Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Circus Fat Men 100 Years Ago

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Blackcatbone View Post
    Not really. Society failed to progress in terms of parental leave and too few women have taken it far enough in refusing to partner/reproduce with men who wouldn't pick up their share of household/childrearing duties. Men's happiness hasn't fallen because they still have someone picking up after them and raising their children. Ask a woman who hasn't compromised her ideals for a relationship if she's happy and the answer will most likely be a resounding yes. But most women don't consider themselves feminists.
    So feminism has resulted in the majority of women being less happy, but it cannot be called a failure because the minority who are feminists most likely are happy?

    In other words, feminism wasn't really about making women happy, it was about making feminists happy? I think you just unintentionally told the truth...

    Comment


    • I agree with Blackcatbone. If they'd polled me when I was working full time, going to school full time, raising 3 teenagers, and had a husband who was gone more than he was home, I'd have ranked as definitely unhappy. In my case, though, my husband was military special ops, and being gone wasn't a "choice" (except for his choice to do the job, and my choice to marry him).

      Now that he's retired from the military and the kids are grown and on their own, I'm very happy--and I have a husband who appreciates what I did for the family all those years, and pulls his own weight around the house.

      Men still make more money than women with the same education and experience. That's got to add to the "unhappy" measure.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Nicator View Post
        So feminism has resulted in the majority of women being less happy, but it cannot be called a failure because the minority who are feminists most likely are happy?

        In other words, feminism wasn't really about making women happy, it was about making feminists happy? I think you just unintentionally told the truth...

        http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/26/bu...leonhardt.html
        Buy house, Demolish house, Build house.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Goldie View Post
          I agree with Blackcatbone. If they'd polled me when I was working full time, going to school full time, raising 3 teenagers, and had a husband who was gone more than he was home, I'd have ranked as definitely unhappy. In my case, though, my husband was military special ops, and being gone wasn't a "choice" (except for his choice to do the job, and my choice to marry him).

          Now that he's retired from the military and the kids are grown and on their own, I'm very happy--and I have a husband who appreciates what I did for the family all those years, and pulls his own weight around the house.

          Men still make more money than women with the same education and experience. That's got to add to the "unhappy" measure.
          The article that I just posted makes a lot of great points that I was too lazy to type out, but a big one is that women tended to have narrower expectations 30 or so years ago.
          Buy house, Demolish house, Build house.

          Comment


          • I think for me, personally, feminism was a positive because I never wanted children. For women that want kids....today, wow, between work and homemaking, they lose themselves. I see so many women who work full time with kids and they have nothing of a life outside of work and kids. Given that most work sucks.... and the BS with kids it must suck. But I see a lot of moms who set really high bars for themselves. People rush along with goals that aren't really theirs. I think feminism has made women in some cases extremely competitive to show the world they have it all. My question to them would be if they are actually happy? Maybe they enjoy it.

            http://maggiesfeast.wordpress.com/
            Check out my blog. Hope to share lots of great recipes and ideas!

            Comment


            • What was considered abnormally fat 100 years ago, while not considered normal now is a lot more prevalent. I was working ambulances starting back in 1975. We had the occasional 300 pound patient but they were rare, perhaps once every couple of months. I had one patient in almost 15 years working 911 service, that weighed close to 500 lbs.

              In the short time between then and now, the number of patients that exceed that weight has gotten to the point that major ambulance services are ordering special bariatric ambulances capable of transporting patients up to 1600 lbs.

              Bariatric Transportation

              The standard weight capacity of ambulance cots has gone from 275 lbs, back when I was on the units, to a standard 650-700 lbs today.

              And if you timeline this out, it fits with the increased use of HFCS and the government's food pyramid being rolled out along with the use of artificial fats, etc.

              Nothing hateful about stating the facts. Like Harry Truman said:

              I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.
              Randal
              AKA: Texas Grok

              Originally posted by texas.grok
              Facebook is to intelligence what a black hole is to light
              http://hardcoremind.com/

              Comment

              Working...
              X