*Feminism IS Population Control*

Post Reply New Topic

Feminism freed women from the lone/unattached/"loose" woman taboo, made it possible for most women in the west to live alone, if they wanted, without a man, ( father or husband ) to "legitimise" her.

And it seems that when women are freed from those old constraints, ( that 8,000 year old social contract/system ), they no longer distribute themselves equally amongst most men, but want only alpha/beta males or none, and enjoy the freedom of living alone so much that, as you say, they do not want children, or fewer of them, or later ...

Feminism, by freeing women ... has put brakes on human reproduction. As feminist policies spread the birth rate drops:

Births per woman:

............1950 .. 2000
Japan ... 2.8 ... 1.3
USA ...... 3.5 ... 2.1
India ......6.0 ... 3.0
Kenya ....7.5 ... 4.0

.

Well...it would sure suck to be born by mistake as a female in many cultures.

Girls have been outnumbered in many cultures that tend to favor boys such as China. That means guys will have to look elsewhere for females that can make babies. I've heard this is happening more and more in some countries.

Only thing that's more worrisome is overpopulation which is exaclty what happens in most of these cultures including China. Creates many havocs of diseases as well as poverty for those whose fault it wasn't born.

As for population control, look at history and the diseases that wiped out many many and many populations. Now that would be something to reconsider when it comes to nature's way of controlling populations!

I think feminism is so backward. I don't understand why women don't embrace their femininity rather than try to act and compete with males.
Perhaps this is what ounion is referring to? Women acting like men is confusing and sets the sexes against each other. There is nothing wrong with a woman staying at home to raise children. I think our society would be better off if we gave more respect to women in their natural role.
Women should be more submissive to men and show some respect. And men should appreciate women as well.

Think about how silly it would be if we lived in a matriarchal society and men decided to establish equal footing by becoming nurturing and taking care of babies at home. Then they started to wear dresses and such. Maybe feminism is responsible for so many men preferring men now.

We are different. Of course it would be ideal to cultivate both are male and female sides, but until then we should respect each other's differences and roles in society. I bet that if women in the 60's weren't made fun of for being full time moms, they wouldn't have felt the need to go out and prove anything. Of course they shouldn't have let their egos become so fragile that they felt they had to prove something. All they proved was that they spawned a bunch of needy people who now see consumerism as the only source of solace in the deep void that indifferent parents created in their child's hearts.

That is because most men do not bother to turn their woman on. The minute it gets even marginally above flaccid, they want to insert it, and I'm sorry, but almost flaccid isn't a turn on, and neither is, "Hey, I'm hard! You have to accomodate me!"

I don't think that could be right. are you saying that the early feminists in the XIXth century had some intuitive insight into how the technology was going to turn out and that the Earth was about to get overpopulated?

and that this intuitive insight made them burn their bras and demand the right to vote?

Wow, how many blunders can one make in such a short space? Let's go point by point:

What do you mean by "embracing their femininity"? Do you presume to have a better definition of femininity than women themselves? Why don't you let women decide for themselves what the feminine means to them?

Women deciding to get a career and support themselves has nothing to do with "acting like men". Independence is not an inherently masculine value; it's a universal human aspiration.

What's that about a "natural role"? No natural role exists for either women or men. We aren't destined to do anything in life other than what we decide to do.

Let me quote you on this: "Women should be more submissive to men and show some respect". That's so outrageous an assertion that it should hardly deserve a response. Just let me say this one thing: if you are married, I feel pity for that poor woman.

And what the heck has feminism to do with male homosexuality? People have liked people of both sexes for centuries.

Wait are kidding me? Are you saying that men have had no part in nurturing children since homosapiens existed?

And women are responsible for men's sexuality?

I hate to bring this up but it may be a natural inclination for men to nurture their children. I mean I would hate to assume that it's not natural for some men to despise their children as it's not natural for other women to be good at math or any skills of great significance. Look at penguins, the dads act as motherly as the females LOL.

Also I would wonder how populated we would be just as we are today if humans weren't flexible or diversified in their roles as parents and genders. Our closest relatives, the chimpanzees have breaken this taboo. Male chimpanzees have proven to be just as capable of nurturing their young as the female chimpanzees.

As for homosexuality, that's existed for thousands of years. Just look at much of the ancient Greece remenants left behind. I have a hard time believing that women had anything to do with it as it was a male dominated society at the time.

Homosexuality in many faith-based cultures are kept under tabs because it is seen as man's worse crime. Most homosexuals, if given any sufficient evidence are arrested and/or executed. It depends on how tolerant a society is to their open-ness just as heterosexuals. I mean prop 8 has already made it clear that homosexuality is a "sin" against god.

