The demonisation of single mothers.

[SantaIsAnAnagramOfSatan]

Hi,

I've ended up talking about this in various threads but have never dedicated a thread to it.

So, i'm looking for your thoughts. How do we see this in action? What are the views of single mothers? How are they propagated? Why are they propagated and why do they attract such demonisation?

I'd also like to hear about where you think the feminist vision saw single mothers, did it predict their would be more given the increased freedom women would have in their lives and their ability to leave male partners or choose to not have one without being financially or socially (though that hasn't held true entirely compared to 1960's it's at least possible to live this way) ruined?

Is women being able to have children alone a part of the feminist outcome - if women have more control over their bodies and reproduction surely it was an inevitable outcome? And is it in your mind a positive or negative thing in terms of feminism?

I'm actually going away for a few days now but hope this will attract lots of thoughts for me to read when i get back.

As for me, to put this in context, i am a single mother of a pre school boy. When i found out i was pregnant (unplanned) at 30 i decided that i was happy to be and wanted to keep the baby but that i didn't want to stay in the problematic relationship with the father. Therefore i've been a single parent from the outset.

I have framed this as about single mothers rather than single parents as it is my experience that single fathers are seen very differently, imo as heroes and glorified whereas single mothers get the demonisation treatment in popular culture.

Look forward to reading your thoughts.

Judging by your outdated attitudes Bill, you yourself fought in the Boer war.

Oh BIllhicks is obviously a needledick who's lousy in bed and no fun for a woman to be around and therefore gets dumped all the time, hence the whining.

I think that (parent or not) one of the biggest threats to the patriarchy is the single woman who has loads of sex with loads of men because she chooses to. We won't be property and we are not interested in doing one particular man's housework and remembering his gran's birthday in exchange for Not Being Single.
THe whole heteromonogamy thing is basically about the 'right' some men think exists for each man - the right to have a woman dedicated to serving him.

"Great grand father was Royal Navy in WW1 and WW2, grandfather was Royal Navy WW2. I have another grand father who fought to hold off the Japs at Papua New Guinea in the Australian infantry, my great grand father on that side fought in the British army, joined up with some lost Aussies in WW1 in flanders after a brief firefight, LOL."

And? i had tonnes of relatives who fought in WW1/WW11. The big difference is that they weren't misogynist arseholes like you?

And no women died in munition factories?

And no women, throughout history, ever died giving birth to a man's baby? Oh, no, sorry billions of women have died or been maimed - still no big deal. Or is bravery only something that men do?

TheCrackFox Sun 05-Dec-10 20:19:24

A lot of men where abandoned by their DHs too.

FWIW, during the Victorian era a man was entitled to leave his children to whoever he liked. It wasn't an automatic right that a mother would keep her own children upon the death of her DH. Ah, the good old days, eh?

How far back do you want to go in history?

julius Ceasar (Cleo-fucking-patra!?!?!?!?!?!)

Hitler (Didn't Mrs. Gobbels feed her children cyanide? Forced the oldest one to swallow it because she knew it was poison.)

Napoleon (Compared to say Elizabeth 1? She had women, children and men butchered to maintain her illegal occupation of Ireland.)

--

Clearly because leaving children to a single mother was considered cruel as if she were anything but rich she either couldn't do the same PHYSICAL labour as a man to earn what she needed to support them or was protected by the first of the workplace safety laws.

You feminists live in a dream world where the 19th century was all Pride and Prejudice and men discriminated against women for the hell of it. Most people lived in abject poverty and even among the poor it was the man who was expected to work to earn a living, to send his boys to work to help support their sisters.

The only reason we live in such a comfortable, peaceful world (westerners) is because the men of our societies wanted to make life better for their families, for their daughters and sons.

I don't feel demonised as a single mum, but then I don't read nasty newspapers or listen to the opinions of idiots. I love being a single mum (most of the time), I think I'm doing a good job and don't believe for a minute that having a man around would make us happier. I don't fit any sterotype - I have a degree, work full-time and live above the poverty line, I don't give a monkies what class I am, I'm not going to pigeon-hole myself.

Lots of my friends growing up were from single-parent households and most of them have gone on to get well-educated and have much better careers than I have as a child from a two-parent household. Sterotypes are usually total nonsense and only lazy stupid people believe them.

LMAO.
Feminists have been accused of many things before but living in a Pride and Prejudice dreamworld is a new one on me.

Trop Sun 05-Dec-10 20:28:23

At the risk of derailing the thread even more, I'm sorry Bill do you answer my question? I tried to find it but the hate in your posts is palpable and makes for difficult reading.

A woman, working in an environment you clearly feel is dangerous and entitles men to higher pay - what would you say was my 'danger money'?

--

Define dangerous. If you're working construction or doing police work or any job that puts you at risk of injury regularly or death. I would have to say you're entitled to earn equal money right down to cent if you put in equal time and equal effort. However, if you're a 120 pound female firefighter that couldn't lift me to save my life... well... coughs abit

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Operations_Executive?wasRedirected=true

This as an article about secret agents who went behind enemy lines during WWII over 3000 were women.

ROFL at Cleopatra.

She crucified Christ, you know. And Brian.

Far be it from me to comment on my ability to lift the weight of your beer belly and fat head but you didn't answer my question.

I was working in exactly the environment you claimed entitled men to higher pay due to the risk.
I was required to wear the same PPE.

How much extra pay do you suppose I got?

I think, since women are meant to have these superior personal and communication skills (see sexist research ad nauseam), we should get paid more for any job that involves interpersonal communication.

sethstarkaddersmum Sun 05-Dec-10 20:41:18

LMAO.
Feminists have been accused of many things before but living in a Pride and Prejudice dreamworld is a new one on me.

--

Feminists denigrate the sacrifices of progressive men throughout history by suggesting that they have never acted in ANYONE'S interest but their own EVER. They also sully the names of men long dead, men who worked in the most appalling conditions to support their families. People had to die to secure the rights we take for granted at work, men DIED to get a TWELVE HOUR day! Men DIED for safety equipment, men DIED for the right to a decent day's pay.

"Women couldn't vote back in the day of the rule of thumb!" I've heard this one so many times, yet none of these women realize that nine year old boys were regularly losing arms, legs, fingers and hands in dangerous machinery and that the franchise was restricted to rich landowners and nobility until WW1 in some places! They didn't realize that men had to die protesting for rights that women have never doubted they will have for the rest of their lives.

feminists do not denigrate progressive men.

They denigrate men like you Bill - who are anything but progressive.

And women died fighting for freedom too.

Bill MEN DIED and will continue to die in illegal wars they create because they haven't got the ability to reason and negotiate away from conflict.

Perhaps instead of banging on about the sacrifice in history you should be thinking about what you are going to do in future because you are behind the times.

LOL at your assumptions about what we know, what we "realise" adn not Bill.

Trop Sun 05-Dec-10 20:48:16

Far be it from me to comment on my ability to lift the weight of your beer belly and fat head but you didn't answer my question.

I was working in exactly the environment you claimed entitled men to higher pay due to the risk.
I was required to wear the same PPE.

How much extra pay do you suppose I got?

--

I would assume given the same workload, you earned the same as a man at your workplace.

My girlfriend is a tomboy, did weights in HS, plays rugby, does taekwando and is almost as strong as me... I would expect her to get the same pay as me for the same work because I KNOW she can do it. She's not some limp-wristed prissy girl and I LOVE it. :p

HOWEVER... her older sister is a limp-wristed prissy girl and I wouldn't expect her to be able to perform as well physically as my girlfriend who as I've found is one of a kind. _

So Bill, why do you think single mothers are demonised by society?

And why do you think that in spite of the demonisation, 1 in 4 women choose to join such an unpopular club?

What do you think men and women should do in order to live together happily and respectfully (because unlike you, that's what most men and women want)?

limp wristed prissy girl WTF????

Oh Bill, you know pitifully little history.
It's quite sad how weirdly skewed your version is.

Basically what he's saying is that as long as women are like men, they can be allowed to live and work and function.

But if they're like women, they ... er... shouldn't.

I think.

But you weren;t talking about workload before Bill, you were talking about dangerous environments versus the office.

You are squirming out of it because you know you are talking nonsense.

I'm bored of you now.

Sorry I mean 1 in 4 families are headed by single parents.

90% of them mothers, 10% fathers.

Why do you think so many women choose the stigma of single parenthood Bill? What do you think men could do to stop this?

HerBeatitude Sun 05-Dec-10 20:59:26

feminists do not denigrate progressive men.

They denigrate men like you Bill - who are anything but progressive.

---

I suppose the SCUM manifesto was aimed at men like me too, huh?

I remember that particular manifesto urging feminists to kill male babies in their cots, replace males with spermbanks and then artificial sperm altogether. It also encouraged turning men into homosexuals to hasten our destruction, does that sound progressive and liberal to you? How about the women with signs at every damn feminist rallies saying "All men are rapists"? They're not denigrating or demonizing men at all?

How about the feminists who ran Erin Pizzey, the founder of the first British women's refugee out of town with bomb threats, physical confrontations and constant harassment? You know what she did? All she said was that of the first 100 women to enter her shelter, 60 or more of those women were as violent or more violent than the men they left. That didn't fit with their agenda, they couldn't control her so they destroyed her.

Proof: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Pizzey

Oh dear. I didn't think I'd have to do this quite so soon but....I'm going to have to outsource my disagreement with Bill Hicks to PDD and have done with it so I can get on with enjoying the thread (lurking at the moment trying to think of something insightful to say...may be lurking a while yet)

Other posters on this thread, I invite you to outsource your disagreement with anything BH comes up with to this person instead: Privilege Denying Dude. It will ultimately have the same effect (as banging your head against a brick wall repeatedly) without the effort of having to type a reasoned response.

You've got boring now Bill. Anyone who relies on Wikipedia to back up an argument is a fool.