TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

What are the most harmful beliefs feminism promotes? Harmful beliefs in traditional Western gender roles?

Caulifluer
August 27, 2020
105 upvotes
/r/RedPillWomen

I had a very feminist upbringing, and I have been on the journey of unpacking all the ways it damaged my perspective. Curious what others think are some of the feminist beliefs that are most harmful/most prevalent/ hardest to get past. If there are any beliefs promoted by more traditionalists, especially in western culture, that you think are harmful, I would be interested in knowing those too. By harmful, I mean impede one's ability to thrive, specifically in the context of relationships. Sort of as an example of how I'm working through this, some of my beliefs are really hard to unpack. I've always been put off by the more traditionalist notion of "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" Its just so crass and transactional. And it implies that money is a tool men use to extract sex from me. On the other hand, weird early 2000s feminism taught me that my sexuality was a powerful tool that I could use to extract resources from men, and that doing so was virtuous and strong. I do not want to view relationships transactionally in either of these ways. I am not a prostitute, and I want resources and sex to both be given freely and generously through good faith within my relationship. So now I am trying to counteract the ways these subconscious beliefs impact my behavior (an example would be making sure early in dating, we spend plenty of time engaged in activities with no potential for him to pay for anything, or for sexual contact, and allow us space to engage outside of those narratives )

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/RedPillWomen.

/r/RedPillWomen archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title What are the most harmful beliefs feminism promotes? Harmful beliefs in traditional Western gender roles?
Author Caulifluer
Upvotes 105
Comments 130
Date August 27, 2020 2:24 AM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit /r/RedPillWomen
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/RedPillWomen/what-are-the-most-harmful-beliefs-feminism.171628
https://theredarchive.com/post/171628
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/ihcqrd/what_are_the_most_harmful_beliefs_feminism/
Red Pill terms in post
feministfeminism
Top posts by Caulifluer

A high value Man's checklist for his partner

77 upvotes
August 31, 2020
/r/RedPillWomen

What is reasonable to expect from your man in a disagreement?

34 upvotes
September 22, 2020
/r/RedPillWomen

Male friends

31 upvotes
September 8, 2020
/r/RedPillWomen

My materialistic standards are quashing a promising romance. Please advise;

23 upvotes
August 17, 2020
/r/RedPillWomen

How to introduce him to the RP mindset

19 upvotes
January 15, 2020
/r/RedPillWomen

Making a relationship official: what should be discussed?

15 upvotes
September 15, 2020
/r/RedPillWomen
Comments

[–]cygnisinteranates34 points35 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

For me personally it is the illusion that you can have it all, and it should be so easy and you shouldn't complain. You can have a successful career, a happy family, a nice home, home cooked meals all at the same time without a problem. The truth is something suffers if both parents are working full time and concentrating on their careers, it's usually the kids, the marriage or your own mental health because you are burnt out.

[–]A-Sentient-Robot1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

For me as a woman, not working is the easy option. Just like eating junk food and playing video games all day is the easy option. Leaving my job because “it’s too stressful to have it all” is instant gratification for lower rewards.

At the end of the day, I don’t want to be an old woman who’s broke because I didn’t earn a living and I don’t want my daughters growing up thinking it’s okay to take the easy low-reward path in life. If they see a mother who had so little faith in her ability to control stress that she left the workforce, they will also have lower self-esteem and be vulnerable to abuse from “provider” males.

The most intelligent, strongest people will rise to the challenge and find a way of balancing work and family. No one said having it all was easy. Everyone needs to make sacrifices. But being a complete stay-at-home mother like some suggest seems like a cop-out to me.

[–]cygnisinteranates4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

By comparing stay at home mums to junk food, and saying that it's the easy option is totally discrediting the work that goes into running a home. I don't judge women who chose to be at home. I also didn't suggest all women should stay at home and "be vulnerable to abuse from provider males".

My own personal experience, and I'm not coming from a place of judgment for other people's choices on how to run their home, is that it is difficult to work full time, concentrate on my career, raise my children, have a nice house and healthy meals, have time to invest in my marriage, and have time for myself to do the things I enjoy. There are not enough hours in the day.

I am lucky enough to have a job where I can work but also be the primary care giver to my children. I consciously chose a job where I knew this would be possible. I chose children and marriage because they are important to me, I also need to work but work life balance is important. I didn't want my children to be in daycare 10 plus hours a day, with a large portion of my salary going towards paying for childcare.

On my deathbed I will never wish I spent more time at work, but I would regret not spending time with my family - they make me happy. Some sacrifices are worth making, but sometimes we are choosing to make life more difficult for ourselves and we need to prioritise what is important to us.

[–]bhadby2k108 points109 points  (19 children) | Copy Link

That women need to “be more like men” in terms of a career. Women need to be the “boss”. And it’s too the point that women who choose to child bear and stay at home, or do something that isn’t so demanding is deemed as “lazy” or “hopeless”.

Child bearing and looking after a household is one of the hardest jobs to have in my opinion. And you don’t get paid. Good on women if they choose to have a career, but don’t put down women who choose to be a stay at home mum while their partners are the breadwinners.

[–]keatsvevo45 points46 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

I agree. A lot of young women/girls today look down on the role of the “housewife” or the “homemaker.” They see it as subjugation.

“I’m not gonna spend my life cooking and cleaning for my husband and kids!”

Not wanting to is one thing but to think of it as enslavement is another.

How can the role of a housewife be deemed so low? A weak spirit cannot be able to handle the weight of raising a family and managing a household — but a mother can. It takes sooooo much resilience and willpower to do all that.

How is nurturing a weakness? Way to counterintuituvely trample on women by telling them to be more like a man in order to be powerful. It’s status they want, not power.

[–]annanorwich23 points24 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I hate how feminism brainwashed everyone into thinking that housewives/stay at home moms are "lazy." Every young man these days think you are leeching if you dont split the bills 50/50.

[–]A-Sentient-Robot1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why shouldn’t the bills be split 50/50 though? Statistically speaking, as a single young woman dating you have the same education as your date and the same opportunities to work.

[–]czarnychomik3 points4 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, that how it looked like to me when I was growing up. Enslavement.

I had to watch women from my family not having time for anything, while their husbands always could afford to watch soccer games, doing sports, fishing, and many more. When my mom wanted to start engaging in her hobby again, the one that he had to forget about when we were born, my dad got furious and accused her of not caring about her family. Only he got to decide where we would spend holidays, where we would eat, etc.

My aunt couldn't go out to meet my mom on Saturday, because my uncle wanted her to stay at home, make him special dinner and take care of the kids, while he would go relax somewhere. She couldn't even visit her own sister. She couldn't leave for the weekend with friends. She couldn't go back to school.

So sometimes it's just hard to see being a traditional woman as not being a servant to others.

[–]A-Sentient-Robot1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Yep. I felt the same way as you for a while until I did further reflection. Not many people talk about how some women overburden themselves to feel in-control of their family. Women with control issues enslave themselves even when they have a helpful support network, they push eager help away only to complain about how much work they’re doing. they do this because they have trust issues with others or because they like the control of being everyone’s primary caregiver.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/nov/22/working-women-husbands-housework This is an interesting read on the topic of women doing more home labor than men. There’s also a book called “it’s not a glass ceiling, it’s a sticky floor” which attributes the chore gap largely to WOMEN’s perfectionistic tendencies, people-pleasing nature and trust issues.