Geez, and what feminism movements are we talking about here?

All of them?

If by feminism you mean equal rights for women, then I think enhanced female rights can result in lower reproductive rates, because once they have rights, then it follows that they hae choices about whether or not to marry, whether to use birth control, to pursue college or a career, and so on. I think there is a correlation between the two, but that causation cannot be proven, i.e. feminism does not equal population control, but is merely associated with lower reproduction.

Hello Miss Construe

Men and women have played significantly different roles during the evolution of homo sapiens. For the most part, we were hunters and gatherers.
It is cooperation that has granted us success as a species, not competitiveness between the sexes.


It is a natural inclination for males to compete. Infanticide is often committed by males much more so than by females.
http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/cata ... 0521772958



Chimpanzees live under the watchful eye of the alpha male. Mother chimps are the primary care takers. There are high ranking females in which the lower male chimps will wish to appease and so they may be kinder to the babies of these mothers but for the most part they play no role in their upbringing. Even the alpha who is usually the father doesn't have much to do with his offspring. Bonobos are not much different. Although they live in a matriarchal society, the males don't bother too much with the babies. Chimps are no more altruistic than humans in my opinion.


Women played a very strong role in ancient Greece. The female gods represented the ideal traits in women. This is what real feminism should be about. Homosexuality was accepted in ancient Greece because they were not competitive with each other. The sexes were more cooperative with each other unlike now. Homo sexuality has been around since humans have been around. But, for the most part men preferred to be with women and women preferred to be with men as far as relationships go. Bisexuality is a natural inclination that we all have.
When natural desires are suppressed they become a neurosis. Chimps serve as a good example on this issue. The common chimp which is ruled by the alpha male engages in war and they are much more competitive and aggressive. The bonobo freely engages in homosexuality and they are much more peaceful, do not engage in war, and are vegetarians.



agree

I could start the 'point by point' bit too, but that's so trite. To be honest, in Classical Greece only the wealthy women were of any power at all. Most of the hoi polloi (means the opposite today of what it originall meant) were practically in purdah.

I see feminism as an evolving discipline; from Wollstonecraft, to the Second Sex, to 'post-feminism'. True, there is a reduction in the birth rate; this is due to many factors. It's also true that feminists were early champions of birth control, just ask Ms. Sanger..

It's Birth Control that has actually led to the decline in birth rate. It also allows for the control of population, on an individual level. For the first time, women could enjoy sex for it's own sake, and for a while it was a very surprising and pleasing change to men.

The birth rate has slowed in developing countries, true, but it's still climbing in the developing world. There's a host of reasons; just having a midwife wash her hands in soap and clean water almost wiped out 'puerperal feaver, and allowed the death rate of infants to plummet.

China's 'astonishing' birth control methods are because there's over a billion of them, and there's a danger that they won't be able to feed themselves without imports. Now the 'sex selection' process I find a bit extreme, but then I'm not Chinese.

The idea of a race to populate the earth has (hopefully) come and gone. It's not how many players you can put on the field, but the quality of the few you do.

Power was a male trait in Ancient Greece but females were held in high esteem. The Goddesses were given equal footing to the gods. Bisexuality was accepted between both the sexes. Have you read anything by Sappho?

It is unnatural for women to be powerful like men and even though it is unexplainable, there is an inherent disdain toward women who want to exert power over other people and compete like men in the work force. Life isn't always fair I know, but femininity has it's own source of power and there is beauty in it. When we suppress our natural inclinations, a neurosis is created.

mmm...I guess it depends on which part of Greece you're talking about... and what period. Haven't read any Saphho, but did fly over Lesbos (bad analogies for 20) once. Goddess is a good gig if you can get it, but they're a bit thin on the ground...

now back to serious discussion...

Feminists are probably from the subset of women that haven't gotten close to any men...

One fatal flaw in the "men have too much power" line is that in most cases all a woman has to do is withhold sex and she has her man by the balls...

It is population control a bad thing anyway?

well, I'm not sure if feminism IS about population control, but may be part of it, given that they are able to make the choice nowadays instead of the decision being made by others, same can be said about divorce rates, as it seems they are increasing, it could be argued that feminism has played a role into the increasing number of divorce.

In what century do you think you live?

And again that meaningless talk about "unnatural." Please open your eyes. We are an intelligent species. Personal achievement is not unnatural. Subservience is.

Can anyone explain why the Netherlands with an average of 1,025 people per every square mile of land has a higher
per capita birth rate than Greece, which has an average of 218 people per every square mile of land?

It's even more difficult to explain considering that Greece has a population of around 11 million while the
Netherlands has a population of around 16 million.