. Take a few risks, that is the downfall of women, they just don't want to do stick their necks out a bit and manage instead of letting their lives drive them.

[betsy]

That this insensitive boss runs a GROUP HOME makes one wonder how that group home is particularly managed and operating.

Is there anything wrong in questioning about these things?

Nope, but it's totally irrational to take that to the next level and question all group homes. Just like it's totally irrational to think: that woman's a feminist + she spoke inappropriately = feminism is bad.

But don't you feel that by operating a daycare centre, you're not only appeasing mothers' abandonment of their children, but facilitating it?

Excuse me, but my statement clearly says THAT group home, not "those". Nor do I have any problems with women who prefer to go to work outside the house. My point and beef is about working women...and the seemingly pervading attitude among women who have scorn and contempt for those who CHOOSE and PREFER to remain in their kitchens and hearth!

This particular boss woman, (whom I described was "butchy"...or is the term, "dyke"-like for those who shows visible masculine physical traits?), just happened to go bashing this father to a complete stranger, moi....in front of his daughter. Not only was that behaiviour totally unprofessional and insensitive, but her good judgement call seemed to have been easily clouded by how she felt towards the dad.

I can't help but compare her attitude to some of the incidents I've read in the paper and the ones being complained about from that post above, about women shelters.

[betsy]

I've mentioned from the topic Scheherezade that women had gained through the movement, but unfortunately we've lost some too.

It seems that now when we've supposedly acquire more "freedom", women seems to have been entrapped into a situation where there's palpable "pressure" to "rise" above that position in the kitchen which, a lot of women, suddenly find so shameful and degrading. Ironically, the pressure doesn't come from the men....but from fellow-women who show contempt and scorn to those who prefer to remain in their kitchens.

Why is it so surprising to find a lot of women preferring home and kitchen? I think it is our natural habitat. We're natural born nurturers.

Way back, it was a big deal that women had finally managed to get men to do their share with house chores. But lately, when you talk to women, most of them admit that they still do the bulk of chores at home. Some even confess that nothing had changed...their husbands still would not lift a finger when it comes to domestic chores, other than the traditional taking-out-the-garbage routine, or handling the BBQ.

The reason why a lot of women end up doing the chores is basically identical. Men are so clueless when it comes to cleaning...that either you put up with a sloppy job or end up doing the chore yourself. A lot of women cannot abide by the former, thereby they end up opting for the latter.

I think we've been had!

Now women do so much more in AND outside the house! They're stressed out and harried more than ever!

I don't know about you Betsy, so many of your posts are in line with Margraces comments above. What are you exactly and what do you really stand for?

Men are good at certain tasks at home and not at others. This is a fact most women have learned...men are not that adaptable around the homes, they have their limitations. However they have their strengths and are very good at certain stuff...mr. fix it stuff , the garbage, the remote control, you know what I mean.

For the rest of it you hire a housekeeper at 10 bucks an hour. Get an education and go out into the workplace and make $30 plus. Take a few risks, that is the downfall of women, they just don't want to do stick their necks out a bit and manage instead of letting their lives drive them.

When I said "I think we've been had!", I neglected to put a smiley to indicate it was a joke.

But yes, I believe in some points that womens' movements are fighting for (and I find that based on their objectives, REAL WOMEN is the group that actually represents me...for I share the same values).

So that's where I stand.

But going back to working women, I sense that:

Women who prefer and had chosen to stay at home to become TRADITIONAL wives and moms are somewhat made to feel that they are either being taken advantaged of or dominated by their spouses, that they are simpering morons who go along with the dictates of their husbands...and therefore do not have a voice in the matter of womens' rights agendas.

The movement had evolved into something that had unintentionally somehow put a great deal of pressure on all women, in a negative way. I guess this was not really the intention when the movement first started...but it had taken on a different route.

Concerned, please elaborate on this statement. I might've misunderstood what you mean so I'll keep my comment for now until I hear from you.

"For the rest of it you hire a housekeeper at 10 bucks an hour. Get an education and go out into the workplace and make $30 plus. Take a few risks, that is the downfall of women, they just don't want to do stick their necks out a bit and manage instead of letting their lives drive them."

[BubberMiley]

The working mothers I know just envy stay-at-home mums and wish they could afford to do the same. So I think this "pervading attitude" is mostly in your head.

[Drea]

Absolutely BM!

In an ideal world one parent would stay home and raise the kidlets while the other parent goes out and earns the bacon.

This is not an ideal world.

When my son was young I did envy those moms who didn't have to work -- spoiled little bitches (I'd think that!). Driving brand new vehicles bought by their husbands while they "baked" all day (in the sun in the backyard!)

I was angry at them then. I worked for minimum wage, I had no husband to help, noone to buy me brand new SUV.

Today, my son is almost a teenager -- I work full time at a very rewarding career -- a career, I might add, I would not have today if I'd stayed at home. So I'm glad that things worked out the way they did for me.

And I'm no longer envious of stay at home moms. They are making sacrifices too. They are risking their potential futures because you just never know when hubby might come home from work and say "Yer on yer own, I'm leaving you for the secretary".

So both stay at home moms and working moms sacrifice something.

Personally I am very lucky to have a wellbehaved child who thrived in a daycare environment when he was little. Pity the working mom who has a child with "difficulties".

[betsy]

The working mothers I know just envy stay-at-home mums and wish they could afford to do the same. So I think this "pervading attitude" is mostly in your head.

As long as that envy does not translate into meaning that stay-at-home mums do nothing but watch soap and squander time in leisurely fashion....that home-making means "doing nothing."

[betsy]

When my son was young I did envy those moms who didn't have to work -- spoiled little bitches (I'd think that!). Driving brand new vehicles bought by their husbands while they "baked" all day (in the sun in the backyard!)

That's how male chauvinist piggy husbands used to think of their stay-at-home wives too! Remember?

[betsy]

And I'm no longer envious of stay at home moms. They are making sacrifices too. They are risking their potential futures because you just never know when hubby might come home from work and say "Yer on yer own, I'm leaving you for the secretary".

I agree that you never know what can happen to a marriage. The wife and mother who had given her life making home for her family could end up with nothing should hubby decides to trade her in for the latest model.

That's why the Movement deemed it absolutely necessary for society to change their views on how they regard stay-at-home women. The Movement wants everyone to acknolwedge that stay-at-home wives and mothers are not only contributing something important to society...but are also working a job.

That's why in divorce cases now, rare indeed do you find wives walking away with hardly anything! The husband is most likely to support the wife to the kind of life you're used to, should the marriage end up in divorce.

Your "envy" stemmed from the fact of comparing yourself of having to get out and work (dealing with all the hassles of having to work for someone else).

At least, you no longer think of stay-at-home wives as "spoiled little bitches." Hopefully, all women working out there are like you.

Home-making is an important full-time job. The Movement had worked hard in having it recognized and treated as such. Let's keep it that way.

[betsy]

The working mothers I know just envy stay-at-home mums and wish they could afford to do the same. So I think this "pervading attitude" is mostly in your head.

Well, it isn't just in my head. Drea just proved my point, admitting she did used to have disdain and contempt for those whom she called, "little spoiled bitches."

Oh, and I failed to add condescension to the negative attitudes thrown towards stay-at-home mums.

[margrace]

In our extended family and immediate family only two families had children get into trouble with the law. sad to say in both these families they had stay at home mothers. I have so often heard that kids wouldn't get into trouble if mother was at home. Well it doesn't follow in our family.

On the other hand I would have loved to stay home with my kids but when your husband, who wanted a whole household full of children, died suddenly at 29 one does not have much choice. I had to get a job. I had 4 small children to support. Lucky for me I had strong family support, we still lived in the traditional neighbourhoods.

The situation is not the same today, my daughters had to put their children into childcare. It was the only way their families could survive.

The had no family to back them up, most of us were working out of the home.

Incidently a fair amount of the working mothers in our family work right along with their husbands on the farm, keep the household work up to date, do the gardening and work away from home several days a week to supplement the farm income and support the farm.

There is a lot of lack of understanding on here of the real world.

[Drea]

When hubby and I got together, my son was 7 and I took a year and a half off work.

