|
Post by jondough on Apr 19, 2014 11:39:44 GMT -5
The problem is, some people just want to see the world through their narrow, preconceived, negative ideas of how it is...doom and gloom. No matter how much better it gets, they will still see it as doom and gloom, and all negative and getting worse.
A person could purchase and old deteriorated house, completely refurbish it, and if you want to look at it with these same negative glasses, you could see it as all negative.
I agree with the above. The women are treated with much more respect today than when we were in high school. It really is a shame how much they were sex objects to many when I was in school. That has changed extensively for the better. The way women were talked about amongst the boys wouldn't even be tolerated amongst my sons or their friends.
I really think part of the problem with the way Bert sees things is he is judging them by what he watches on TV. I'm not saying this facetiously. TV has became more liberal on what they will allow. But this is fantasy, not reality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 12:35:46 GMT -5
The problem is, some people just want to see the world through their narrow, preconceived, negative ideas of how it is...doom and gloom. No matter how much better it gets, they will still see it as doom and gloom, and all negative and getting worse. A person could purchase and old deteriorated house, completely refurbish it, and if you want to look at it with these same negative glasses, you could see it as all negative. I agree with the above. The women are treated with much more respect today than when we were in high school. It really is a shame how much they were sex objects to many when I was in school. That has changed extensively for the better. The way women were talked about amongst the boys wouldn't even be tolerated amongst my sons or their friends. I really think part of the problem with the way Bert sees things is he is judging them by what he watches on TV. I'm not saying this facetiously. TV has became more liberal on what they will allow. But this is fantasy, not reality. That's where I get my views on the previous generation. My family generally treated women well and with respect, but the locker room and elsewhere around teen boys was atrocious. Boys taught boys that "no means yes and a strong no means a strong yes". This is practically downright criminal talk. Boys bragged of their exploits as though girls were sub-human species and if half of what they bragged about was true, there was a huge amount of rape and attempted rape in those days. A woman struggling was seen as a good thing. I heard this over and over again as I went through my teens and hung out with a lot of different school buddies (although they weren't all like that but it was very common). Today, there are posters all over university campus men's restrooms headlined: "Do you have consent? Do you know what consent means?" and those posters detail a very rigorous expectation on how to make sure you have consent. It's a totally different world today in that regard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 12:44:15 GMT -5
When I observe the world around my still-teen daughter and compare it to how young men treated young women 40 years ago, I would completely agree with you. The world is a completely different, and better place for her than for my sisters. The observation I'd make based on both your post and that of matisse, is that for many women the world is a much better place today, but not for all. And I'd certainly include my own daughters in the number of those finding it to be better. I suppose the threats to the well being of women are very much the same as they were 50 years ago. In the small prairie town in which I once lived there were wife-beaters, alcoholics, misogynists and general derelicts, as there are today. At least today a woman can to a greater extent make her own way in society, and the quality of her life is not so dependent on choosing a good man. I don't think that men's attitudes to women were generally worse than today, although women were much more limited in what they were allowed to do. Rather, I think that my own relatives represented an expectation that you treated your wife, and women, in general, with kindness and civility. There seems to be more general boorishness around today. Men aren't uniform in their behaviour anyway. A boy who calls on your daughter may present quite differently than when he's in a bar with his loutish friends. Or he may present the same. Again, it's very difficult to generalize, but I'd have misgivings in saying that things are generally better, or that they are generally worse. An individual person may well say, it's better for me, or it's better for my family. I agree that we have regressed in some ways and you are correct that the media is one such way. However, overall I would say we have advanced greatly in 50 years, starting with the cultural revolution of the 1960's which laid the groundwork for so much of this to come out into the open and be confronted in subsequent decades. I would disagree that things like wife-beating is much the same.....it's completely different. Today, women are not economically dependent on men as you rightly point out and divorce is easy to get. If a man gets physically abusive, a woman will not tolerate it like 50 years ago when they were actively taught (from the bible) to obey and put up with it. They leave and the man has to look for a new victim if he can find one. Today, verbal abuse will also quickly end a marriage and the abuse stops. 50 years ago, it went on for a lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 19, 2014 14:02:10 GMT -5
Now that I've arrived at that point in my thinking, the question of one man contemplating the penis of another on a postage stamp seems like a drop in the bucket. An interesting collection of words.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Apr 19, 2014 14:30:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 19, 2014 16:44:30 GMT -5
Frankly, I can't see where a man contemplating the penis of another is as devastating to either the psyche or the community as the oversexualization of young women. first off, they're not doing it for society's expectations of entertainment. I wonder if it's a general condition of our human existence that the effect at which we take umbrage is not nearly as harmful as the one that is widely prevalent and generally accepted. Probably so. It is one thing to protect ourselves from something that we know hurts us, but it is the fears we have been taught by the general public that are most often accepted without any reason. Not everything in life is a slippery slope to depravity. If it were, mothers would have to stop breast feeding their children because it could develop into alcoholism later in life.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 19, 2014 16:51:55 GMT -5
