Can you think of any conditions that leave a person feeling powerless to achieve happiness? — Athena

Do you really have to ask???

Yes, I am asking if the change in a woman's social responsibility is for the better or worse. Now like T Clark, I have my concerns about saying what is on my mind but if I don't, this thread is pointless. — Athena

Well, I'll warrant I don't have much knowledge on this topic, but i'll give it a shot.

my general idea is that its not necessarily only a woman's social responsibility that has altered; I would say that the average idea of "family" has changed, or in any case has lost a veritable amount of importance. Human artificial insemination, rising rates of sterilization amongst men, I think theres even a human clone in china somewhere... not sure, but it would seem that the word family is definitely decreasing in value. Personally, I wouldn't be able to say whether its for the better or for the worse, seeing that my belief around family is obviously biased.

Who knows? Maybe in the future we'll see family as a terrible and archaic form of human development. Only time will tell I guess.

The essence of adulthood is that you don't blame other people for your misfortune. — T Clark

That doesn't hold for me as a generalization. If someone shot me in the spine, I would blame them for that and certainly some of my misfortune. One can blame others AND then make the best of the situation. I don't think serfs being wiped out by Mao or Stalin would have been wrong to blame their misfortune on those guys. Of if society were to move towards a dictorship and speaking up gets you killed. I can blame justifiably those who are pulling stuff AND also do the best I can given the effects of the work of evil people.

And sometimes there are group patterns. Generally not always that the entire group of one side abuses the entire group the other side. But there can be tendencies and imbalances in who should get the blame. Their can be cultural practices that benefit one group and harm the other.

I know Iranian women, for example, who blame men more than women for the current way women are viewed and treated in that society. They certainly see women participating and perpetrating also. But the greater blame they aim at the men, while feeling that they have male allies also.

Physical strength has allowed political strength and then created cultural patterns that are abusive more to one side, though, I think ALWAYS abusive to both. It doesn't make you a child to notice this.

Just as an African slave (a more extreme example) is not a child if they had blame for the way the whites treated them.

Both of them take responsibility for their own lives. Neither blames the people who abused them, although they do hold them responsible. — T Clark

What do you see as the difference between blame and holding someone responsible.

I can't see a problem with someone who is sexually abused blaming someone who abused them.


Meaning of blame in English
blame
verb [ T ]
to say or think that someone or something did something wrong or is responsible for something bad happening:


From Cambridge dictionary. Notice how responsible is in the definition of blame.

Do you really have to ask??? — baker

Well of course. Philosophy is about asking questions, and then daring to answer them. It is not being a know it all. Just this morning I read how we risk the gods striking us down if we are not modest in all ways. :grin:

There would be no point in coming to the forum if it were not to ask questions and attempt to answer them.

Well, I'll warrant I don't have much knowledge on this topic, but i'll give it a shot.

my general idea is that its not necessarily only a woman's social responsibility that has altered; I would say that the average idea of "family" has changed, or in any case has lost a veritable amount of importance. Human artificial insemination, rising rates of sterilization amongst men, I think theres even a human clone in china somewhere... not sure, but it would seem that the word family is definitely decreasing in value. Personally, I wouldn't be able to say whether its for the better or for the worse, seeing that my belief around family is obviously biased.

Who knows? Maybe in the future we'll see family as a terrible and archaic form of human development. Only time will tell I guess. — john27

Thank you that is what I was hoping we would get at.

Okay, what of our hormones that define our human nature? Sex and mothering are hormonal. Now we can be celibate and childless but that goes against our nature. Our nature is to feel pleasure when we have sex or suckle a child. Oxytocin is our love hormone and sex and suckling a child stimulate the secretion of that hormone. Because of our hormones, it can be hard to be celibate and it can be hard for a mother to return to work instead of staying home to care for her baby. Men can get up in the middle of the night and give the baby a bottle, and they can change the baby's diapers, but they will not have the feelings a mother has. I do not understand why in this age of science, we are in denial of our hormones and what they have to do with our feelings and behaviors? What we have done is very dehumanizing and it is hard for me to believe this is good for humanity.

Family fidelity is gone from our consciences and I know for a fact this is very painful for most older women who are being firmly rejected by their grandchildren who don't like old people who just by looking at them, remind them of their mortality. In the past, we were taught to respect our elders, and family fidelity defined who we were and our place in society. Education for a technology society with unknown values has purposefully destroyed that. I am horrified that today when people speak of their identity it is about the work they do, not family!

Until women's liberation, I was Mrs. James Smith, and it was my husband and children who defined me.
For at least 6 thousand years all of humanity was ordered by family order. That is no longer true. We are no longer committed to each other as we once were and this has huge moral ramifications. What do you think?

I can't see a problem with someone who is sexually abused blaming someone who abused them. — Bylaw

That is not how either understands their act of abuse unless they are aware of being angry and wanting to hurt the other person. I am including females as sexual predators, because of news stories of female teachers lusting for a young male student and acting on it. Normally sexual behavior comes from knowledge of self, not knowledge of the other person. Some thoughtful people may read a book about sex and technologically be sex experts, and they can not know how the other feels without asking? :lol: How many men fake a climax to make the woman feel good and to stop the action that is not appealing because the hormone level is not where it needs to be to enjoy sex?

The young man who recently entered an older woman's home and raped her had been watching porn of women waking up to a rapist and being delighted. He expected her to enjoy the sex. He is not the only rapist who expected the female to enjoy the sex. In the past women were expected to say no, and men were expected to not take no for an answer. From the Carol Burnet Show to Mash and Gomer Pile sex is a mating dance of females rejecting the male and the male continuing to pursue the female and it is funny or pathetic when the roles are reversed. If we think of nature we might be a little less hysterical about the behavior and behave according to nature's rules, instead of flaunting the rules and then crying about the man's act of nature. :monkey:

Hmm...I think this is a really difficult question, with a lot of different sides, and maybe no good one answer. Again, I don't have a lot of info on the topic, so I'm just going to relate my thoughts on what I've heard on the radio and whatnot.

I think its important to note that the loss of importance of family comes from a lot of different sectors.

For example gender dysphoria: A rising mental condition that makes some girls physically feel that they belong more in a guys body. I don't suppose that they would be particularly receptive to oxytocin, or stimulation via maternal instinct if they felt more physically inclined to be a man. So perhaps if we could conclude that a variant expression of oxytocin exists within woman in general, it definitely would not be hard to believe that some women just feel less inclined/binded to maternal instincts like other girls would be.

Theres also scientific advancement. I think were getting to a point where now you can actually choose the eye colour of your child, hair colour, specific immunities against certain disabilities etc... we may eventually come to a point where its more cost effective to just make a baby in a lab, then go through the natural process.

Overall ignorance might be a point too. Since celibacy is gaining traction, some people don't know exactly how powerful the sentiments are after having a kid. How it completely takes over your life.
They might just view the practical/physical aspects of it, and go, "meh, not for me. Costs too much."

Finally there's just the fact that there is too many people on earth! I think men are less incentivized to have babies when they know they might contribute to the overpopulation of earth.

Now does/would all this contribute to the devaluation of a woman?

Well depends on how you would define one. I think gender is a really complicated issue right now in terms of definition, and in my belief I think it might be better to restate the question to how can we sustain the individual, who NEEDS maternal instinct to validate themselves? If one day family is out of the picture, how can we still stay connected?

Do these advancements destroy family fidelity?

Well yeah. Now you have to define yourself by yourself, whether you want to or not.

Do you believe there are any conditions that leave a person feeling powerless to achieve happiness?

Hmm...I think this is a really difficult question, with a lot of different sides, and maybe no good one answer. Again, I don't have a lot of info on the topic, so I'm just going to relate my thoughts on what I've heard on the radio and whatnot.

I think its important to note that the loss of importance of family comes from a lot of different sectors.

For example gender dysphoria: A rising mental condition that makes some girls physically feel that they belong more in a guys body. I don't suppose that they would be particularly receptive to oxytocin, or stimulation via maternal instinct if they felt more physically inclined to be a man. So perhaps if we could conclude that a variant expression of oxytocin exists within woman in general, it definitely would not be hard to believe that some women just feel less inclined/binded to maternal instincts like other girls would be.

Theres also scientific advancement. I think were getting to a point where now you can actually choose the eye colour of your child, hair colour, specific immunities against certain disabilities etc... we may eventually come to a point where its more cost effective to just make a baby in a lab, then go through the natural process.

Overall ignorance might be a point too. Since celibacy is gaining traction, some people don't know exactly how powerful the sentiments are after having a kid. How it completely takes over your life.
They might just view the practical/physical aspects of it, and go, "meh, not for me. Costs too much."

Finally there's just the fact that there are too many people on earth! I think men are less incentivized to have babies when they know they might contribute to the overpopulation of earth.

Now does/would all this contribute to the devaluation of a woman?

Well depends on how you would define one. I think gender is a really complicated issue right now in terms of definition, and in my belief I think it might be better to restate the question to how can we sustain the individual, who NEEDS maternal instinct to validate themselves? If one day family is out of the picture, how can we still stay connected?

Do these advancements destroy family fidelity?

Well yeah. Now you have to define yourself by yourself, whether you want to or not. — john27

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I love your questions about gender dysphoria.

Can hormones affect gender identity?
The hormonal theory of sexuality and gender identity holds that, just as exposure to certain hormones plays a role in fetal sex differentiation, such exposure also influences the sexual orientation and or gender identity that emerges later in the adult.

Prenatal hormones and sexual orientation - Wikipedia — Wikipedia

However, gender dysphoria can also be a defense mechanism resulting from childhood trauma. However, we have always had Tomboys, and why not? The restrictions that were once put on females made being a boy appear a lot more fun.

"a point where its more cost effective to just make a baby in a lab, then go through the natural process." Bad idea. Bonding begins in the womb, and no female animal will produce milk until a baby is born. Once the milk begins to flow, we can keep it flowing by milking the goat, cow, or a human mother and as I mentioned the baby suckling on the mother triggers the mother's hormones and heightens bonding. But so does learning a language begin in the womb and while in the womb the baby recognizes the mother's voice. I hope we come to pay attention to what makes us humans. We might be able grow babies as the novel and movie The Brave New World speaks of growing beings, but I am not exactly sure they would be humans instead of androids. Mammals are conditioned by their relationships and environment.

"some people don't know exactly how powerful the sentiments are after having a kid". Oh yeah! I tried to warn my son about how a baby would change his life and he didn't pay attention. Like the ignorance could be, not knowing what one is missing or not knowing what one wants to avoid. Being a parent is a human experience and unless someone has had the experience, it is hard to relate what that experience is. Facts have little meaning without experience. However, not all parents want to be parents, so they do not respond to the child emotionally, and you causing me to think about this, is very appreciated. It just is not the same for all people.

Many people are thinking our planet is overpopulated and global warming is making matters much worse and it is best to not have children.

"Now does/would all this contribute to the devaluation of a woman?" The value of the woman was radically changed when it was decided the man puts the baby inside the woman. I would love to turn the clock back to when we thought life came through the woman and we loved our earth mother. If we need women to reproduce and nurture children, and all of us, she can not be devalued, but we can fail to recognize her value. I think our role in civilization has been overlooked and I have no desire to live in an all male world. Male domination was bad enough. This is when we should be stronger and bolder about being women and not one of the guys.

Yes, I would rather not have life than be an Afghanistan mother right now. Finding happiness in a situation of powerlessness as one's children die, would be perverse don't you think?

That is not how either understands their act of abuse unless they are aware of being angry and wanting to hurt the other person — Athena

Could you rephrase this. I said

I can't see a problem with someone who is sexually abused blaming someone who abused them. — Bylaw

I think some people do frame their sexual interaction with an adult when they were a child as sexual abuse. I think they would also say they blame the person in some way or other. So, I am not sure what you mean by it not being 'how either understands their act of abuse...'

I am including females as sexual predators, because of news stories of female teachers lusting for a young male student and acting on it. — Athena

And some of them have blame, the young men and the adults they become, especially if they were very young.

I don't see how 'blame' is inappropriate as a rule.

How many men fake a climax to make the woman feel good and to stop the action that is not appealing because the hormone level is not where it needs to be to enjoy sex? — Athena

I have no idea how you got here or what this has to do with what I wrote.

If we think of nature we might be a little less hysterical about the behavior and behave according to nature's rules, instead of flaunting the rules and then crying about the man's act of nature. :monkey: — Athena

I don't think I was hysterical. I don't think your response makes much sense as a response to my post A young man who rapes someone in the way you describe is a very dangerous person but I guess I kinda hope he watches the guy who wants to be killed and eaten by that German guy before he meets you. You won't have any blame for him or complaints if he kills and eats you. He will have thought you wanted it. It would be hysterical of you to think his behavior was blameworthy even if he starts eating first before the kill.

That is not how either understands their act of abuse unless they are aware of being angry and wanting to hurt the other person
— Athena
Could you rephrase this. I said
I can't see a problem with someone who is sexually abused blaming someone who abused them.
— Bylaw
I think some people do frame their sexual interaction with an adult when they were a child as sexual abuse. I think they would also say they blame the person in some way or other. So, I am not sure what you mean by it not being 'how either understands their act of abuse...'
I am including females as sexual predators, because of news stories of female teachers lusting for a young male student and acting on it.
— Athena
And some of them have blame, the young men and the adults they become, especially if they were very young.

I don't see how 'blame' is inappropriate as a rule.
How many men fake a climax to make the woman feel good and to stop the action that is not appealing because the hormone level is not where it needs to be to enjoy sex?
— Athena
I have no idea how you got here or what this has to do with what I wrote.
If we think of nature we might be a little less hysterical about the behavior and behave according to nature's rules, instead of flaunting the rules and then crying about the man's act of nature. :monkey:
— Athena
I don't think I was hysterical. I don't think your response makes much sense as a response to my post A young man who rapes someone in the way you describe is a very dangerous person but I guess I kinda hope he watches the guy who wants to be killed and eaten by that German guy before he meets you. You won't have any blame for him or complaints if he kills and eats you. He will have thought you wanted it. It would be hysterical of you to think his behavior was blameworthy even if he starts eating first before the kill. — Bylaw

Oh my goodness, I didn't mean for any statements to be taken personally. I think we have a whole lot of misunderstandings.

I am quite sure none of the men who attempted to have sex with me thought they were harming me. Why would anyone assume it was their intent to harm someone? I am not saying that harm can be done. I am just saying that was not the intent.

Comparing a cannibalistic pervert with most of the people who are charged with rape is a false comparison. However, I remember long ago there was a news story about such a perverted person. Thank goodness the high school and college males are only wanting sex and are not intent on harming the female.