sharkfin

"Womens liberation got the balance wrong, they should have fought for more recognition and status for the female role in societies , not for the recognition of females doing male roles in societies."

I totally agree with you. Many of the early feminists did envisage a society where the nurturing role of women was raised in status to equal the more warrior/entrepreneurial masculin role, and where both men and women would, within the confines of nature, be free to choose whichever role they'd prefer.

Such feminists once imagined an alternative to the dominant androcentric model. They imagined a world where the more feminine values of nurturing, caring, co-operating and sharing would replace the dominance of the more masculin values of competition, aggression and acquisition.

Other feminists weren't interested in changing the world so much as they were in changing women's position within it. It's more this stream of feminism which has triumphed. Women haven't changed the androcentric model of society at all. They're participating in it differently than they once were, but to many like myself, they've sold out on many of the earlier feminist ideals. Women are now competing with men and on men's terms. Femininity has been devalued and feminine values remain as marginalised as they ever were.

I don't agree though with your assessment that the 'Western Empire' is in downfall because women aren't producing children. To me, the West is in downfall because it hasn't managed to change from the aggressive, competitive and aquisitive model which is to my mind ultimately leading it on a path of self-destruction.

So you could say we both predict the same gloomy outlook if for different reasons! We share some similar views on feminism and femininity though which for me anyway is a refreshing change.

*Women are now competing with men and on men's terms.*

Bronwyn, that might be the case in the business world, well
fair enough, women can't have it all their way.

As it is, some women expect men to contribute to the housework,
up to their standards, not mens standards. Women call the
shots in the bedroom too, when she has a headache, so be it.

Certainly not all women, but some women want everything on their
terms!

Sorry, unless you can find yourself a henpeckable husband,
many men will simply refuse to play that game.

Sharkfin yu wirte

'Let’s call a garden spade a spade,and let’s call a spade that will have casual sex with an accomodating lady or an accomodating man for the night by the same name too. A trollop if that’s the name you think fits. And it fits either male or female.'

I happen to agree with you on this one. The article is however written about loose women, whores, sluts or whatever other name you wish. The author is championing this 'freedom' which says it all. With attitudes like the author is is no wonder many men think like the Mufti who refers to loose women as meat. I personally feel sorry for young girls who are trying to live an upright life when they have to have feminist like the author contributing to the breakdown in society because she wants the 'right; to sleep with whoever, whenever and without anyone raising an eyebrow. Selfishness actually describes this view more than feminism.

I happen to live in Sydney, and my observations in the last two years, are that there are little feet pattering everywhere. I put if down to the recognition, by the now almost adequate Baby Bonus, of the maxim that home made are best. Whether girls raunch or not is really immaterial. What really matters is that women fulfil their unique role in society of producing a next generation.

To this end a Church I know, has special programs aimed at lifting the self esteem of women as they move from the raging hormone era of 16-24, to the child rearing times of their life. Many women feel enormous guilt from their raunching days, but they should not do so. This Church does not do any judging at all. It accepts all women as wonderful and teaches that God made men and women, and Christ accepted even a Samaritan woman, as part of his following. He healed a woman who was an untouchable, to a Rabbi, as He was, and when He as a man without sin, stared down a crowd who wanted to stone a woman to death, caught in flagrante delicto, and refused to do so himself, He proved himself the non-judgmental champion of womanhood everywhere.

I know how much love most women have to give, and most give that love to their children without qualification or stint. The days when girls were frightened into chastity are gone. The days when they were terrified of getting pregnant are gone and the spectre of a shotgun wedding has disappeared hopefully forever. As a young man I knew two young women who went away and had babies and gave them up. They had families afterwards, but there was always a small sad corner in their eyes, as they mourned for their firstborn. That is no longer the case.

It is wonderful to live in a society where women are respected. It is great to see women enjoying life, and walking with their children, as often as not with their man by their side. A little raunch is immaterial

Panthos-: If we choose to become extinct then that is our perfect right. If we choose to live in such a way that precludes children then that is a perfectly valid option.

You may choose this if you wish, as long as you also choose not to accept any of the services rendered to you by other peoples’ children when your generation becomes too decrepit to work any more.
Will you be one of the ones who tries to buy the limited doctors and nursing services with money when in reality it should only be the people who had children who are entitled to these services, (I am not of course in any way applying this to those who genuinely could not have children for medical reasons.)
If war breaks out you will expect a reasonably young army to defend you, you will expect other peoples’ children to die for you. You may not of course become extinct by gently dying out, you could just as probably suffer the fate of other races who were too weak to defend against aggression and be horribly overrun and slaughtered. Don’t count on the United Nations to save you they don’t usually act until the massacres have reached huge numbers, if then.

Sharkfin -

They all sound pretty selfish reasons for having a child. If I asked my parents why they had me and they gave any of those reasons I wouldn't feel very loved.

I can't choose extinction - it has to be a consensus.