Does women being in the work force hurt our economy?

[Creoda]

There is a lot of "woke" men out there. I don't think all the woes of society can be blamed on women.

Yeah there are. Certainly not, for one thing I blame Western men for being weak towards feminism.

I can't understand many men's attitudes on here to women? They appear to want to have complete control over women's lives.

I don't think that's true. I think most would just prefer social norms and gender relations to return to how they were 60 years ago (and countless generations before), which were healthier and more sustainable. If wanting what our grandparents generation had makes me Taliban then I'm a proud Taliban member. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

As a women I wouldn't want to spend all my days in the house looking after children and relying on money from my husband. What if he was a controlling bastard? Women have as much right as you to have a career and control over their own finances. If you were born a female would you want your life to be controlled by a male? There are a lot of abusive men out there. I suppose you would say that any woman that wants to not rely on a man is a feminist.

Personal freedom needs to be balanced with the greater good. Women's primary function and duty to society is to have children and raise them (while men's is to work/provide/fight), and right now women are failing to have children at replacement level, thus condemning our nations to death and replacement, because they've been socially pressured to chase careers in their fertile years. I saw a study the other day that women are more and more unhappy, and are now unhappier than men on average in Britain, no doubt because they're being forced against their natural inclinations to become mere wage slaves - many ending up childless catladies/wine aunts by their 40s because they chose that path. Hypergamy also means women tend to always want to marry up, or at least sideways, which with full gender-equality in the workforce makes it harder and harder for partnerships to form, while men are generally not picky about women's social status, and if anything prefer their partner to earn less. That is nature telling you the right course. Moreover if you're a feminist you're fine with the ongoing legal 'positive' discrimination in favour of women and against men, which most women seem to be, at least passively.

[Bleach]

No, I don't think so.

[Grace O'Malley]

Yeah there are. Certainly not, for one thing I blame Western men for being weak towards feminism.


I don't think that's true. I think most would just prefer social norms and gender relations to return to how they were 60 years ago (and countless generations before), which were healthier and more sustainable. If wanting what our grandparents generation had makes me Taliban then I'm a proud Taliban member. If it ain't broke don't fix it.


Personal freedom needs to be balanced with the greater good. Women's primary function and duty to society is to have children and raise them (while men's is to work/provide/fight), and right now women are failing to have children at replacement level, thus condemning our nations to death and replacement, because they've been socially pressured to chase careers in their fertile years. I saw a study the other day that women are more and more unhappy, and are now unhappier than men on average in Britain, no doubt because they're being forced against their natural inclinations to become mere wage slaves - many ending up childless catladies/wine aunts by their 40s because they chose that path. Hypergamy also means women tend to always want to marry up, or at least sideways, which with full gender-equality in the workforce makes it harder and harder for partnerships to form, while men are generally not picky about women's social status, and if anything prefer their partner to earn less. That is nature telling you the right course. Moreover if you're a feminist you're fine with the ongoing legal 'positive' discrimination in favour of women and against men, which most women seem to be, at least passively.

I think people should be picked on merit. I don't think the past was always better. There was a lot of dysfunction then also. My mother always worked and also my Grandmother was an amazing woman who ran a farm and looked after her 6 children after her husband died and left her with big debts. She managed to pay his debts and bought more land. No social security in her time. More power to her. Women need to have control over their destinies. I don't think we need more and more children to sustain our populations. It is big business and government that are behind bringing in endless amounts of immigrants and the ones making the big decisions are men not women. Women were very much outnumbered in government positions and in influential positions in the past. Men are still the ones making most decisions. You can't blame women for all the things you don't like.

I want to be in control of my own destiny so I need to work. What do you think would happen to women and children in the case of divorce? I just don't agree or understand your logic on this. It should be a woman's choice not a man deciding what is best for women. As you have shown you would not want a woman to have a right to her own destiny. I'm far from a feminist but with my life experience it is of course very important for a woman to have the opportunity to education and a fulfilling career. I can't understand someone wanting to deny that basic right to half the population. Not all women want to be married either and are quite happy ending up childless cat ladies.

Why are you putting all the blame on women for what you see wrong with society? Men are the ones that have been in the driver's seat for much of history.

[Anglo-Celtic]

I do not like "wokeness". It irritates me no end with programs like Vikings and The Last Kingdom having women warriors. I enjoyed those programs immensely but I would prefer if they were more authentic on some things. Women would not be able to compete with men in armed combat. I find that level of misinformation very annoying. It is also why I'm so angry with trans competing in women's sports.

Oh, I agree. There are some women who are stronger and tougher than most men, but they're as rare as normal people on Apricity. There are times when woke nonsense can put people in real danger. A firefighter went undercover to film female members who demonstrated that they were too weak for the job when they miserably failed the strength tests, and the clincher was that the undercover firefighter was a woman who passed her strength tests with flying colors.

[Grace O'Malley]

Oh, I agree. There are some women who are stronger and tougher than most men, but they're as rare as normal people on Apricity. There are times when woke nonsense can put people in real danger. A firefighter went undercover to film female members who demonstrated that they were too weak for the job when they miserably failed the strength tests, and the clincher was that the undercover firefighter was a woman who passed her strength tests with flying colors.