After observing my father’s willingness to help my mother and her constant pushing-him-away (only to later complain about how “useless” and “unhelpful” he is) I started to suspect that there’s more to this narrative than “men are lazy privileged sociopaths who always try to enslave women”. Ironically enough, my uncle (mom’s brother) has the same dynamic with his wife where HE is the one enslaved to the family. In my experience if you take on too much family responsibility it’s a control thing, usually caused by childhood issues. It doesn’t discriminate based on gender. But since women are more agreeable, and since society babies women by telling us we can do no wrong... women are less likely to reflect on our controlling behaviours than men. Thus we’re more likely to dig ourselves into this family-enslavement ditch and have no idea what caused it.

EDIT: I’m not saying lazy, entitled men who view women as domestic slaves don’t exist. Sadly we still have to filter them when we’re dating. But consider the woman’s agency in a lot of these situations. If she is able to speak up and ask more from him but doesn’t... silence is a statement of its own.

[–]keatsvevo0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

This is absolutely true. Thanks for putting this into words. I’ve always known this but never fully acknowledged it. My mom does this a lot. Taking up all the work and refusing help even though I told her I WILL. I do help and I do so willingly most of the time. All she has to do is ASK, literally. Once that had been established, the problem renewed itself into me lacking initiative. I have to guess where she needs help and so feel guilty a lot of the time.

A lot of women associate themselves with the role of the homemaker so it’s no surprise they want to take full control of it. The irony comes in when they do so to the point of restlessness and blame others when in actuality it’s unlikely they’ll be content with and pacified by others’ efforts.

This isn’t true for everyone of course but it’s a reality among many wherein blame gets misplaced.

[–]keatsvevo0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I understand and I symphatise. It’s hard to see where the middle ground lies when all our lives we’ve been privy exclusively to one kind of experience. I’d hate to see someone in real life witness that, not least myself.

It’s difficult not to disapprove of something so degrading and it seems that we look to overcompensation as our way of coping - what was taken from us must be brought back tenfold.

And so we set our minds on one goal; that is, to turn our gaze away from what we’ve known and to only welcome what is from the other side. Inadvertently, we condemn a reality that isn’t entirely deplorable because we have only seen one side of it - a side that has the potential to bring about a healthy, loving, and mutually receptive relationship.

There’s good in both the traditional and modern approach of women. It’s exploitation of any kind that tears apart all kinds of relationships. We’ve seen what it has done to women in the past but we musn’t turn a blind eye to what it is doing to relationships now.

The exaggerated need for independence and not catering to a man’s needs brings cynicism to relationships even before it has begun. We let go of possible healthy dynamics because the possession and relinquishing of power is always on our minds. When in reality, that is what has wreaked havoc in the first place - a supposedly mutual compliance on one hand and exploitation on the other.

However, the modern woman archetype is merely taking on what used to be man’s unwholesome privilege - to take advantage of seized power. If a man refuses to comply, we see him as but another jerk/asshole to be swept to the wayside.

To do exactly to them what has been done to us is, perhaps unbeknownst to us, an agenda built on vengeance. We’re not aiming at the right target. Anything that has to do with exploitation is wrong whether that be by a woman or a man. It’s not the exclusive problem of “men” at hand, it’s the overall problem of unhealthy power dynamics.

[–]MattsyKun7 points8 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

I truly believe it's because in the past, it wasn't seen as a choice. You WERE going to grow up and get married and you WERE going to have children and THAT was your whole identity. It wasn't a role, it was an identity. And being forced into this identity, in my opinion, makes for a disgruntled woman who is controlled by their unwanted identity.

But, as you said, a weak spirit, or in my analogy (is that even the right word?) an unwanted identity, leads to an inability to handle the weight. It's not compatible. But, when someone accepts the role, but maintains their identity (as a mother, and an artist/programmer/chef/gamer/etc etc), then they not only become well-rounded as an individual, but as a mother.

It sounds really cheesy, but a woman doesn't need to be like a man to be powerful. The role of a housewife is just one block of a woman's identity that can give her power. I personally don't want kids, but if I did, I wouldn't want to just be known as "mom that cooks and cleans". My identity would be "cool mom that runs a business, likes video games, and supports our interests". To me, that would be more beneficial to my family. (already, if my sister in law has kids, I'm gonna be the cool aunt that'll make good food and spoil them with cool stuff, haha. They'll eat well AND learn in our house!)

So tl;Dr Maybe because housewife is portrayed as an identity and not just one of the various roles a woman can have, young women and girls are just bucking the whole thing because they don't want to JUST be seen as "housewife". But, whether they do or don't want the role is valid, and telling women that nurturing is a weakness is harmful in the long run.

Basically, I Agee lol. Now to get some coffee.

[–]alpacaapril7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No since the agriculture Revolution 10.000 years ago more than 95% of all adult women in Europe worked physically hard on fields and in the household. Grandparents raised the children. Being a housewife is a luxury of the last 200 years. Yes, some women were more or less forced. But basically, just Elite and upper class women in the last 200 years were Housewives.

[–]ill-settle-for4 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

I think you’ve absolutely hit the nail on the head when it comes to a good portion of women. I’ve always found it…oppressive-in-the-way-an-approaching-storm-is-oppressive to think that the only way I can contribute to the world is by having and raising kids and then fading off into the background, which I find to be an easy impression to get when feminists like to point out that “men could only become great because their women were watching the kids,” and stuff like that. That’s a scary thing for a kid or a teenager to hear, and they probably shouldn’t be hearing it when they’re young and easily terrified.

[–]ban1chka14 points15 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

There's nothing wrong with "fading in the background" though. I see everything as a part of building a new and better world. That's, I believe, the only point of this whole life situation that we're put in. Everyone likes to see themselves as the leading actor in their own little play, but to me that's a bit self-centered and kind of pointless because then we die and we all know the play is over when the main character dies and that's that.

I used to lust after a main role, I wanted to be glorious and remembered and legendary. But at the end of the day we all die and we are all forgotten sooner or later. I enjoy life much more when I play a supporting role. There's so much bad stuff going on in the world, when you do things genuinely and with love, people appreciate them (and you get to have a good time too). The people around us are the ones who give meaning to what we do. What's joy if you have no friends or family to share with? I have found that when I do things with other people in mind, I am able to achieve much more. Not to say we don't have value as individuals... Just that... We're more valuable as part and in the context of a community and living with other people in mind is much more gratifying than living with yourself in mind only. At least that has been my experience.

PS. I still want to be a total legend, that hasn't changed. Just a different way of getting there.

[–][deleted]  (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]ban1chka2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you. I'm honored and humbled to have reminded you of someone who meant so much to you and your family. Lots of love and joy to you all :)

[–]czarnychomik0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

> The people around us are the ones who give meaning to what we do. What's joy if you have no friends or family to share with? I have found that when I do things with other people in mind, I am able to achieve much more. Not to say we don't have value as individuals... Just that... We're more valuable as part and in the context of a community and living with other people in mind is much more gratifying than living with yourself in mind only. At least that has been my experience.

You can be successful and maintain healthy relationships with friends and family.

I definitely do want to play the main character in my own life. I don't just want to support my fiance and watch how he succeeds. I also want to be successful

I'm very ambitious. But I also work on never neglecting my man, my friends. I do spend time on things that benefit mostly me, but I also find time to help and support others. It's possible to have both of these things. Being just a supporter would not make me happy, being a supporting wife would quickly make me resent my man and my life.

[–]ban1chka0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

You can be successful and maintain healthy relationships with friends and family.

I agree, but I don't see how that negates any of what I said. Tbh, success to me is an empty word when out of context. You have a goal - if you achieve it, you are successful, if you don't, you aren't. That's it.

I am also ambitious, in the sense that I have very high standards for myself. I know myself very well and I know the exact extent of my skills and talents. I am working hard to develop as many of them as I can.

Here's what I believe. We don't live in a vacuum. We are alive now and today and we have the opportunity to develop our individual skills and talents to their utmost potential and use them to make life better for everyone. To me, it's actually more of a responsibility than an opportunity. Can you just do whatever you want and whatever makes you feel good with no regard how it would affect people around you? Sure. Personally, I don't see much value in that, but maybe that's just me. I actually used to be like that, just did things because they were fun, and it's not like I was miserable... But I noticed that when my work is appreciated by those around me, that makes it feel more valuable. I have started spending more time consciously putting in effort into doing things for other people, often going out of my way to do so, and it has genuinely made me more happy.

I never meant to say that you should never pursue things just for fun, or that you shouldn't take care of yourself. In fact you should absolutely take care of yourself first before even attempting to help anyone else. But I stand by my words, that doing things for others gives them more meaning than anything else could. It's about finding the things you genuinely enjoy and are good at, and then figuring out how to make them bring value to people around you too. I see that as a total win-win situation.

[–]czarnychomik1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

But I stand by my words, that doing things for others gives them more meaning than anything else could. It's about finding the things you genuinely enjoy and are good at, and then figuring out how to make them bring value to people around you too. I see that as a total win-win situation.

But I don't see why would I try to do everything for others? What I mean in my previous post is that it's ok to do things only for myself.

I see this like that: hobbies are for me. They are for my developement, my enjoyment. Just becasue I have my own passions it doesn't mean, that I'm selfish and that I don't do thigns for others. But focusing on helping others, and bringing other up all the time would likely stop my own developement, becasue the things I would to master are not really nurturing (and that's compeletly ok!).

But I stand by my words, that doing things for others gives them more meaning than anything else could. It's about finding the things you genuinely enjoy and are good at, and then figuring out how to make them bring value to people around you too. I see that as a total win-win situation.

Constantly trying to bring value to other people, no matter what I do, would make my own developement slower.

For example, I learn game design and play in a band. Both of these things are only for my benefit, I do them becasue they bring me joy and they help me to develope my skills. I could make it valuable for others, I could for example teach kids in my family, or create a game that would be educational. But these are not things that I want to be great at, I'm not interested in becoming a better teacher and educational games for children are a completely different genre in game industry, that I don't find challenging and interesting enough.

Beside that, I do things for my fiance, that are selfless. But If I had to do them all the time, or if I had to constantly work on supporting others instead of working on my own projects sometimes, I would be miserable. I do have my fare share of chores. I don't want to do them in my free time.

Healthy balance is what I have in mind.

[–]ban1chka0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Then I think we are in complete agreement, as healthy balance is what I had in mind too. I suppose the balance is different for different people and that's okay.

I do apologize if I sounded a bit too extreme, that was not my intention at all. In fact, I wrote my original comment because I thought the person I replied to was being too extreme and implying that doing things for others is somehow "less" and that everyone should always be aiming to do things first and foremost for themselves, and everything else is an afterthought. It seemed to me that they were looking down on people who spend the majority of their time and effort to the benefit of others.

When you are supporting someone else, it's not because you are less capable or less important. It's just something you think is meaningful, and it's a way to express love. My belief is that we should all strive to be supportive of the people around us in some shape or form. But no, that shouldn't exclude taking time for yourself and doing things purely for your own enjoyment. I agree with what you said, I think in your previous comment, that these things are absolutely necessary to preserve our sanity... Plus, they're fun.

Again, I apologize if I sounded too extreme, and thank you for adding more nuance to the conversation, I really appreciate your thoughts.

[–]A-Sentient-Robot1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

We look down on the SAHM role because...

a) It is not as valuable as it used to be. Plain and simple. Doing basic chores around the house used to be a full-time job. The invention of dishwashers, washing machines, baby formulas, urban areas and processed food made homemaking a very easy, minor job compared to what it once was. When people view SAHMs as “lazy”, they’re usually right. She’s not taking on half as much work or stress load as someone in a regular full-time job unless she has a side hustle, heaps of young kids or a special needs child. Most modern “housewives” and “homemakers” are glorified NEETs whose only valuable contribution to society is giving birth a few times and inflating their husband’s ego.

b) Good caregivers are a luxury, good providers are a necessity. Would you rather be a luxury or a necessity? The non-essential nature of the SAHMs role is why they are afforded less political and social influence. SAHMs of the past gained social influence from their wisdom as they raised children, but modern social structures do not reward SAHMs the same way because they are less communal, and this will only get worse. Any modern woman who chooses the SAHM life is stupidly leaving herself and her children vulnerable in a time of crisis. Being above average in nurturing is cool, but it is not ESSENTIAL to your survival or to the survival of your kids like your provider husband’s role is. That is a huge weakness.

c) A SAHM, despite her adult mind, lives life like a child whose only bet for survival is pleasing her caretaker (husband) enough that he doesn’t leave. She is in a position of dependency and no amount of “weakness is strength” “nurture is valuable too“ platitudes can change the degrading nature of this social position. Once again, he is essential to you, but you are not essential to him. People claim husbands in a traditional relationship have it just as bad, because they’re subordinate to employers... but the wife is subordinate to her husband AND his employer.

Society doesn’t devalue SAHPs because it hates women, society hates women because it looks at the objectively low value of most SAHPs, notes that they are mostly women, and then generalises all women as low-value burdens.

SAHMs used to be socially powerful and useful, when society was more communal. But this changed when technology advanced and social structures became less communal. SAHMs of the 1950s fantasy are bourgeoise, glorified children. They are not respectable members of society no matter how you spin it. They just get a pass for their uselessness because they’re attractive young women. No amount of moralising can change how useless and dependent most housewives and homemakers are. If you want to be a valuable SAHM then live on a farm, run a business from home, have 5+ kids or raise special needs babies. Otherwise, accept the reality of your low value existence and stop using emotional ploys to convince people that “your spirit” and your people-pleasing is contributing to society somehow

[–]NationalMouse10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree. It wasn’t until I had a child of my own that I fully appreciated a stay-at-home mom’s role. I always admired these women but I couldn’t fathom giving up a career to stay home with children. Now I can see that it is soooo much more important to raise children that become good people, and smart people, and definitely to be well-rounded people than it is to be a corporate slave. It is now my goal to be a stay-at-home mom and I told my husband I would much rather do without the small luxuries we can afford now just so I could be home with them.

[–][deleted]  (6 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]ban1chka20 points21 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You can dress however you like and no one is allowed to judge you based on that. When in fact, the way we dress is a form of self-expression.

This. I like to approach it as I would a product on the market. There are two parts of it - substance/quality and appearance.

Appearance is what gets you to try the product and substance is what makes you want to keep using it. I work really hard on being a smart, kind, reasonable, generous, caring, hard-working person who nurtures and develops her talents and always tries to improve. That's my substance. To make people want to get to know me and be friends with me, or hire me, I also have to allow my appearance to reflect the effort I put into my personality.

If you put no effort into how you look, why would anyone bother getting to know you? They would just expect to get more of the same. If you see a sloppy package, you just immediately assume the product itself is also cheap and poorly made. Why blame society for seeing what you show them?

[–]Nyanko175 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think your comment is gold. As a woman coming from an Asian culture, I don't understand the idea of '' sleeping around is empowering''. This is a nasty idea and it decreases the woman's value. I think only animal will mate around for the instinct but human. We as human we have feeling and love. I can't comprehend the idea of open relationship either. I think somehow people promote it as the freedom of love and sex. That's is horrible.

[–]Cultivate_a_Rose6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You can dress however you like and no one is allowed to judge you based on that. When in fact, the way we dress is a form of self-expression.

This is even more complicated, and also more important, than just expression (which is one-way.) What it is is production. Humans engage in social production, meaning that how we present ourselves, how we act, what we do and so forth are all something we are very much bringing into the world; always creating ourselves in each moment perpetually.

Gender is something we produce. It is far more than merely self-expression. The RP production of gender is the whole point. Not quite nature, not quite nurture, but these processes of defining and creating femininity (or masculinity) arise together and are utterly reliant on the other.

When a woman dresses poorly and, say, has a foul mouth it is so offensive to us because it undermines our own process of producing femininity. These are competing ideas in the social marketplace.

[–]MoDuReddit1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

  • Thinking leggings are pants. Cammel Toes everywhere are sexy /s

[–][deleted]  (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]MoDuReddit5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Pappa Swollio

Oh god I'm dying, thanks for the link.

Glad I'm not the only one with a sense of good taste.

[–][deleted] 166 points167 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I think the ol' Bridget Jones shtick, that you can be crass and frumpy and make bad life choices and a gorgeous man will love you anyway, has done irreparable damage to young women. You see this trope in countless romance stories from the 80s forward. Kirstie Alley plays a single mom, who got pregnant by a married man, and she lands John Travolta. Julia Roberts has left multiple men at the alter and still lands Richard Gere. Rachel McAdams cheats on her fiance and it's totally fine, he and Ryan Gosling still think she's amazing.

In the real world, a chubby, unkempt 31-year-old, who doesn't know when to keep her mouth shut and sleeps with her boss, will never land a successful, hot, lawyer. High value men rarely want to date single moms or women who've left men at the alter or cheaters... or generally just any woman who is a total mess.

"If you can't handle me at my worst, you don't deserve me at my best." What an incredibly selfish idea that people have to put up with the ugliest part of you to deserve the prettiest? You have to be a good person, who makes good decisions, and looks good to get the same.

[–]jakethegreatwhite34 points35 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well said, this can go for men aswell, just in different aspects

[–]Brandonxxxi10 points11 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Thank you. Completely true. Hollywood keeps putting up this falsehood of a woman having anything she wants no matter how bad her life choices were. Sex and the City is a good example of that. Funny enough, the creator of Sex and the City, Candace Bushnell , openly regrets choosing her career over having kids. She's now 61 with no kids and no stable relationships. She's truly alone.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

My favorite moment in Sex and the City was when Carrie sees Aiden on the street and thinks she can rekindle her romance with him again, despite what she's put him through. Then, he turns around and has a baby strapped to his front. That's what happens when you think you have all the time in the world. The great guys move on and get married and have babies and you're just a bad memory.

[–]fairydust910 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

So true, I was always rooting for Aiden.

[–]retal1ator9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well said!

[–]LookingForEquanimity4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

That is so true. I loved and watched all those movies growing up. In fact I re watched Bridget Jones a couple of months ago. I hope unconsciously they didn’t do damage.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think most adult women are capable of compartmentalizing. I'm a librarian and see some of the weird books people read and the movies they watch and most of them are pretty much normal. Just keep in mind that it doesn't work that way and you'll be fine.

[–]Sp3c1alSn0wflak30 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Before you continue to bash single moms, women who are doing right by their kids in a tough situation, I just wanted to raise my hand here and say here I am, a single mom who is overweight, 36, and has had multiple failed/abusive relationships who is dating a very hot buff younger than me surgeon. We have been happily together for 3 years.

The important thing is that you compliment each other and are both committed. Personality can go a long way, as can intelligence and life goals. Not every guy views single moms like you.

It's sad to see that you view other women in such a negative way. Women who work extra hard to give their children a good life. Women who were strong enough to leave a bad situation, women who knew they deserved better and went for it.

I have never ever regretted my kids and I sure as hell have never regretted leaving my ex. If I hadn't, I never would have met the amazing man I am with today. I hope you never are in my shoes because your beliefs would make you stay with someone you knew wasn't right for you, even if he was mr perfect when you met 15 years ago. People change and sometimes you need the strength to let them go and forge your own path.

And I am not taking myself off the dating market for 18 years lol are you scared of the competition? Scared he will choose me over you? Then where will your self esteem be. All bad.

[–]wannaberunner13119 points20 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I hope this fits. But I was lead to believe that men only want sex, all the time, no emotional connection, just kind of an animalistic constant need for all men. And that if they didn't want sex it was weird and unnatural or they just weren't attracted to you. I basically had to learn and retrain myself when I got married to realize that not every man works that way and a lot of men actually do care about the bonding and intimacy aspects. It should not be a transactional arrangement and that if the relationship is suffering, it will impact his desire.

Also "happy wife happy life"! I hate that saying now because it makes the purpose of the man to keep his wife happy no matter what. I want us both to be happy, and both actively work to keep the relationship healthy.

[–]fairydust911 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Love this! I hate that saying too! Is my happiness supposed to come at the expense of his?! That's so BP it hurts.

[–]Jiatingzhufu18 points19 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I believe it’s the idea that the nuclear family structure isn’t one that’s good, and single parenthood is often best. ‘Single mother by choice’ is not the best route to take but apparently it’s growing in popularity.

[–]RinoaRita18 points19 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I think it has focused ran off course when they went from fighting so women can have careers to women must have careers. If a woman wants to stay home and be a wife and mother she should be celebrated as well as it is her choice.

Valuing traditionally “women’s work” and uplifting it will help.

In the end it’s about choice. When it limits women’s choices the other way then it’s problematic.

[–]fairydust912 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

This is so interesting - especially considering the amount of women who want to stay at home but can't. Do we really have a choice in the matter? I don't necessarily think so.

[–]RinoaRita1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well I guess the phrase is pursuit of happiness. If a woman wants to she is free to pursue it and shouldn’t get ridiculed for it. If she wants to be a full time wife and mother she can put that out there and see if a man wants something similar.

Now there is something lost when an average single income no longer supports a family but that’s not an explicitly feminist issue and more about income inequality and how the wealth gap got bigger since the boomer era.

But I think there is something to say we should fight for better leave and better jobs so it can be a choice for more families.

[–]A-Sentient-Robot0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I’m sorry but traditional women’s work is objectively less valuable than traditional men’s work. I’m not talking physical labor I’m talking jobs which involve systematic thinking as opposed to social/nurturing thinking. Social jobs and nurturing jobs have no place without systematising jobs behind them, but the opposite is not true.

When it comes to children’s survival, a good caregiver is a luxury but a good provider is essential.

Women’s role since the dawn of the time has been to act as luxuries who support the men, who act as necessities. This has led to women’s low social status. You must understand that women’s work being devalued isn’t a conspiracy to degrade the feminine, it’s a genuine hierarchical assessment of what value “women’s work“ provides vs. what value “men’s work” provides. We now have more opportunity than ever to become actual valuable members of society and it’s disappointing to see so many women taking the blue pill and pretending that being nurturing and people pleasing offers more to society, than gritting their teeth and experiencing a bit of unpleasantness in “male roles”.

Imo the most valuable people balance masculine and feminine roles adequately. But the roles as they’re currently defined are NOT equal in value and I’d appreciate if we stopped dancing around that. So long as we define non-essential, luxury, supportive traits like nurturing as feminine, women will not be valued equally.

[–]RinoaRita1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think corona virus has made very clear what’s acutely essential and what’s luxury. Sure, farmers, the food supply chain and medical roles like doctors nurses and support staff under there are more vital than anything. There’s also the infrastructure related jobs like power, water lines, phones lines.

But child care providers are the next stop gap for everything moving again. I think you are confusing exclusivity with essential and vital. Yeah. No one off the street can be a brain surgeon and anyone that’s able minded can do child care if they had to. At least the essentials of the job.

If we go in the what’s stopping society from collapsing and us all dying child care is pretty important and essential especially infancy care.

[–]ddouchecanoe45 points46 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Feminism perpetuates the two income trap.

[–]UniformFox_trotOscar10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Can you elaborate? What is the “two-income trap?”

[–]JeenyusJane50 points51 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Liz Warren wrote the book on it. It's less about feminism and more about how suburban families are paying for a good education through expensive housing, which requires both parents to work to afford a home in a good school district AND ALSO cover childcare costs because both parents are working.

"Astonishingly, sending mothers to work has made families more vulnerable to financial disaster than ever before. Today's two-income family earns 75% more money than its single-income counterpart of a generation ago, but has 25% less discretionary income to cover living costs. This is "the rare financial book that sidesteps accusations of individual wastefulness to focus on institutional changes," raved the Boston Globe. Warren and Tyagi reveal how the ferocious bidding war for housing and education has silently engulfed America's suburbs, driving up the cost of keeping families in the middle class. The authors show why the usual remedies-child-support enforcement, subsidized daycare, and higher salaries for women-won't solve the problem. But as the Wall Street Journal observed, "The book is brimming with proposed solutions to the nail-biting anxiety that the middle class finds itself in: subsidized day care, school vouchers, new bank regulation, among other measures."

[–]Cultivate_a_Rose14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This. This. This. This is the most lasting piece of damage from 70s feminism.

[–]bitchbaby15 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

wow thats so interesting!

[–]Homemakingvampire14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That you will never truly enjoy sex or that you are missing out if you don’t have more than one sexual partner. (Been told this a few times)

That you must always have a backup or orbiter on standby for “when” your relationship goes south.

Men are animals without any self control and therefore we must always shame them for having preferences. That men will have sex with anyone.

But mostly, because I’m an attractive woman i can get anything I want as long as I flaunt my boobs and smile. That as a woman I can’t be abusive or a monster of a human being or be any kind of threat. That how I treat men means nothing but I am a gender traitor for questioning the things some women do or for not always backing and automatically believing women just because they are women.

[–]cohost392 points93 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

It’s tragic that girls are told they can have a lot of sexual partners and their future husbands won’t care. This is so false. They may put up with it, but most of them do care.

I see so many reddit posts of women realizing too late that they shouldn’t have slept around. The comments are always filled with women saying that numbers don’t matter and the man is just insecure.

[–]ban1chka54 points55 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Honestly, if the guy sleeps around, it's also a deal breaker for me (or close to one). It shows me that:

  1. He is okay with the risk of getting sick and/or getting a woman he doesn't know well (or at all) pregnant.
  2. He thinks of sex as a purely physical thing and does not care about the emotional aspect of it.
  3. He has little to no impulse control.
  4. He has attachment issues.

Neither of these are okay. The quality of the people you are with and the quality of the relationships you build say a lot about how much you value and respect yourself. A high quality person would seek quality relationships with quality people.

[–]shopdropnroll12 points13 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yup I don’t want to be with a guy who has been around but it’s pretty hard to find guys like this nowadays! At least ones that are sociable and successful.

[–]mryugideck9 points10 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Sounds almost like being sociable and succesful leads to more sex for a man

[–]BeholdTheHair4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

More opportunities for sex, rather.

[–]A-Sentient-Robot0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Mmhm it’s kinda silly how guys think they can get away with sleeping around but women can’t. Neither sex can get away with sleeping around if they want a high quality partner. More women are attracted to manwhores than vise versa... but the majority of women still avoid manwhores. Especially high-value women who are interested in intimacy and commitment.

The type of women who are attracted to manwhores, are the type of women who men fear. I’d argue that women who’ve been around are better off than men who’ve been around, because they end up alone instead of getting their lives ruined by unstable trainwrecks. Just my experience tho.

[–]Raebrained23 points24 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This is a huge one

[–]MoDuReddit14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The comments are always filled with women saying that numbers don’t matter and the man is just insecure.

Woman has 200+ n-count at 23 years old: man is to blame.

This is your brain on feminism.

[–]Kaisern9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

this is a huge one, and I’d also tack on that sleeping around has demonstrably been shown to make women near incapable of bonding properly with their long term partner

[–]anonkcthtk29 points30 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I had an extremely feminist radical-leftist upbringing and it has definitely damaged me.

  1. I would say the number 1 thing feminism hurt me with was teaching me that empowerment was being obnoxious and recreating brash toxic male energy. Aggressive and burping without covering your mouth are all “quirky” cool girl things(wish I was making this up guys). Being an SJW and burning all the bridges around you over small things is what you have to do for the cause! Who cares about the connections you’re throwing away! Who cares if you isolate yourself if it’s for the cause!!

  2. This may be controversial but I was actually far more understanding and forgiving of men when I was a feminist SJW, due to the ideologies circulating at the time. Let me explain why. So we’ve all heard of the term “toxic masculinity”, meant to describe harmful patterns of male behaviour that they believe make them more manly or dominant. Feminists believe that men feel trapped by the rigid ideals of masculinity like having to pay for everything, plan everything, always being the stoic protector. So they proposed a more egalitarian relationship model where men and women share all roles like paying and protecting. So when for instance a man didn’t pay for me, due to my parents not teaching me anything about relationships (besides that finding a man who can support my family is classist), I felt a bit bad but couldn’t pinpoint why. After all, this is the right thing to do!

The second example of no. 2 is “sexual liberation” and “slut culture”. In the medical community, depression among teenage girls is almost exclusively related to sexual activity, to the extent that some doctors are referring to it as an STD in females💔 (I will add a source asap)(source: “Denise D. Hallfors, et al, “Which Comes First in Adolescence: Sex and Drugs or Depression?” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 29 (2005)” Excerpt From Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters by Meg Meeker)

From a young age I was bombarded with sexual imagery in music and came across it online which had me extremely confused. When I was in grade 9, a bunch of kids in our grade would go to these all ages events and kiss. Everyone would call it “hooking up” not knowing what that actually meant. so I told my mom I was gonna hook up with a few guys and without batting an eye she asked if I needed condoms...

THAT was the problem!!! So progressive and radically sex positive that she left her own daughter to the wolves. And I don’t have a very protective father in that sense. He’s protective in terms of physical danger but he doesn’t have a sense of chivalry or protecting me from boys my age. So from then on I had no idea how precious my body was. Now during that time I developed severe social anxiety and had to go to a therapist. In that time (grade 11 I believe) I also met a guy who was very abusive to me but I luckily got away from him. I was plagued by things he told me for a long time but between therapy, medication, and rediscovering my feminine I’m a lot better.

And others can sense it too:) Overall, if I hadn’t escaped radical leftism/feminism, it could’ve killed me. I can’t imagine the life I would’ve had, if I‘d managed to stay alive that is.

Also: on why I’m less forgiving of men now - before I would excuse men’s shortcomings as victims of the patriarchy but I don’t see men as victims anymore. We can achieve anything we put our minds to!! So I don’t have time for entitled behaviour paired with mediocrity! I’ve been going 100% working to improve myself every day without fail and I will do so until the day I die. So if a man comes to me wanting me to chase him, pay for our meal, or accept subtle insults because he had a bad day or whatever, I will politely decline and block! Not my problem!❤️

[–]fairydust914 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Ugh I relate to this so much. I wish I'd never been brainwashed with that crap.

[–]anonkcthtk3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

On the bright side we made it out!!

[–]fairydust912 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

We sure did :)

[–]blendedbuns71 points72 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The idea that pornography is empowering and healthy. It harms all of us, especially in relationships.

[–]amadexodus11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I am going through a breakup right now because of this. My now ex-partner is on NoFap. I had known for a while that he was, but I underestimated how deep in the weeds he still was in breaking himself free from the porn/masturbation addiction. I should have asked the right questions when he first told me about it. He is on a 30+ day streak now for the first time ever. I now realize that the addiction was the major underlying reason for the split, now that I've put all the pieces together. Since this is the case, and we both still love each other and could have a future together, I would take him back only if I saw for myself through his actions that he could remain sober of this, not just for the 90 day reboot. It's a big "if" though.

[–]ladyrailly12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That it should be okay for women to sleep around when so many men sleep around and don't get the same treatment. When in fact men should actually be slammed for sleeping around just as much as women should get slammed. Sex is one of the only acts in this world that encompasses pure love for one another and it's been twisted into being "just an act" and therefore transactional, something to barter with even. A man who has slept around is not someone I would want to be with: it simply shows that he doesn't value sex if he has such a casual view of it. A woman who has slept around shows the exact same viewpoint. If sex and intimacy and exclusivity is something that is important to you, which on a natural level should be, the don't settle for someone who clearly has an opposite view.

If i said this anywhere else but here I'd be torn apart for slut shaming. But I accept that term, I just really wish it would be used with men too.

Oh and also "I don't dress provocatively FOR MEN, I do it for MYSELF" bullshit. Like if you really were doing that you wouldn't post those photos all over social media, you would keep them to yourself. And if you feel comfortable with showing those parts of your body to the public irl, well public includes men, which means you should be at least comfortable with men, who are part of the public, looking at you. You do it for validation, end of story. And especially if it's bright coloured or has a unique pattern on it, both basically scream "LOOK AT ME".

[–]Zion9912 points13 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Blocking your child's father from taking an active role in that child's life when the father genuinely wants to be involved. I've heard alot of women be proud of not allowing the father to see the child because of personal feelings towards that other parent with no consequences or backlash. You hurt the child by blocking a potential relationship and that child can harbor resentment. Fathers are important to a child's development. I know there's alot of deadbeats out there but don't deny men the chance to take an active role if they genuinely want to.

[–]A-Sentient-Robot1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don’t think feminism exactly caused this one but it definitely made it worse.

[–]Ok-Firefighter-2266-4 points-3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

What does that have to do with feminism?

[–]barooka32 points33 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Society forcing women into careers they don’t like so you get to have 50:50 ratio. But they don’t care about careers with high risk or less earning potential

[–]A-Sentient-Robot2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Society hasn’t forced women into careers we don’t like. It has highly incentivised us to enter fields like engineering but it has never forced us.

[–]missylizzy40 points41 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Sex positivity as in all sex and all sexual acts are inherently good and healthy.

This one really messed me up.

I think sex is neutral now. There are some negative aspects of sex (sleeping with strangers, sick or degrading fetishes, abuse or control, porn) and there are positive aspects to sex (love, fertility, connection, etc).

[–][deleted] 84 points85 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

That women are inherently perfect and they don't need to work on themselves/ a partner has to accept every single thing about them instead of working to change toxic behaviors. I'm currently watching 30 rock and Lemon tells this nice guy that she doesn't has to settle she's going to find a guy who love every disgusting thing about her and she doesn't need to give anyone a chance even though she's not all that.

[–]momentsofnicole20 points21 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You gotta love Tina Fey for poking fun at that mentality

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes! She does it so well! No shade to her :)

[–]Svenskamamma8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

That the “it” in having it all means having a high powered career, squeezing in time for your children and spouse as a secondary task.

I bought into this idea and after climbing the educational and career ladder realised it meant nothing if I was dropping my baby off to be cared for by someone else for nine hours a day, only to be so stressed and linked in to what was happening in the office (I was in a senior management/advisor position) that I wasn’t present regardless.

I pulled out of the workforce completely and am now a full time home maker - I hate the term SAHM- it suggests passivity when we’re anything but! I work just as hard on nurturing and running my home as I did in my old life.

[–]fairydust912 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So jealous of this. I also bought into that idea and although I don't have children, I realized that my high stress job was freaking killing me. I felt so stressed, agitated and manly all.the.time. I was trying to be someone I'm not. I'm just not aggressive, I'm not confrontational. I quit my job and I'm now looking for something less stressful. This has allowed me to relax, detox all that negative masculine energy and I've never felt happier.

You are so lucky to have pulled out and now you're home with a baby... :) Good for you. Xxx

[–]zino1937 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Speaking more for a friend - the belief that you can be a nasty person and still be praised and valued as a princess that that men want.

That's I think the core domino that reverberates in hipersexualizing themselves. If you are a terrible person - you either double down on your sexuality to still have people around you - or you retreat to your cave and simmer in your self-hatred and neurosis.

As a secondary - I think the belief that "men are bad" I see this now in my younger sister that is of college age. All rejection, and unhappiness is funneled by the culture and her girlfriends into: Men are the problem. It's so ridiculous to think you can be happy without men.