I was bored stiff! My house was spottless, fresh cookies coming out of the oven at 3pm

dinner on the table by 5:30, all the laundry done...

Today I work 40 - 47 hours a week, my house is a disaster throughout the week and we all get together and clean it on the weekends.

I am much happier now than I was staying at home.

When I was staying at home, I went through a period of depression, didn't want to get out of my pj's at all. I felt I wasn't contributing, wasn't pulling my own weight, so to speak. (I've worked and earned my own money since I was 15yo)

Of course, this is only my experience and I have only one child. Easy Peasy IMO.

BTW, I wasn't envious of the moms because they stayed at home, but because they got everything given to them and I had to work at a crappy job with long hours and little pay and there was no way for me to afford a new vehicle or any special treat at all.

LOL there are days when I wish it were 1950 and nothing was expected of me except taking care of the children and hubby. Thankfully those days are few and far between.

I don't think that stay at home moms (with more than one child) work less, their work is simply more intangable.

As a working mom I still do exactly all the same stuff a non-working mom does, only I get it done on the weekends and after work.

My work load has pretty much doubled even though I have a man who contributes almost as much to the "household" chores as I do. I'm thankful I've met an understanding "liberal" man who does not feel it's beneath him to scrub the floors or the toilet (and he does a great job of it too!)

Please don't think I'm "slamming" stay at home moms. They are an invaluable part of our society. But I should also not be vilified for working outside the home and "abandoning" my child to the daycare system. In my case it's a choice I've made.

[betsy]

In our extended family and immediate family only two families had children get into trouble with the law. sad to say in both these families they had stay at home mothers. I have so often heard that kids wouldn't get into trouble if mother was at home. Well it doesn't follow in our family.

On the other hand I would have loved to stay home with my kids but when your husband, who wanted a whole household full of children, died suddenly at 29 one does not have much choice. I had to get a job. I had 4 small children to support. Lucky for me I had strong family support, we still lived in the traditional neighbourhoods.

The situation is not the same today, my daughters had to put their children into childcare. It was the only way their families could survive.

The had no family to back them up, most of us were working out of the home.

Incidently a fair amount of the working mothers in our family work right along with their husbands on the farm, keep the household work up to date, do the gardening and work away from home several days a week to supplement the farm income and support the farm.

There is a lot of lack of understanding on here of the real world.

The world had changed dramatically since the time of our parents, and we do know that a lot of women are driven to work outside the home out of necessity.

It is not a question of who is the best parent...or what environment makes the best child. For we do know that being a stay-at-home or a career-mom does not necessarily make an ideal or rotten child.

This is about those women, who either by luck of having spouses who can comfortably support a family with one income....or those women, who had decided to "tighten" their belts and do without that second car, or bigger house, or swimming pool...in lieu of staying home with their children and devote their time to home-making. It is also about single moms struggling to make do with welfare and child allowance, or child support and alimony...opting to raise their own children instead of going out there to start a new career.

For some women, family and children means everything....and it's all they've ever dreamed about and the only thing that gives meaning to their life.

[Drea]

For some women, family and children means everything....and it's all they've ever dreamed about and the only thing that gives meaning to their life.

My sister is one of these moms. She always dreamed of being a mom (while I always dreamed of a high-falutin' career). She married a man with 4 girls, she had a son of her own and together they had another daughter. That makes six!

Her hubby doesn't earn alot and she's had to work for the past 5 years or so. She chose a night shift job so she could be home during the day for the girls. (The boy and two of the girls are all grown up and moved out).

I might add, her husband is also the type who takes care of the household chores. When she gets home from work at 1am the house is clean. Gotta love men like that!

[betsy]

On the other hand I would have loved to stay home with my kids but when your husband, who wanted a whole household full of children, died suddenly at 29 one does not have much choice. I had to get a job. I had 4 small children to support. Lucky for me I had strong family support, we still lived in the traditional neighbourhoods.

Traditional. It is something that the now generation do not understand about and will never understand about....at least, not the kind that you had experienced with your family and neighborhood who was there to offer you support. A lot of self-less acts and sacrifices by parents or relatives or even friends.....

It's a different world now. It's brutal.