I'm not convinced that feminism has helped the women it should have?

But it doesn't give any better guarantee of paternity than any other form of monagamy.
Monogamy (whether formal marriage or not) benefits women hugely, and I would see the paternity "benefit" as a not-very-good side effect.

I have a theory that women aren't naturally monogamous for life to one man, but they may be monogamous during the initial pair bonding stage that gets them pregnant. Many women aren't of course. I know a couple of women who don't know who the father of their child is.

So essentially I just see monogamy as completely unnatural for women and it's just something that is enforced by law, economics and social punishments for those who transgress.

I don't see how women benefit from male monogamy? You might be hurt if he has an affair I suppose, but I think that's most probably socially constructed. If you had your own money and your own place and resources it would just be part of life for him to move on? Or for you to move on.

@sakura184 that women should reject intercourse(and by the sounds of it,I might've got it wrong, any relationship with a man).

But it doesn't give any better guarantee of paternity than any other form of monagamy.
Monogamy (whether formal marriage or not) benefits women hugely, and I would see the paternity "benefit" as a not-very-good side effect.
It's well understood that throughout history many many men raised children that weren't theirs.
Geneticists prefer to trace through the female line because they know the mother is guaranteed.

You haven't commented on the fact that marriage doesn't guarantee paternity either.

I think marriage enables men to keep a very close eye on their wives so they have the best chance possible of being sure of paternity.
But Dworkin points out in RWW, that men realize what she calls "the farming model" is flawed. Wives have spare time and so on, some of them become feminists, they "might" be adulterous ( we know this because of the strict punishments enforced upon women for this crime, death in some countries , loss of custody of kids in others).
So she theorizes that marriage isn't really an ideal system for men, because of its inadequacies. She thinks men would prefer surrogacy to be the norm, then he knows 100% for sure that it's his sperm.

From what I'm seeing there are moves in this direction and she was right

The theory that marriage is prostitution? Or the theory that women should reject intercourse?

Some people say all work is slavery too, and I reject their arguments as well.

You haven't commented on the fact that marriage doesn't guarantee paternity either.

@sakura184 I don't know if it's possible but I would like to know the (approximate) age bracket if the women that think this way and support this theory.

That why it's just so obvious to me that cohabiting women who can't leave because they can't pay the rent by themselves are in captivity, and this is the feminist argument against marriage. Well it originally was against marriage, feminism was co-opted by the left and women ended up cohabiting with men for feminist reasons without a contract.
Clearly feminism didn't really go far enough and should've said not just marriage but all cohabitation with men. Or maybe it already did but women couldn't because we don't have the resources to live alone because of discrimination at work and the pink ghetto (work losing intrinsic value when women do it, because it's women doing it)

And maybe it should go further again and say not just prostitution but all intercourse with men. And some feminists are already going there. And whether you agree with them or not, it's interesting to hear what they have to say

Wait, so you are criticising men for wanting sex from their wives, and now also for not wanting sex from their wives? 

Erm not quite. I'm trying to point out the hoops wives and cohabiting women have to jump through to keep men happy

Wait, so you are criticising men for wanting sex from their wives, and now also for not wanting sex from their wives?

Look on relationships board. Along with all the posts from women who's husbands pester them for sex they don't want, there are many posts from women who's husbands aren't interested in sex with them, and obviously the women want it.

Some posters are lucky to have lovely partners that would never pressure them into sex, sadly in my experience that is not typical.

I think it runs deeper even than this. What if he doesn't pressure you into sex because he's lost interest in you because you got old or pregnant or fat. Or he had a Madonna/ whore complex and doesn't find his wife attractive anymore simply because she's now a wife. And like Greer said, "wives aren't sexy".
If he goes elsewhere for it, what then? And what if you have children? Like Dworkin said many routes out of marriage lead to the street corner for women.

So do you put on sexy underwear? Keep yourself young and beautiful. What if he's got a penchant for BDSM that he'd like to explore? If you're a boring prude you might end up getting turfed out. And as we know from that link, women can't pay rent on their wage.

So I think it runs much deeper than a man simply pressuring a woman into having sex. she has to keep him interested

It’s about income and culture, I don’t think it’s about sexual orientation

I know but I think the point the lesbian separatists were making is that there are material returns for being heterosexual, a reward, if you like.
The het women argued that that might be true but surely the het women deserved what they got because they had to deal with men and the lesbians didn't
The het women also said the old school lesbian separatists hadn't "got the memmo" that these days quite a lot of het women are actually supporting men on their wage and not the other way round. A good example of that is the pregnant women who have to save up for their maternity leave while the man gets to keep his wage because "equality"

Not only is it not typical, it's also generally understood to be an anti feminist argument. Why would you argue that your Nigel is great? That's why feminists termed the phrase "Not my Nigel" to describe women who say this.

I've just pinched this from another thread, it's about how impossible it is for women to live alone on their wage, giving rise to questions about just how many women are having sex because they can't afford rent themselves, including women stuck in marriages.

https://wbg.org.uk/media/press-releases/exclusive-data-housing-is-unaffordable-for-women-in-every-english-region/

ArnoldWhatshisknickers I am around the same age as you and it was certainly not my experience that most boys and men were willing to either put on or keep on a condom, most resisted it strongly and I was left worrying about pregnancy.

Also I think while there are plenty of equal marriages in the UK on average marriage isn't equal. Marriage increases life expectancy for men, but lowers it for women. Blaming women for marrying the wrong men only works on an individual level, if most men aren't willing to do their fair share of house work and childcare it follows that most women will be married to such men and on a nationwide (and worldwide) level that will affect womens ability to achieve in other spheres. As a society we are practically groomed to think housework is a women's thing. Children's books, tv, film and adverts are all terrible for this and let face it, if as a heterosexual couple your home is a shit tip people will be subconsciously blaming the women more than the man.

Also I believe sex is far more fraught for most women that for most men for a number of reasons. Men are generally stronger than women, so there is more potential danger for women. Women have pregnancy to worry about. Because there is such an emphasis on how women look and how they should look many women are self conscious and unhappy with the way they look. Young women are sexually harassed, groped, flashed at etc. often to such an extent it can put you off sex a bit and obviously rape can have a big effect on your sex life.

So for those reasons I think women on average find sex more difficult than men and are more likely to be the ones having sex they don't really want to keep their partners happy. Some posters are lucky to have lovely partners that would never pressure them into sex, sadly in my experience that is not typical.

I don’t understand that point Sakura.

Women who cohabit with men are better off ( than women who live with women ) because men earn more.

Traditionally, het women have cared more about expensive clothes than “ diehard lesbian seperatists”.

It’s not that het women somehow deserve more money because they have to put up with men.

Women who cohabit with other women have less money than het couples and more money than people who live alone.

Men who live alone have more money than women who live alone because men earn more.

It’s about income and culture, I don’t think it’s about sexual orientation.

It's not sensible for a woman to cohabit and we need to get rid of this idea that it some how acceptable.

It's interesting that when I was involved in some feminist blogs a while back, there was a bit of a divide between the diehard lesbian separatists and the heterosexual women who were living with men.
Anyway the lesbian separatists would say that they could tell the het women were getting material advantages by living with men, for example the women in their work who were het would wear expensive clothes and so on.
The het women would respond with "yes but her women earn it, because they have to live with men. But also, that nowadays, you quite often do get women investing financially in their marriage and cohabitation in ways that you wouldn't have seen in the past, where it's true that het women are in fact bringing a lot more to the table than the man is.
Maybe it gives them more leverage in the marriage/cohabitation-- so if you contribute financially you can actually somehow force him to do the dishes, that sort of thing.

I think most women want to live with a partner, and most of those want to live with men

There is almost incessant propaganda promoting heterosexual pair bonding so you're probably right there. Especially for young women. I was mainly talking about women who are now stuck cohabiting or married with men , I guess. For those women living alone would be bliss

I think most women would feel unadulterated bliss at being able to live alone.

I think you have spectacularly misjudged the opion of "most" women here.
Maybe you live in some kind of bubble.
I think most women want to live with a partner, and most of those want to live with men.

And let's also not forget that the reason marriage exists is so that men can be aware of and certain of paternity

Marriage doesn't ensure that men can be sure of paternity, though.
I'm not sure how that could ever be done.
So the primary reason (in your view) that marriage exists, is meaningless.

I also had to give a hollow laugh that patriarchy considers women who marry to be wholesome and women who prostitute their bodies to be whores, yet you (a so called feminist) consider both to be "whores" - your words, which you have used many time on this thread.

So because women can die of having sex and men can't I guess it makes sense that women are the "gatekeepers".

This comment is utterly alien to me and makes me wonder how old you are. And I don't mean that in a snarky way, but am genuinely curious.

I'm 45, which means I went through my teenage years at the height of the AIDS epidemic. A fact that with hindsight I am extremely grateful for, weird though that may sound. I genuinely think my generation were lucky to be teenagers at that time.

Lucky because it was a rare moment when men had as much to lose from having sex as women. As it turns out heterosexual women are more vulnerable to HIV than heterosexual men but that wasn't known, or certainly not common knowledge, at the time. Lucky because teenage boys were just as cautious about sexual partners as teenage girls, just as keen to use a condom. Lucky because pregnancy was not viewed as the 'worst' outcome of sex. You're pregnant? Have the baby, have an abortion, whatever, if you're not dying of AIDS it's fixable. Lucky because the adults around took, out of necessity, a pragmatic rather than moralising view of sex. Yes, we know you're horny teenagers but for fuck's sake use a condom, this shit will kill you. Lucky because there's nothing like a deadly disease to worry about for getting over your teenage naval gazing.

I always feel a bit weird and wrong expressing this view. AIDS is a killer, people died. Lots of people. People still do. Yet, for me and my peers there were positives to growing up then and I'm glad I did.

Imnobody4

I don't disagree with most of what you say in your last post.
I know Dworkin didn't believe it was biology. I do, or at least that part of it is biology, part socially constructed, so that's where I differ from her, I guess.

I'm happy to live with OH as I quite like him. If we were to break up/he died there's no way in hell I'd live with another person or even bother with a relationship.

dodgeballchamp

I think most women would feel unadulterated bliss at being able to live alone. I mean that really is the feminist ideal