Thirdly, this time more from a man's point of view: Thinking trying is worth a participation trophy and worth respecting. I like strong women, I have a thing for the woman that can kick arse. Technically I am the ideal career woman bait - that one man that actually appreciates a woman's status. But if it's not sustainable and you are barely sleeping to the point of deteriorating health, if it's just showboating to your friends you always follow up with complaints about how hard, how difficult it is. If all you do is basically just start out things you can't actually finish or sustain - then you aren't showing you are a strong woman.

Anyone can start. Anyone can talk themselves into a position of power - especially if you are a young pretty reasonably confident woman in this climate. People will give you a shot. But if you are just showing that your ambition is cashing checks your work ethic can not deliver on - that's a huge relationship red flag and you fundamentally don't understand what it means to be a successful person. You are not the type that puts in the blood sweat and tears that makes a successful person. The traits we actually admire beyond the status and success.

[–]mensahi41-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It's so ridiculous to think you can be happy without men

I don't think it's ridiculous and I'm a man. People don't depend on each other anymore. But tearing each other apart is really problematic.

[–]zino1932 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's kinda why - it wasn't a ego-driven sentence. It was a comment at the nature of femininity. Women aren't weak - they are adaptable. If their enviroment asks of them to be strong - they will be - but that is not the place where they find balance and comfort. In comparison if they are next to the typical chad, that doesn't worry about anything and can handle any situation - then she will adapt to that, and blossom. Create a home, create a family, support her man to use his powers for greate and better things.

[–]Mewster18181 Star46 points47 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

For me personally? That if someone sexually assaults you, the police and authorities won't believe you and will judge you(so you basically shouldn't bother). "What were you wearing?" is used to help find possible witnesses, find the victim on CCTV or other camera footage, etc, IT IS NOT THEM JUDGING THE VICTIM. There's actually completely valid reasons for all the common questions, and it's to help the police do their job so they can catch the criminal.

That was the bombshell that I discovered while doing research for an essay for a political theory class. It completely ruined modern feminism for me, because of the actual real victims out there who have internalized this and never reported actual criminals because of it. That led me down the rabbit hole to realize that most of the feminist things I had been taught were utter garbage, and when I reflected on them personally I realized they had never made me happier or feel good about myself.

[–]aehei4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

could you share that essay? I would love to learn more :O

[–]Mewster18181 Star20 points21 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh god, I don't think I have a copy anymore. The computer I had it on has long since died and been replaced. But here's just some resources that you can look into(they're actually kind of hard to find because most of the resources are from a feminist perspective and are manipulated to get the results they want.

How the police will treat you and your report process:

https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/rsa/rape-and-sexual-assault/what-happens-after-you-report-rape-or-sexual-assault/

A comparative study showing that police actually do not seem to have a strong bias against victims(I selected a few quotes below that highlight the findings):

https://derby.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10545/621784/Sleath%20&%20Bull%20Ag%20&%20viol.pdf;jsessionid=8B78DDFD14A7145570E549CB0F6C8388?sequence=3

"All of the studies demonstrated that police officers do engage in victim blaming, however some of the studies identified that this occurred at a low level... The most common victim characteristic to be examined regarding blaming and responsibility was victim alcohol intoxication

In the only qualitative study, Wentz and Archbold (2012) found that only a very small minority of the police officers (approximately 2%) produced victim blaming statements.

Ninety-three per cent of the sample of police officers demonstrated some level of acceptance of the myth “any woman can be raped

Schuller and Stewart (2000, U.S.A., n = 212) found no significant relationship between victim blame and intentions to charge the perpetrator in police officer samples

It is surprising, given a generally accepted belief that police officers do hold negative attitudes about rape victims, that there is only very limited published empirical research that has evidenced this using police samples. From the general rape victim blaming literature, it has been made very clear that blaming attitudes towards victims of rape exist in several societies (Grubb & Turner, 2012), therefore in examining this literature, it should be considered unlikely that police officers did not also hold such attitudes (Jackson, Witte, & Petretic-Jackson, 2001). In fact, the present review has demonstrated that police officers do hold negative attitudes about rape, particularly in relation to blaming and rape myth acceptance. However, a number of the studies do emphasise that these levels are very low, particularly in relation to blame e.g., Wentz and Archbold (2012) found that only 2% of their sample of police officers produced victim blaming statements. "

I also want to follow up that I think it's okay for the police to want to make sure the victim is legitimate, some research suggests that up to 50% of allegations are FALSE. And the police can't afford to waste time and resources on false claims, or claims that have no ability to be prosecuted, likewise rape allegations ruin people's lives regardless of if they're true or not(just look at the #MeToo movement outcome). Source: https://www.mediaradar.org/research_on_false_rape_allegations.php

[–][deleted]  (4 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]bitchbaby14 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

for real!!! i dont want to be the “cool girlfriend.” thats not me, never has been.

[–]amadexodus1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I've never heard of the "Mental Health Mafia," could you elaborate?

[–]nezavisimaya1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Radical feminism is also opposed to these trends. It's liberal feminism that spreads these messages.

[–]Cultivate_a_Rose2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

To my understanding, "radical feminism" is pretty incompatible with RP ideas. At least if we want to look down the Dworkin/Jeffreys/Bindel pathways. Am I missing something?

[–]JeenyusJane6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I love this question. I agree everyone makes things sound so transactional, bu maybe in the end they are. I the way you put it -> "I want resources and sex to both be given freely and generously through good faith within my relationship." If someone else wants that as well from their partner, that's what they'll put out. It's transactional, but not withholding, if that makes sense.

[–]clitorophagy28 points29 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Just plain general man hating is odious

[–]cebollofor29 points30 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That woman can live by themselves and are perfect, we as humans need companionship we are social animals, the solitary life many individuals take is really sad, they end up alone and confuse. Some people is happy alone, not most of us.

[–]shopdropnroll7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not taking care of yourself and expecting to still be loved. Respect yourself and take care of yourself. Otherwise who will? So many women I know are staunch feminists and don’t take care of themselves. They talk about hating exercise and hating eating healthy. They catch STDs from unprotected sex with multiple strangers. They act difficult and moody. They are easily offended and argumentative. They don’t dress well. And they wonder why their boyfriends left them for other women or why they can’t find someone to be with them. All while yelling at men by the third date for not following up. The entitlement is insane. Honestly, I’ve been cutting ties with these people because self improvement is not an interest we have in common, which makes friendship with them all the more lackluster. I’m probably not woke enough for their respect anyway.

[–]Shymink15 points16 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That it’s important for everyone to know you’re the smartest person in the room (if you are). That men and women are the same. That you don’t need a man in your life. Blah blah.

[–]leftajar1 Star27 points28 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Feminism is fundamentally fueled by a hatred of the natural world, manifested as a rejection of the divine Female.

This can be seen most clearly it the rejection of Motherhood.

There is nothing more quintessentially female than carrying and bearing a human life in one's body. Imagine creating a whole person from a cell! Two beings sharing one body, until the miracle of birth. And then nourishing a helpless infant from one's own breast.

The cascade of hormones a woman experiences during and immediately after childbirth represents the pinnacle of human mental, emotional, and spiritual experience.

And Feminism has somehow, somehow(!) managed to convince women that everything I just said is slavery, and that empowerment is to go work a stupid marketing job while having meaningless, degrading sex with strangers.

Feminism robs women of their souls. When you understand this, the inescapable conclusion is that Feminism was created by evil people who hate God and nature.