Men have significantly more strength and better endurance than women. Understandably woman have more empathy and are better at nurturing than males. I've had both male and female bosses and find women much more understanding and supportive.

[Creoda]

I think people should be picked on merit.

If genuine, then you might be a minority among women, many of whom think they should earn equal pay for less work, and continue to receive 'positive discrimination' in the neverending quest for so-called gender equality.

I don't think the past was always better.

Materially no, but the family unit and society was stronger, demographics were healthy and there was a future to work for.

No social security in her time.

There is now (which I support); women are the net beneficiaries of that system, men are the net benefactors, so women don't want to have to rely on one man, but they're happy to rely on men as a whole. If you want to talk about equality, maybe women should only get out what they pay in.

Women need to have control over their destinies.

They do. And now our nations are dying, because many choose to have abortions and careers rather than kids and a family.

I don't think we need more and more children to sustain our populations. It is big business and government that are behind bringing in endless amounts of immigrants and the ones making the big decisions are men not women. Women were very much outnumbered in government positions and in influential positions in the past. Men are still the ones making most decisions. You can't blame women for all the things you don't like.

We need children at replacement level at least. An old society is a dying one, that can't pay for itself. Women are the majority of the electorate and vote for these politicians, so they can't escape responsibility there. I know when women didn't have the vote we weren't importing millions of foreigners (most of whom come for the welfare states, whose budgets have skyrocketed with female franchise).

What do you think would happen to women and children in the case of divorce? I just don't agree or understand your logic on this.

Women should get their fair share in a divorce (right now many would say they tend to get more than their fair share). And most divorces are initiated by women. Unlike historically it's good that there's now a social safety net for divorcees to get back on their feet if necessary, but no-fault divorces should be banned.

As you have shown you would not want a woman to have a right to her own destiny.

No I haven't. I've never said women shouldn't have equal personal autonomy.

Why are you putting all the blame on women for what you see wrong with society?

I haven't, that's just your inference. I blame feminists, but I don't blame women anymore than men for the state of affairs. People are subject to the society around them, and overall their actions are unconscious and predetermined.

[Incal]

This is the bottom line. I would be fine with a girl NFL linebacker *if* she's qualified for the position.

[Annie999]

Since today's women folk are entering the work force, it seems like it throws things off a bit. If only men worked and women stayed in the home, it would solve a lot of issues, would it not? There would be less competition for jobs, more jobs available, and better pay overall. Women complain about being paid less than men, but that's because they won't do the same amount of work. They also take off more vacation time, which costs companies money. Women being at work creates an unstable society where everything is just ready to implode. We need women in the home raising babies and making nutritious meals for their families. I'm not a "misogynist" by any means, I just wonder if we would be better if we got women back in their natural habitat.

"women staying at home would solve a lot of issues" - Only for men that feel threatened by women working along with them. You speak as if women were nothing but things to be managed by men. Women won't accept to be forced to stay at home and that would be a huge problem, not a solution.

"they take off more vacation time" - That's not vacation time, that's maternity leave and I assure you it takes more work and it's more tiresome than most jobs.

[Petalpusher]

It's the switch between an industrial economy towards a service economy that called in mass for women to join the work force. They are factually also better consumers so it was win-win situation in a global consumerist system. The family patriarch was holding off the market to reign over individuals. In the same way today gays are even better consumers, so they are the new praised demographic.

With that said i think women can be better at certain jobs than men, at lot of jobs actually, but different jobs than in the past where the focus was on to create hard material things, and now more on providing services and experiences even through a physical product. Let's just not assume all this came naturally, or it was people's choice to evolve this particular way.

The real question for women i think in my humble opinion as a designated oppressor in chief, is would you rather sell "stuff" all your life for somebody else one way or another, or take care of your family which is a hard task as well. I mean i understand it can be a real dilemma, maybe some jobs are worth sacrifying at least some it, but most certainly not in my opinion, especially if you don't need it financially. They are not even close as spiritually rewarding than just raise kids or building a great home for the family and in many ways more degrading than this. A female receptionist in most cases is there for her good looks and nothing else, an accountant because she's organized and docile, etc...You get a few thousands dollars or whatever and you think you are free to spend it on your own on inane things, without realizing you might actually be more alienated than your ancestors who worked at the farm or at home (women have always worked). I think many women realize that now. Having sisters, they definetly realized that at some point, while they had great jobs but were missing most of the good things in their life. Eventually you find a balance or settle for something more meaningful.

It was indeed mostly some borred Bourgeoise reasonings who didn't have to actually work, behind all these feminist movements. No female cashier choosed to emancipate herself by doing this job, they all rather dream of being a wealthy stay at home mom. Most middle class women love to not have to work or only scarcely to have an occupation and do whatever the hell they want all day, they are living the dream.

[Richmondbread]

"women staying at home would solve a lot of issues" - Only for men that feel threatened by women working along with them. You speak as if women were nothing but things to be managed by men. Women won't accept to be forced to stay at home and that would be a huge problem, not a solution.

"they take off more vacation time" - That's not vacation time, that's maternity leave and I assure you it takes more work and it's more tiresome than most jobs.

I don't feel "threatened" by anyone. My argument is that it really isn't natural for women to be working. At least not in the corporate world.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk