Feminists and homosexuals share one attribute. They don’t reproduce, so they must ruin the lives of others to maintain their numbers.

http://www.ebcak.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/iron_my_shirt.jpg

Must. Be. Stacy.

Little Miss Attila said at PW: Stacy thinks he’s defending a sacred principle by policing everyone’s language. He’s defending the fact that he’s capable of acting like a complete dick–and I mean that in a gender-neutral way, of course.

I think TOM should adopt this as its new masthead.

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. You can fight that truth all you want, but it won’t change it.

Women walked away from their kids and into the workplace and now, after halving the salary of almost every job (don’t blame math when there’s a buyer’s market) it’s extremely difficult for a family to make it on one salary. Meanwhile, children are outsourced to other cradle-rockers who care not for a child’s welfare or education, but for their own paycheck.

I, for one, never wanted to be equal with men. I liked it just fine up there on my pedestal. I never once considered that I couldn’t be or do whatever my mind had the energy and my heart had the will to accomplish. . . a man raised me that way. Imagine!

The link didn’t work for the quote in question. Got an error message.

I’m and RN, with an IQ of 156, and when my fourth child was born I quit my other job to take care of the more important one. Three more children followed that one, and every one is a conservative, and every one is highly intelligent. Two are in the military.

Don’t even think of telling me that only unintelligent women stay at home with the kids.

Feminists need to get a life. There are more important things to do than slave nine-to-five on some stupid career ladder.

I’m really enjoying this back and forth discussion, especially as it is very pertinant to my current station in life. I am due back at work in 3 weeks when my first born turns one ( I am in Canada, where we have 1 year mat leave). There is nothing I would rather do less. I have a university degree, an excellent job with great benefits/pension etc., but it all seems mind-numbing, ridiculous and unimportant when compared to being with my daughter. It feels like a denial of every instinct in every bone of my body.
As a recovering leftist, I can’t help but be very angry. I feel like I should have known better and I admire young conservatives (I am 29 and came to my senses gradually over the past couple of years). However, the feminist message is JUST SO PERVASIVE. It has to be fought. Your mentioning of Carolyn Graglia’s book led me to read a speech she gave, which I wish I could’ve heard at age 18. The message I heard loud and clear through high school, university, culture, etc. was that only dumb rednecks stay home with their kids. People who stay home “waste” their intelligence and education.

Now I have a $30,000+ student loan (which to add insult to injury was basically for a marxist/feminist indoctrination), among other debts, and my husband and I are now planning to live as frugally as possible so we can afford for me to stay home when #2 comes along.
I plan on teaching my children these life lessons that I wish someone had taught me. The feminist meme is so ridulous, b/c your kids are not young forever! As Graglia shows, one can still have a career before and after.
It is truly terrifying to look at today’s cultural messages, which my daughter will be exposed to.

Now, this is a really serious topic, and I really enjoy the various opinions presented here. I also appreciate the lack of mud slinging. It makes for a refreshing change in the blogosphere, believe me.

But I have to ask — does this mean no more healthy human female breast admiration?

Just askin’, is all.

I too find it wise not to get into the substance of this argument, particularly as I’ve no dog in this hunt.

A very important lesson in Idiocracy. That is exactly where we’re headed.

That is a joke ladies. Just a joke.

Stacy: there’s a difference (to rational, thinking people) between saying that being a grade-school teacher is beneath women and saying that it’s one of the few jobs that women should be allowed to do.

Likewise, there’s a difference between saying that all women must have a busload of kids and saying that it’s beneath the dignity of any self-respecting woman to have a busload of kids.

Time to pull the feminist card: it is accepted without question that men can be middle school teachers or corporate executives, and no one runs around policing men for those. It’s accepted without question that a man can have ten kids or zero kids and still be himself. That women need to fight for these things shows why feminism is not about Marxism.

For all the mocking of straw-womyn who say that no woman should be a teacher or whatever, the reality is that a lot of high-octane women (to use LMA’s term) were forced into teacher, stewardess, or nurse. That’s it. Your lovely daughter would not have had a choice to teach kindergarten or join her husband in law school; kindergarten would have been the only option around for her.

Real choice, Stacy. It’s akin to the choice between sending your kid to public school or charter school or parochial school or removing them from the educational system and home-schooling them: that we want people to have such choices hardly means that we’re for shutting down all non-parochial schools or all public schools or making it illegal to homeschool.

As I’ve pointed out before, 88% of American women self-identify as a feminist. A lot more than 12% of women are conservative. A lot more than 12% are pro-life. A lot more than 12% think that it’s fine for women to be nurses or elementary-school teachers, but think that women ought to have a choice in the matter. Where does that leave your theories about what feminism is?

So, are you saying that we flooded the pool of available workers and it had no effect on wages? Of course it did.

The complaint back during the “feminist movement” was much like it is now with illegals: Women would do the same jobs for half the salary of a man, the jobs that men won’t do. So feminists fought for equal wages or living wages for the women who opted to join the workforce.

Now, freeing women from the social stigma of working outside the home isn’t the culprit here, but the consequence was to bring about a substantial change to the Market model of available employees and the going wages. Women would work for half the salary of a man, since most had a man who also worked, they didn’t pressure the employer for more.

We had to artificially interfere with the Market to achieve desired results of wage equality. Well, we didn’t have to, we were forced to.

Now, I know why I have a quibble about illegal workers, but based on your math, why do you? If we flood the workforce by another 30% we should be able to absorb that, too, without it affecting wages. But reality tells us otherwise: they will work for far lower than the artificially controlled Market is paying. Until they unionize and victimize. Then, as prices for goods and services go up to keep the victim-mongers and workers’ rights socialists happy, we’ll keep overpaying for more things and pretty soon we’ll be pooling a whole household’s worth of wages in order to keep a roof over our heads. Like they do in every equality paradise.

The numbers will still look good, though!

When companies are forced to overpay above the natural market price for an employee, they won’t. And they never have. They will simply increase the price of their product or service. And they don’t pay taxes, they pass them along.

They don’t pay wages, the consumer does.

Can we chart that with math on that?

For all the mocking of straw-womyn who say that no woman should be a teacher or whatever, the reality is that a lot of high-octane women (to use LMA’s term) were forced into teacher, stewardess, or nurse. That’s it. Your lovely daughter would not have had a choice to teach kindergarten or join her husband in law school; kindergarten would have been the only option around for her.

I would love to smash the stereotype walls in schools — where girls are expected to excel in reading/English and boys in science/math. They are utter nonsense! So many brilliantly profoundly beautiful poems are penned by men. So many accomplished women of science!

I would love to smash all gender walls.

I happen to believe that there is a modicum of “statistical truth,” so to speak, in the gender stereotypes, but many exceptions and gradations, and those who don’t fit the model should be accepted and encouraged as such rather than made to fit, Procrustes-style.

…your daughter seems to be profoundly independent and self-reliant and resourceful. It is a great accomplishment to have raised such a child.

I built this town on the Central Coast to be a friendly and gentle place.

I chose an offshore breeze to cool it…and lots of trees to make it green.

I am quite proud of how it turned out.

JeffS, corpore sano in mens sana

Just sayin’

So, are you saying that we flooded the pool of available workers and it had no effect on wages? Of course it did.

Walked RIGHT INTO THE TRAP.

Dear Joan: if every family had six kids instead of two kids, thus tripling the working population in the next generation, would wages be cut in three?

This is painful to explain.

If we flood the workforce by another 30% we should be able to absorb that, too, without it affecting wages.

[Shakes head] Joan, Joan. If we flood the market with uneducated people with limited job skills, we will artificially change the market, but that’s because we are not uniformly increasing the workforce and its purchasing power; we are increasing a low-skilled portion of it, which earns little,, spends little, and needs a lot of government assistance.

By your logic, if we quadruple the number of people who have start-up companies, we’ll be poorer as a nation. Incredible lack of logic – or brainwashing by Keynsian economists.

I’ll also add: pandering to the statistical median is stupid in ANY educational system. The people who push our country forward are, by definition, not average. In some way or another, they excel. So looking at the middle and saying, “This is how it will be and should be and is divinely ordained to be” is mental.

No one says to a high school senior, “The average senior does not get an academic scholarship to college, does not take AP courses, and does not play varsity football, so get onto the JV team, don’t take AP Physics, and stop trying for the academic scholarships – even though you have an A average and are #3 in your class.” But a bunch of people think we should do that with 51% of the population, regardless of gifts and talents. It’s absolutely mental.

“Don’t even think of telling me that only unintelligent women stay at home with the kids.”

Who said that? Certainly not feminist conservatives. Most of us, in fact, are agitating for a less punishing tax code that would enable more women to stay at home with their kids.

Well, you see, there are only so many jobs in an economy. Each one created means one destroyed, like the first law of thermodynamics. Or something.