The problem is, some people just want to see the world through their narrow, preconceived, negative ideas of how it is...doom and gloom. No matter how much better it gets, they will still see it as doom and gloom, and all negative and getting worse. A person could purchase and old deteriorated house, completely refurbish it, and if you want to look at it with these same negative glasses, you could see it as all negative. I agree with the above. The women are treated with much more respect today than when we were in high school. It really is a shame how much they were sex objects to many when I was in school. That has changed extensively for the better. The way women were talked about amongst the boys wouldn't even be tolerated amongst my sons or their friends. I really think part of the problem with the way Bert sees things is he is judging them by what he watches on TV. I'm not saying this facetiously. TV has became more liberal on what they will allow. But this is fantasy, not reality. And people who don't watch TV have just a slight tendency to think that TV is all sex and violence. I found it quite amusing when our little old lady neighbor signed up for the Spice channel, thinking she was going to watch people cooking all day. She wasn't so horrified about what she found as she was embarrassed that she had asked a "sweet little young man" to sign her up.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 19, 2014 16:57:59 GMT -5
These types will always be with us. I shocked a man (a teacher) seriously after he gave me his reasoning why some young college guys had raped a stripper. He considered the fact that they were male and she was a stripper that there was no other conclusion to draw -- life as he knew it. I told him I had never raped anyone and it had never occurred to me to rape anyone no matter what they were wearing or not wearing. And he was a real Bible pounder.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 18:54:19 GMT -5
These types will always be with us. I shocked a man (a teacher) seriously after he gave me his reasoning why some young college guys had raped a stripper. He considered the fact that they were male and she was a stripper that there was no other conclusion to draw -- life as he knew it. I told him I had never raped anyone and it had never occurred to me to rape anyone no matter what they were wearing or not wearing. And he was a real Bible pounder. Sounds like the Duke University Lacrosse team case?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 19, 2014 19:03:25 GMT -5
These types will always be with us. I shocked a man (a teacher) seriously after he gave me his reasoning why some young college guys had raped a stripper. He considered the fact that they were male and she was a stripper that there was no other conclusion to draw -- life as he knew it. I told him I had never raped anyone and it had never occurred to me to rape anyone no matter what they were wearing or not wearing. And he was a real Bible pounder. Sounds like the Duke University Lacrosse team case? It was. The stripper finally couldn't keep her facts straight and her history under the rug. But that's not the only such case I know about. The stripper should have had a couple of workers handling her case!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 19:10:00 GMT -5
Sounds like the Duke University Lacrosse team case? It was. The stripper finally couldn't keep her facts straight and her history under the rug. But that's not the only such case I know about. The stripper should have had a couple of workers handling her case!!!! No, they are much better at defending the perps.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 19, 2014 19:10:06 GMT -5
The problem is, some people just want to see the world through their narrow, preconceived, negative ideas of how it is...doom and gloom. No matter how much better it gets, they will still see it as doom and gloom, and all negative and getting worse. A person could purchase and old deteriorated house, completely refurbish it, and if you want to look at it with these same negative glasses, you could see it as all negative. I agree with the above. The women are treated with much more respect today than when we were in high school. It really is a shame how much they were sex objects to many when I was in school. That has changed extensively for the better. The way women were talked about amongst the boys wouldn't even be tolerated amongst my sons or their friends. I really think part of the problem with the way Bert sees things is he is judging them by what he watches on TV. I'm not saying this facetiously. TV has became more liberal on what they will allow. But this is fantasy, not reality. Some people also think that everything they see on a television set is TV for everyone. You can use a television set for almost any media now, beginning with paid cable channels to rented movies on-line.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 19, 2014 21:16:42 GMT -5
The observation I'd make based on both your post and that of matisse, is that for many women the world is a much better place today, but not for all. And I'd certainly include my own daughters in the number of those finding it to be better. I suppose the threats to the well being of women are very much the same as they were 50 years ago. In the small prairie town in which I once lived there were wife-beaters, alcoholics, misogynists and general derelicts, as there are today. At least today a woman can to a greater extent make her own way in society, and the quality of her life is not so dependent on choosing a good man. I don't think that men's attitudes to women were generally worse than today, although women were much more limited in what they were allowed to do. Rather, I think that my own relatives represented an expectation that you treated your wife, and women, in general, with kindness and civility. There seems to be more general boorishness around today. Men aren't uniform in their behaviour anyway. A boy who calls on your daughter may present quite differently than when he's in a bar with his loutish friends. Or he may present the same. Again, it's very difficult to generalize, but I'd have misgivings in saying that things are generally better, or that they are generally worse. An individual person may well say, it's better for me, or it's better for my family. I agree that we have regressed in some ways and you are correct that the media is one such way. However, overall I would say we have advanced greatly in 50 years, starting with the cultural revolution of the 1960's which laid the groundwork for so much of this to come out into the open and be confronted in subsequent decades. I would disagree that things like wife-beating is much the same.....it's completely different. Today, women are not economically dependent on men as you rightly point out and divorce is easy to get. If a man gets physically abusive, a woman will not tolerate it like 50 years ago when they were actively taught (from the bible) to obey and put up with it. They leave and the man has to look for a new victim if he can find one. Today, verbal abuse will also quickly end a marriage and the abuse stops. 50 years ago, it went on for a lifetime. Statistics do seem to bear out what you're saying, although there are some issues.
But isn’t there less domestic violence now than in the past?
Like all violent crime in Canada, rates of domestic violence have fallen in recent years.18 This decline is partly due to increased social equality and financial freedom for women, which makes it easier for them to leave abusive relationships at earlier stages. It is also due to years of effort by groups who are working to end domestic violence. Their achievements include improved public awareness, more treatment programs for violent men, improved training for police officers and Crown attorneys, having the police lay charges rather than the victim, more co-ordination of community services, and the creation of domestic violence legislation in some areas of Canada.19 Still, despite this good news, some disturbing trends are emerging: In 2010, the rate of intimate partner homicide committed against females increased by 19%, the third increase in four years. During that same period, the rate for male victims fell by almost half. 20 After falling for a decade, rates of domestic violence have now flat-lined. In 2009, the rate of self-reported spousal violence was the same as in 2004. 21 Victims are now less likely to report an incident to police.22 More women are experiencing violence after leaving their abuser.23 (Source: www.canadianwomen.org/facts-about-violence)
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 19, 2014 23:21:55 GMT -5
I agree that we have regressed in some ways and you are correct that the media is one such way. However, overall I would say we have advanced greatly in 50 years, starting with the cultural revolution of the 1960's which laid the groundwork for so much of this to come out into the open and be confronted in subsequent decades. I would disagree that things like wife-beating is much the same.....it's completely different. Today, women are not economically dependent on men as you rightly point out and divorce is easy to get. If a man gets physically abusive, a woman will not tolerate it like 50 years ago when they were actively taught (from the bible) to obey and put up with it. They leave and the man has to look for a new victim if he can find one. Today, verbal abuse will also quickly end a marriage and the abuse stops. 50 years ago, it went on for a lifetime. Statistics do seem to bear out what you're saying, although there are some issues.
But isn’t there less domestic violence now than in the past?
Like all violent crime in Canada, rates of domestic violence have fallen in recent years.18 This decline is partly due to increased social equality and financial freedom for women, which makes it easier for them to leave abusive relationships at earlier stages. It is also due to years of effort by groups who are working to end domestic violence. Their achievements include improved public awareness, more treatment programs for violent men, improved training for police officers and Crown attorneys, having the police lay charges rather than the victim, more co-ordination of community services, and the creation of domestic violence legislation in some areas of Canada.19 Still, despite this good news, some disturbing trends are emerging: In 2010, the rate of intimate partner homicide committed against females increased by 19%, the third increase in four years. During that same period, the rate for male victims fell by almost half. 20 After falling for a decade, rates of domestic violence have now flat-lined. In 2009, the rate of self-reported spousal violence was the same as in 2004. 21 Victims are now less likely to report an incident to police.22 More women are experiencing violence after leaving their abuser.23 (Source: www.canadianwomen.org/facts-about-violence)
Canada is doing much better than the US when it comes to domestic violence. Even the chief of police in Carson City was hospitalized from the beating his wife put on him. One guy shot his girlfriend right in front of our house. It's better to be rich because then you can live in a single house and lock the windows closed so the neighbors can report what they're hearing next door. Closest I have come to being shot was about 1 foot from my head on the window I was leaning against. Closest I came to getting my throat cut was about 1/4 inch and both elbows held together behind my back. Ever negotiate with three thugs in that position?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 23:22:01 GMT -5
I agree that we have regressed in some ways and you are correct that the media is one such way. However, overall I would say we have advanced greatly in 50 years, starting with the cultural revolution of the 1960's which laid the groundwork for so much of this to come out into the open and be confronted in subsequent decades. I would disagree that things like wife-beating is much the same.....it's completely different. Today, women are not economically dependent on men as you rightly point out and divorce is easy to get. If a man gets physically abusive, a woman will not tolerate it like 50 years ago when they were actively taught (from the bible) to obey and put up with it. They leave and the man has to look for a new victim if he can find one. Today, verbal abuse will also quickly end a marriage and the abuse stops. 50 years ago, it went on for a lifetime. Statistics do seem to bear out what you're saying, although there are some issues.
But isn’t there less domestic violence now than in the past?
Like all violent crime in Canada, rates of domestic violence have fallen in recent years.18 This decline is partly due to increased social equality and financial freedom for women, which makes it easier for them to leave abusive relationships at earlier stages. It is also due to years of effort by groups who are working to end domestic violence. Their achievements include improved public awareness, more treatment programs for violent men, improved training for police officers and Crown attorneys, having the police lay charges rather than the victim, more co-ordination of community services, and the creation of domestic violence legislation in some areas of Canada.19 Still, despite this good news, some disturbing trends are emerging: In 2010, the rate of intimate partner homicide committed against females increased by 19%, the third increase in four years. During that same period, the rate for male victims fell by almost half. 20 After falling for a decade, rates of domestic violence have now flat-lined. In 2009, the rate of self-reported spousal violence was the same as in 2004. 21 Victims are now less likely to report an incident to police.22 More women are experiencing violence after leaving their abuser.23 (Source: www.canadianwomen.org/facts-about-violence)
This looks like a pretty good chart to me from StatsCan for spousal homicide: One of the problems of looking at a short duration is that there are always anomalous periods and it takes time to see if a trend has changed. For instance, that number for 2010 is just too short of a duration to draw a conclusion of a reversal or an acceleration of a trend. Plus, we are looking at some pretty small numbers now so the rate can change dramatically with only a few more or less incidents. The rate/million of spouses is about 4, so that indicates a very small number.....probably well under 100 for the whole country? I'm not sure how many spouses exist in the country, I think less than 20 million so that would indicate under 80 homicides. Unfortunately, while StatsCan has tons of stats on domestic violence, they do a very poor job doing charts of the trends like the one in this post, so it is difficult to get a real sense of where all sorts of domestic violence is going.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 20, 2014 0:54:55 GMT -5
The observation I'd make based on both your post and that of matisse, is that for many women the world is a much better place today, but not for all. And I'd certainly include my own daughters in the number of those finding it to be better. I suppose the threats to the well being of women are very much the same as they were 50 years ago. In the small prairie town in which I once lived there were wife-beaters, alcoholics, misogynists and general derelicts, as there are today. At least today a woman can to a greater extent make her own way in society, and the quality of her life is not so dependent on choosing a good man. I don't think that men's attitudes to women were generally worse than today, although women were much more limited in what they were allowed to do. Rather, I think that my own relatives represented an expectation that you treated your wife, and women, in general, with kindness and civility. There seems to be more general boorishness around today. Men aren't uniform in their behaviour anyway. A boy who calls on your daughter may present quite differently than when he's in a bar with his loutish friends. Or he may present the same. Again, it's very difficult to generalize, but I'd have misgivings in saying that things are generally better, or that they are generally worse. An individual person may well say, it's better for me, or it's better for my family. I agree that we have regressed in some ways and you are correct that the media is one such way. However, overall I would say we have advanced greatly in 50 years, starting with the cultural revolution of the 1960's which laid the groundwork for so much of this to come out into the open and be confronted in subsequent decades. I would disagree that things like wife-beating is much the same.....it's completely different. Today, women are not economically dependent on men as you rightly point out and divorce is easy to get. If a man gets physically abusive, a woman will not tolerate it like 50 years ago when they were actively taught (from the bible) to obey and put up with it. They leave and the man has to look for a new victim if he can find one. Today, verbal abuse will also quickly end a marriage and the abuse stops. 50 years ago, it went on for a lifetime. Does anyone know what was the main instigator of women's advancement in the last in 50 years?
How about taking a look at NOW?
The National Organization for Women (NOW) is a feminist organization founded in 1966.
It was because of NOW that most people first became aware of the discrimination of women in our society.
It was though their actions, political and legislative, -that women gained economical independence from men.
It didn't just happen.
There were no women US Senators.
NO women Supreme Court Justices Very few women physicians, very few attorneys.
--no refuges for women from domestic abuse.
Women had no back up should she divorce her "bread winning" husband who beat her.
She had no place to go to, no income and if she also had children it was doubly difficult.
There are many people who love to disparage those "women libbers," as they call them, - but women would not made that advance in the last 50 years had it not been for them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 1:08:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 20, 2014 8:10:14 GMT -5
I agree that we have regressed in some ways and you are correct that the media is one such way. However, overall I would say we have advanced greatly in 50 years, starting with the cultural revolution of the 1960's which laid the groundwork for so much of this to come out into the open and be confronted in subsequent decades. I would disagree that things like wife-beating is much the same.....it's completely different. Today, women are not economically dependent on men as you rightly point out and divorce is easy to get. If a man gets physically abusive, a woman will not tolerate it like 50 years ago when they were actively taught (from the bible) to obey and put up with it. They leave and the man has to look for a new victim if he can find one. Today, verbal abuse will also quickly end a marriage and the abuse stops. 50 years ago, it went on for a lifetime. Does anyone know what was the main instigator of women's advancement in the last in 50 years?
How about taking a look at NOW?
The National Organization for Women (NOW) is a feminist organization founded in 1966.
It was because of NOW that most people first became aware of the discrimination of women in our society.
It was though their actions, political and legislative, -that women gained economical independence from men.
It didn't just happen.
There were no women US Senators.
NO women Supreme Court Justices Very few women physicians, very few attorneys.
--no refuges for women from domestic abuse.
Women had no back up should she divorce her "bread winning" husband who beat her.
She had no place to go to, no income and if she also had children it was doubly difficult.
There are many people who love to disparage those "women libbers," as they call them, - but women would not made that advance in the last 50 years had it not been for them.
Not to discredit anything NOW has done, but 1966 is fairly late on the scene. At least I would challenge the statement that it was because of NOW that people first became aware of the discrimination of women in society. How about - The Subjection of Women written by John Stuart Mill in 1869. The Enfranchisement of Women written by his wife, Harriet Taylor Mill in 1851. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman written by Mary Wollstonecraft in 1792. I've read Mill's book and it still has relevance all these years later.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Apr 20, 2014 8:28:47 GMT -5
Jesus was a radical in his support of women's rights. Check out wiki on why women were big supporters of christ Sadly, some men claiming to be following christ did not have the same views of women as Jesus did, and a lot of Christ's teachings were undermined and forsaken, to the detriment of both men and women. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 20, 2014 8:48:41 GMT -5
Statistics do seem to bear out what you're saying, although there are some issues.
But isn’t there less domestic violence now than in the past?
Like all violent crime in Canada, rates of domestic violence have fallen in recent years.18 This decline is partly due to increased social equality and financial freedom for women, which makes it easier for them to leave abusive relationships at earlier stages. It is also due to years of effort by groups who are working to end domestic violence. Their achievements include improved public awareness, more treatment programs for violent men, improved training for police officers and Crown attorneys, having the police lay charges rather than the victim, more co-ordination of community services, and the creation of domestic violence legislation in some areas of Canada.19 Still, despite this good news, some disturbing trends are emerging: In 2010, the rate of intimate partner homicide committed against females increased by 19%, the third increase in four years. During that same period, the rate for male victims fell by almost half. 20 After falling for a decade, rates of domestic violence have now flat-lined. In 2009, the rate of self-reported spousal violence was the same as in 2004. 21 Victims are now less likely to report an incident to police.22 More women are experiencing violence after leaving their abuser.23 (Source: www.canadianwomen.org/facts-about-violence)
Canada is doing much better than the US when it comes to domestic violence. Even the chief of police in Carson City was hospitalized from the beating his wife put on him. One guy shot his girlfriend right in front of our house. It's better to be rich because then you can live in a single house and lock the windows closed so the neighbors can report what they're hearing next door. Closest I have come to being shot was about 1 foot from my head on the window I was leaning against. Closest I came to getting my throat cut was about 1/4 inch and both elbows held together behind my back. Ever negotiate with three thugs in that position? As we post about the attitudes that young men and women display to each other, I have a bit of an uneasy feeling that things are going well across the board. The sort of locker room objectification of women that was general 30 years ago, even in business circles, seems to be fading. Perhaps it's being replaced by more open attitudes to sexuality in general. Here's an ad for an exercise bike that popped up in my Facebook stream. Perfectly safe to watch, but shows a male stripper in outline. www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO7iCbtlcIcSo with an easier attitude to sexual activity as the general reference point, it's definitely more difficult for Christian young people to remain chaste before marriage. If you are single and date outside of Christian circles it's just expected that there will be sex. This is definitely not good for those who try to live by more conservative values, but is it even a good trend for young women in general?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 20, 2014 8:53:53 GMT -5
Statistics do seem to bear out what you're saying, although there are some issues.
But isn’t there less domestic violence now than in the past?
Like all violent crime in Canada, rates of domestic violence have fallen in recent years.18 This decline is partly due to increased social equality and financial freedom for women, which makes it easier for them to leave abusive relationships at earlier stages. It is also due to years of effort by groups who are working to end domestic violence. Their achievements include improved public awareness, more treatment programs for violent men, improved training for police officers and Crown attorneys, having the police lay charges rather than the victim, more co-ordination of community services, and the creation of domestic violence legislation in some areas of Canada.19 Still, despite this good news, some disturbing trends are emerging: In 2010, the rate of intimate partner homicide committed against females increased by 19%, the third increase in four years. During that same period, the rate for male victims fell by almost half. 20 After falling for a decade, rates of domestic violence have now flat-lined. In 2009, the rate of self-reported spousal violence was the same as in 2004. 21 Victims are now less likely to report an incident to police.22 More women are experiencing violence after leaving their abuser.23 (Source: www.canadianwomen.org/facts-about-violence)
Canada is doing much better than the US when it comes to domestic violence. Even the chief of police in Carson City was hospitalized from the beating his wife put on him. One guy shot his girlfriend right in front of our house. It's better to be rich because then you can live in a single house and lock the windows closed so the neighbors can report what they're hearing next door. Closest I have come to being shot was about 1 foot from my head on the window I was leaning against. Closest I came to getting my throat cut was about 1/4 inch and both elbows held together behind my back. Ever negotiate with three thugs in that position? I have a feeling that while the overall trend in violent crime is downward, in certain pockets it's higher than ever. I'm not sure why; I feel that there is an underclass or disenfranchised class for whom life is getting worse and worse.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 9:24:40 GMT -5
Canada is doing much better than the US when it comes to domestic violence. Even the chief of police in Carson City was hospitalized from the beating his wife put on him. One guy shot his girlfriend right in front of our house. It's better to be rich because then you can live in a single house and lock the windows closed so the neighbors can report what they're hearing next door. Closest I have come to being shot was about 1 foot from my head on the window I was leaning against. Closest I came to getting my throat cut was about 1/4 inch and both elbows held together behind my back. Ever negotiate with three thugs in that position? As we post about the attitudes that young men and women display to each other, I have a bit of an uneasy feeling that things are going well across the board. The sort of locker room objectification of women that was general 30 years ago, even in business circles, seems to be fading. Perhaps it's being replaced by more open attitudes to sexuality in general. Here's an ad for an exercise bike that popped up in my Facebook stream. Perfectly safe to watch, but shows a male stripper in outline. www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO7iCbtlcIcSo with an easier attitude to sexual activity as the general reference point, it's definitely more difficult for Christian young people to remain chaste before marriage. If you are single and date outside of Christian circles it's just expected that there will be sex. This is definitely not good for those who try to live by more conservative values, but is it even a good trend for young women in general? Here is a fascinating chart not only for the trends, but the fact that the two seemingly unrelated data lines are placed on the same chart. My question to anyone is this: does this chart indicate a society that is getting better, or a schizophrenic society that is getting better and worse at the same time?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 20, 2014 10:10:44 GMT -5
As we post about the attitudes that young men and women display to each other, I have a bit of an uneasy feeling that things are going well across the board. The sort of locker room objectification of women that was general 30 years ago, even in business circles, seems to be fading. Perhaps it's being replaced by more open attitudes to sexuality in general. Here's an ad for an exercise bike that popped up in my Facebook stream. Perfectly safe to watch, but shows a male stripper in outline. www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO7iCbtlcIcSo with an easier attitude to sexual activity as the general reference point, it's definitely more difficult for Christian young people to remain chaste before marriage. If you are single and date outside of Christian circles it's just expected that there will be sex. This is definitely not good for those who try to live by more conservative values, but is it even a good trend for young women in general? Here is a fascinating chart not only for the trends, but the fact that the two seemingly unrelated data lines are placed on the same chart. My question to anyone is this: does this chart indicate a society that is getting better, or a schizophrenic society that is getting better and worse at the same time? "Getting better and worse at the same time" doesn't indicate any kind of schizophrenia. It's simply a reflection of the fact that the world is too complex to allow for any kind of totalizing assessment that it is, on the whole, getting better or, on the whole, getting worse. Because there is no "on the whole" except what our minds may put there. If you tell me the world is getting better because ... I'll look for evidence to the contrary. Similarly, if you tell me it's getting worse because ..., I'll tell you why it isn't getting worse. Of course having a contrary nature in the first place is part of the attraction for me. So, I don't think the graph tells us anything much. Of course, people think adultery is wrong; it boils down to lying, deception and fraud, and has little to do with sexual mores, per se. Show me a graph on attitudes to pre-marital sex, or sex out of wedlock, and we'll have something to discuss.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 10:22:31 GMT -5
Here is a fascinating chart not only for the trends, but the fact that the two seemingly unrelated data lines are placed on the same chart. My question to anyone is this: does this chart indicate a society that is getting better, or a schizophrenic society that is getting better and worse at the same time? "Getting better and worse at the same time" doesn't indicate any kind of schizophrenia. It's simply a reflection of the fact that the world is too complex to allow for any kind of totalizing assessment that it is, on the whole, getting better or, on the whole, getting worse. Because there is no "on the whole" except what our minds may put there. If you tell me the world is getting better because ... I'll look for evidence to the contrary. Similarly, if you tell me it's getting worse because ..., I'll tell you why it isn't getting worse. Of course having a contrary nature in the first place is part of the attraction for me. So, I don't think the graph tells us anything much. Of course, people think adultery is wrong; it boils down to lying, deception and fraud, and has little to do with sexual mores, per se. Show me a graph on attitudes to pre-marital sex, or sex out of wedlock, and we'll have something to discuss. The schizophrenic remark was hyperbole and wasn't really the subject of my question so I shouldn't have included it. The real question was simply this: are we seeing two good trends here or are we seeing one good one and one bad one? I think I know the answers already from Bert and Gene, but it would be interesting to know what most other people think about it. These are both very strong trends, particularly the acceptance of homosexual sex which could be described as a phenomenon. The subject of adultery gets even more interesting beyond the data that is presented here. While adultery disapproval is at a 40 year high (maybe a high for much longer than that?), when the question was put to the same people as to whether or not they would have an affair if they knew for sure they wouldn't get caught, both men and women said "yes" around the 70% range (men a bit higher than women). Now that is a fascinating position. There are a lot of people out there who think it is always wrong but would do it anyway under the right circumstances. I don't have the data for what they thought 40 years ago so the trend is not known.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 20, 2014 10:26:52 GMT -5
I'm not sure if the following statistics are good news or not. They do indicate a gradual decrease in sexual activity among high school students in the last 20 years. But 45-50% of all high school students, grades 9 to 12, having had sexual intercourse still strikes me as not a good thing. And, between 14 and 19% of high school students have had sexual intercourse with four or more partners. www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/yrbs/pdf/us_sexual_trend_yrbs.pdf
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 10:45:43 GMT -5
I'm not sure if the following statistics are good news or not. They do indicate a gradual decrease in sexual activity among high school students in the last 20 years. But 45-50% of all high school students, grades 9 to 12, having had sexual intercourse still strikes me as not a good thing. And, between 14 and 19% of high school students have had sexual intercourse with four or more partners. www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/yrbs/pdf/us_sexual_trend_yrbs.pdfNice find. They are all excellent stats because every one of them show trends toward improvement, and some are quite strong trends. The one I really like is the 40% decline in sexual intercourse before age 13. It bodes very well for my gut feeling that CSA has declined significantly in the last two decades. As far as what the 14-18 year olds are doing, at one time marriage for them was commonplace so there have been some big changes in society there too over the long run.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 20, 2014 11:34:09 GMT -5
I agree that we have regressed in some ways and you are correct that the media is one such way. However, overall I would say we have advanced greatly in 50 years, starting with the cultural revolution of the 1960's which laid the groundwork for so much of this to come out into the open and be confronted in subsequent decades. I would disagree that things like wife-beating is much the same.....it's completely different. Today, women are not economically dependent on men as you rightly point out and divorce is easy to get. If a man gets physically abusive, a woman will not tolerate it like 50 years ago when they were actively taught (from the bible) to obey and put up with it. They leave and the man has to look for a new victim if he can find one. Today, verbal abuse will also quickly end a marriage and the abuse stops. 50 years ago, it went on for a lifetime. Statistics do seem to bear out what you're saying, although there are some issues.
But isn’t there less domestic violence now than in the past?
Like all violent crime in Canada, rates of domestic violence have fallen in recent years.18 This decline is partly due to increased social equality and financial freedom for women, which makes it easier for them to leave abusive relationships at earlier stages. It is also due to years of effort by groups who are working to end domestic violence. Their achievements include improved public awareness, more treatment programs for violent men, improved training for police officers and Crown attorneys, having the police lay charges rather than the victim, more co-ordination of community services, and the creation of domestic violence legislation in some areas of Canada.19 Still, despite this good news, some disturbing trends are emerging: In 2010, the rate of intimate partner homicide committed against females increased by 19%, the third increase in four years. During that same period, the rate for male victims fell by almost half. 20 After falling for a decade, rates of domestic violence have now flat-lined. In 2009, the rate of self-reported spousal violence was the same as in 2004. 21 Victims are now less likely to report an incident to police.22 More women are experiencing violence after leaving their abuser.23 (Source: www.canadianwomen.org/facts-about-violence)
Possibly one contribution towards less domestic violence is the way it can be handled by the police. There was a time when they were called to break up a fight either by the wife or a concerned neighbor, and they got there and couldn't arrest the spouse doing the abusing without the spouse that was abused pressing charges. More often then not that didn't happen. If a woman went to the hospital with injuries she still would have to be the one pressing charges, or husband depending on who was abused. Now the police can charge the abuser without the say of the abused. So it is a better deterrent because they know they will get charged. Many times in the past women didn't press charges because the husband might be the only one making money in the family and she had to consider that. Things are slowly changing, partly because the police can charge the person and partly because women are becoming more able to be independent. This is in Canada, I don't know about the States.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 20, 2014 15:07:38 GMT -5
Does anyone know what was the main instigator of women's advancement in the last in 50 years?
How about taking a look at NOW?
The National Organization for Women (NOW) is a feminist organization founded in 1966.
It was because of NOW that most people first became aware of the discrimination of women in our society.
It was though their actions, political and legislative, -that women gained economical independence from men.
It didn't just happen.
There were no women US Senators.
NO women Supreme Court Justices Very few women physicians, very few attorneys.
--no refuges for women from domestic abuse.
Women had no back up should she divorce her "bread winning" husband who beat her.
She had no place to go to, no income and if she also had children it was doubly difficult.
There are many people who love to disparage those "women libbers," as they call them, - but women would not made that advance in the last 50 years had it not been for them.
Not to discredit anything NOW has done, but 1966 is fairly late on the scene. At least I would challenge the statement that it was because of NOW that people first became aware of the discrimination of women in society. How about - The Subjection of Women written by John Stuart Mill in 1869. The Enfranchisement of Women written by his wife, Harriet Taylor Mill in 1851. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman written by Mary Wollstonecraft in 1792. I've read Mill's book and it still has relevance all these years later. Does anyone know what was the main instigator of women's advancement in the last in 50 years?
How about taking a look at NOW?
The National Organization for Women (NOW) is a feminist organization founded in 1966.
It was because of NOW that most people first became aware of the discrimination of women in our society.
It was though their actions, political and legislative, -that women gained economical independence from men.
It didn't just happen.
There were no women US Senators.
NO women Supreme Court Justices Very few women physicians, very few attorneys.
--no refuges for women from domestic abuse.
Women had no back up should she divorce her "bread winning" husband who beat her.
She had no place to go to, no income and if she also had children it was doubly difficult.
There are many people who love to disparage those "women libbers," as they call them, - but women would not made that advance in the last 50 years had it not been for them.
Not to discredit anything NOW has done, but 1966 is fairly late on the scene. At least I would challenge the statement that it was because of NOW that people first became aware of the discrimination of women in society. How about - The Subjection of Women written by John Stuart Mill in 1869. The Enfranchisement of Women written by his wife, Harriet Taylor Mill in 1851. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman written by Mary Wollstonecraft in 1792.
I've read Mill's book and it still has relevance all these years later. You are correct, there were many people before NOW.
Modern Western feminist rose in different periods of time , or "waves." However, in our own time period the feminist movement began at the second meeting of Seneca Falls in upstate New York( the first meeting was five women in 1848)
The second wave consisted of Betty Friedan with others who "mothered" this wave of feminism and resulted in the organization , NOW, the National Organization for Women.
All the different waves of feminism have certainly been very important.
However, it is this wave that I was referring to.
|
|