[–]pearlsandstilettosModerator | Pearl19 points20 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

The challenges of pregnancy and motherhood may be perpetuated by modern feminism but I think it stems more from watching the women who have come before us. Behind a lot of childfree women are unhappy to bad childhoods and parents.

Pregnancy isn't some glorious ode to womanhood when you get down to it. It's 3 am and I'm typing this because I can't sleep through the night these days. Can't roll over without sitting up first. Can't touch my husband because there is a wall of pillows between us so I can sleep at all. The tums bottle is empty. My daughter is a strain because I can't chase her or give her the energy and focus she needs at this point. Oh and I cried because I made the worst pasta sauce in my life this weekend.

And for me, the ends justify the journey (and let's be clear, the end is whenever the kid starts to sleep through the night 😂 at minimum), every formerly pregnant lady I talk to can commiserate with her own stories. Thats not feminism telling us biology is bad, it's biology being rough.

[–]leftajar1 Star2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Good on you. It's brave and admirable of you to suffer the physical and emotional discomfort.

Y'know, in Europe, and other places, before Modern times, people would throw fertility festivals, where they'd honor the women of the tribe for the sacrifice of pregnancy. These days, I don't see any of that -- quite the opposite, there's a lot of anti-natal propaganda being shoved at me. Unfortunate, really.

[–]pearlsandstilettosModerator | Pearl6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't disagree wholesale with what you are saying, but I think that you are viewing pregnancy and motherhood as some grand ideal that is detached from the reality. And I'm not sure fertility festivals make the risks and discomforts any better.

I also see a lot of anti-natal sentiment, especially on the internet, but I think it has roots beyond feminism, at least directly. I think it's more likely that people who watched their parents struggle will have second and third thoughts about having their own kids (the same is true of marriage). I also think that pregnancy is gross and uncomfortable process for a lot of women -- and because of the internet we share that a lot more now. It can put a strain on relationships, impacts your sex life, impacts your financial life. Just as many men are opting out of marriage because they don't want the responsibility, many women are opting out of motherhood for the same. And I think that everyone in our society places importance on financial compensation as an indication of value and parenthood doesn't bring in a quantifiable income.

This:

The cascade of hormones a woman experiences during and immediately after childbirth represents the pinnacle of human mental, emotional, and spiritual experience

Wasn't true for me with my first child and is so far not true with my second. In fact, the end of pregnancy and the beginning of motherhood can be such a blur due to those hormones and lack of sleep that we only do it again because we've forgotten how hard it is. Further, in our atomized society, motherhood (particularly those that SAH) can be a lonely affair.

Feminism has not given us the right answers but I don't think that they are the cause of the problem. Maybe they even go as far as giving us the wrong answers, but that still doesn't make them the ultimate cause of the problem of declining and denigrated motherhood. Feminism couldn't convince us that motherhood is slavery if all our predecessors were happy and fulfilled and if those mothers around us were extolling it's virtues.

[–]leftajar1 Star2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh I hear you, I know it's not all sunshine and unicorns. My point is that traditional society, and traditional religion used to honor women for going through all of that. It was viewed as a noble fulfillment of duty to the tribe; women were celebrated.

Women used to be given social status for being mothers. Today, it seems like the opposite is happening, and I think red pill women have to deal with that very acutely -- people here know the sort of reactions they can expect when they tell other women they plan on being stay-at-home mothers. The implication is that that's a low status pursuit.

This whole Zeitgeist had to come from somewhere, and I do believe that somewhere is the pernicious feminist movement, which hoodwinks women into thinking that their only worth is to try to out-compete men, at the expense of fertility.

Just to be super clear I'm not trying to diminish the physical and emotional ugliness of pregnancy, I'm lamenting the fact that women aren't being recognized or socially reinforced like they used to.

[–]Holzmann9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thermonuclear redpill right here.

[–]ban1chka11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The truth is that some women are not ready for motherhood. Some people are too damaged mentally or emotionally to ever be parents. Trying to force women like that into a role they are not prepared for, or do not truly want, can be very damaging to them and everyone around them. The power mothers have over their children is astonishing and I'm saddened by the thought of how many children have suffered and are yet to suffer because they were born to a mother who did not want them.

I await the day when I myself start building a family, and when that day comes, my children will be my top priority. But in the mean time, I have so much to learn. Pursuing different areas in life that can enrich your human experience, can be a good thing and is not at all counterproductive to being a mother.

What I'm trying to say is... Having a career and good education, while not necessary to be a good parent, are not inherently bad things. Especially when done with the idea of enriching yourself and sharing your talents with your community to improve the lives of those around you. We are not just responsible for our children, we are also responsible for our communities and for creating an environment that allows our kids and everyone around us to flourish. I want this world to be a better place and I have things to offer that can make it so. I think creating things, nourishing and caring for others is a huge part of traditional femininity. Motherhood encapsulates all of that, yes, and I'm inclined to agree with you that it is a quintessential part of being a woman. But there are other areas in life too where a feminine touch can make all the difference. We shouldn't be dismissive of that and deprive the world of the gift that true femininity can be.

[–]A-Sentient-Robot1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Agree that having meaningless sex with strangers is degrading. Disagree that being a dependent housewife is positive in any way shape or form.

The housewife is enslaved to her husband who is enslaved to his employer. She is at the bottom of that hierarchy. Even if she is a happy slave, she is still a slave if her source of income relies on him being pleased enough with her services to provide her sustenance.

No amount of platitudes about “women’s divine souls” or the beauty of childbirth can change the degrading nature of being at the bottom of the economic hierarchy. It’s just a big cope. You claim woman’s traditional role is “different but equal” to men’s when all empirical evidence of society points to the nurturing role being subordinate to the provider role.

[–][deleted]  (4 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]silkswan8085 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Lol what’s your solution then? The final solution? I wish you anti semites would just spit it out instead of making veiled references constantly.

[–][deleted]  (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]rodentwoman5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

everything listed here, and the idea that i'm supposed to be happy alone and if i'm not i'm somehow an incomplete person. there's not much i hate more than being told i "don't need a man". we all do. we were made for each other. even if i don't, what if i want one? it's so invalidating especially when i'm feeling lonely. why would women encourage other women to shrivel up and die alone?

[–]Throwaway2303065 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Endless and aimless dating--the social shift from seeing dating as something that should naturally lead to marriage within a reasonable amount of time to dating for years (decades?) for the sake of dating/hooking up.

Also add to this endless and aimless cohabitation.

In the past, for better or worse, society (parents, church, social opinion) helped push men and women toward commitment, with obligations and duties clearly spelled out for each side. Now, women are on their own trying to secure commitment.

[–]Pinkrose57115 points16 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Not shaving or showering lol when I heard that I bolted

[–]spud_simon_salem15 points16 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

That’s hardly what all feminists believe though. It’s like saying all Christians abstain from premarital sex. Or all Republicans are against gay marriage. It’s all a spectrum, like most ideologies.

[–]Cultivate_a_Rose4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That’s hardly what all feminists believe though.

That describes a lot of the discussion here lol

[–]Shymink12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I came from a family of a lot of feminists who all have excellent hygiene. This is ridiculous.

[–]Pinkrose5710 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I know

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2023. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter