If he had the balls to be a dad, he would have been known as the “Cool Dad”

“…feminism is not responsible for my having those things in the first place.”

…and the Civil War had nothing whatsoever to do with freeing the slaves and making them full citizens of the US. WTF?

“Before women’s suffrage, most people couldn’t vote. The landowners could, and then it was one vote per family, with the vote falling to the head of the household.”

…and your point?…

“Civil rights? As far as I know, women have never been singled out to be denied civil rights. Blacks, yes. Women, not so much.”

KM, you need to do a lot for research then. Women have been treated as second class in virtually every culture for the entire known history of mankind.

You claim to be “A Woman Against Feminism and For Men’s Rights”. Since when have men not had full rights, so that they need somebody to advocate for them? And what has feminism done to you to make you so bitter, besides attempt to make sure you are treated equally with men?…

KellyMac: Of course not. However, feminism is not responsible for my having those things in the first place.

Before women’s suffrage, most people couldn’t vote. The landowners could, and then it was one vote per family, with the vote falling to the head of the household. That could be a woman, by the way. Also, there were certain states who gave the vote to both men AND women BEFORE the 19th Amendment.

Regarding inheritance laws, they appear to have been made to ensure the inheritance went to the one who was traditionally responsible for maintaining the well-being of the rest of the family. In the time period I believe you’re talking about, that person generally was male, as he was expected to be the one making the living. It’s not like he had a choice. If you want to call that oppression of women, go for it.

Civil rights? As far as I know, women have never been singled out to be denied civil rights. Blacks, yes. Women, not so much.

Even if I were to concede all you mentioned as oppression, I believe women have had the vote for nearly 100 years now. Why is there still so much lamenting about it? Do you believe that the minute you let your guard down, we’ll be stripped of the vote and the right to wear shoes? Please.

MikeEss: “You should be ashamed of yourself writing such strident nonsense, and then trying to pass it off as reality.”

Gosh! That darn Amanda Marcotte and her unfeminine stridency! Doesn’t she know her proper place?…

KellyMac: There is a world of difference between the feminine and feminism. What you’ve said here is a complete non-sequitor. It has nothing to do with her politics, or her gender. It has to do with the “poor me” whining attitude that shows so clearly. In other words, I was telling her not to be such a baby. But nice try characterizing it as gender-related. This is yet another example of manufactured victimhood.

MikeEss: I don’t know about where you live, but where I live, and in the majority of families in the US, mom HAS to work outside the home so the family has enough money to pay the rent, get food and clothing, etc. (And don’t forget the ridiculous cost of gas…)

I’m glad that you have been able to work out an arrangement that allows you to be a SAHM, but the way you are living doesn’t actually represent “reality”, at least not for most Americans…

KellyMac: I don’t know where you got the idea that I am a SAHM; would that I were. I was addressing Amanda’s comment, which was clearly about SAHM’s and the lazy, slave-driving, controlling bastards they married. What she wrote was a far cry from reality, and was a clear example of the half-truths upon which feminism is built.

KM: Of course not. However, feminism is not responsible for my having those things in the first place.

Before women’s suffrage, most people couldn’t vote. The landowners could, and then it was one vote per family, with the vote falling to the head of the household. That could be a woman, by the way. Also, there were certain states who gave the vote to both men AND women BEFORE the 19th Amendment.

Regarding inheritance laws, they appear to have been made to ensure the inheritance went to the one who was traditionally responsible for maintaining the well-being of the rest of the family. In the time period I believe you’re talking about, that person generally was male, as he was expected to be the one making the living. It’s not like he had a choice. If you want to call that oppression of women, go for it.

Civil rights? As far as I know, women have never been singled out to be denied civil rights. Blacks, yes. Women, not so much.

Even if I were to concede all you mentioned as oppression, I believe women have had the vote for nearly 100 years now. Why is there still so much lamenting about it? Do you believe that the minute you let your guard down, we’ll be stripped of the vote and the right to wear shoes? Please.

ME: “You should be ashamed of yourself writing such strident nonsense, and then trying to pass it off as reality.”

Gosh! That darn Amanda Marcotte and her unfeminine stridency! Doesn’t she know her proper place?…

KM: There is a world of difference between the feminine and feminism. What you’ve said here is a complete non-sequitor. It has nothing to do with her politics, nor her gender. It has to do with the “poor me” whining attitude that shows so clearly. In other words, I was telling her not to be such a baby. But nice try characterizing it as gender-related. This is yet another example of manufactured victimhood.

ME: I don’t know about where you live, but where I live, and in the majority of families in the US, mom HAS to work outside the home so the family has enough money to pay the rent, get food and clothing, etc. (And don’t forget the ridiculous cost of gas…)

I’m glad that you have been able to work out an arrangement that allows you to be a SAHM, but the way you are living doesn’t actually represent “reality”, at least not for most Americans…

KM: I don’t know where you got the idea that I am a SAHM; would that I were. I was addressing Amanda’s comment, which was clearly about SAHM’s and the lazy, slave-driving, controlling bastards they married. What she wrote was a far cry from reality, and was a clear example of the half-truths upon which feminism is built.

“You should be ashamed of yourself writing such strident nonsense, and then trying to pass it off as reality.”

Gosh! That darn Amanda Marcotte and her unfeminine stridency! Doesn’t she know her proper place?…

I don’t know about where you live, but where I live, and in the majority of families in the US, mom HAS to work outside the home so the family has enough money to pay the rent, get food and clothing, etc. (And don’t forget the ridiculous cost of gas…)

I’m glad that you have been able to work out an arrangement that allows you to be a SAHM, but the way you are living doesn’t actually represent “reality”, at least not for most Americans…

At first I thought you were writing parody, but I think you’re actually serious. This paragraph, as an example, is typical of feminist blinder-vision.

The housewife does bust her ass making a nice home for herself and her family, while her husband is out busting his ass earning their living. Note that this doesn’t mean he’s in his dream career, although if he is very lucky, he is. It’s the choice they both made when they decided to marry.

As for his spare time being taken up watching football, that is easily believable. But I doubt he has as much spare time as you imply. What with doing all the heavy work of maintaining house, yard, vehicles.

You know as well as I do that maintaining a clean house and cooking for the family takes less time than a 40-hour work week. There’s plenty of time left for watching Oprah, getting Starbucks with the other housewives, and bitching about the menfolk.

You should be ashamed of yourself writing such strident nonsense, and then trying to pass it off as reality.

Ahh, I see your point. Having read those blogs for a while I can say that the minority but more vocal of posters on that site really do need a good shaking for some of the views they spout off.

Obviously, being “boring” is a feature to them, not a flaw.

It’s related to the Right-Wing Authoritarian mindset - Ordered, organized, minimal uncertainty, safe, predictable, and with fixed roles for everyone - all the things that create boredom. And they LIKE IT that way…

“Those that emulate them are little different, and I’d almost certainly prefer the company of some sort of manchild (or womanchild) that at least demonstrates some passion about something.”

Passion is exactly the kind of thing that scares the hell out of them.

Patriotism, subordination, following The Rules, always obeying The Law (man’s OR god’s), etc.

When people have passion, they’re unpredictable and dangerous. The wingnuts can’t have that…

It does highlight the “patriarchy screws up the lives of men, too” issue. Were the genders reversed, a “trophy musician” as a wife would almost certainly be seen as a prize possession… but society expects men to have trophy wives, not the reverse.

(Not that this makes any sense, either. Although the likelihood of “making it big” as a creative type is extremely low, the outside possibility of fantastic success would seem to make it economically viable to keep such a “trophy” around just in case he/she does make the bigtime. In the meantime, you have the bragging rights of being the, heh, “patron” of an artist.)