It's been going on for ten thousand years! Thank you for your advocacy for women. I was wondering if any men were going to do it or if women were going to have to defend themselves alone.
In early '70s, I joined N.O.W., to fight for women's rights, the E.R.A., support Roe vs Wade. I took my 2 young daughters to rallies, marches in D.C., on the Freedom train to Illinois. I thought our work was done. Now I'm 80, my daughters in their 50s, and we're living in the worst hell in our lifetimes. Am I a United States citizen? Do I have the right to vote? Does my education mean nothing? Consent to sex is my right -- all else is sexual abuse.
Thank you so very much for this article, and for consistently going out of your way to stand up for women's rights. You have no idea what it means to have men step up and stand with women and be willing to take responsibility for making positive changes for women. I would like to refer many white males to you to learn something from you about this. I really like that you went out of your way to give men a strong message that "Men created this violence, and men must be the first to dismantle it". Although I do agree with Solemna that since men benefit from the violence and patriarchy, they are not likely to be the first to dismantle it, I do believe it is so important that you went out of your way to give that strong message that men must step up and take responsibility for women's rights and be in the fight! Thank you for using your powerful platform as a man to get this across. It really means a lot. More men should do this. I will post this article on my Facebook and invite men to get louder and more involved in standing up for women's rights.
I do think there are more men are out there that want to speak out for women's rights but they need to be much louder about it right now. I feel this way because back in 2017, it was transformative for me to experience the first Women's March on Washington DC. I believe that there were over 500,000 people there. No one realized it would be that big. Tears were streaming down my cheeks as I didn't realize how many PEOPLE were in solidarity with women and women identified people's rights. I saw thousands of men standing with women holding signs and chanting, "Her Body, Her Choice". Before this, I didn't think that many men cared. I didn't realize there were that many men that felt this way. It was incredible to me to see how many men showed up! We have to keep on holding public rallies/protests and keep on calling men in to keep on joining and speak out!
I am trying not to get bogged down in cynicism. I know that male loyalty and network is very powerful and the way that men cover for each other when it comes to violence and oppression of women is out of control. But from that experience with the Women's March, I believe there are still thousands of men out there that really do care about women having choices, equity and equality. I'm going to hold on to that hope and keep on believing there are PEOPLE out there who are going to stand up and fight. The consequences are too dire not to!
When women, women identified people, LGBTIQ+ people are healthy, have autonomy, live safely, and have choices, the entire community thrives. I don't know what else to say. I'm so overwhelmed by the hate from this "Christian" nationalist movement. There's nothing Christian about it. It's just about hate, and power, and keeping anyone but cisgender white males out of the workforce and public life so that they can exclusively control resources, jobs and people. I know a lot of Christians who don't agree with them but it's so important for EVERYONE to speak out loud and clear!
Okay Qasim. These attacks on women's "rights" have never changed. The laws enacted to give them rights were never seriously considered. It's because of this deaf, dumb and blind attitude that women still don't report rape, sexual abuse, domestic abuse in the numbers that represent the true nature and number of these crimes. If some females still want to live the life of "barefoot and pregnant" there's nothing anybody can do. Yet those that don't are actually the ones that those women attack! Seems weird I know but either some women are still raised to accept this or are forced to accept this. NO MATTER HOW MANY LAWS THAT ARE PASSED TO PROTECT WOMENS RIGHTS, IT WILL ALWAYS BE THIS WAY. As we are seeing now that laws that are still left on the books, not many, are still being broken. What's next I wonder? A reverse "Handmaiden", not sure how that will look but there was a incident a few years ago where a woman cut off her husbands penis because he was "unfaithful." Her last name was Bobbitt and thereafter the threat of bobbitt haunted most men that I'm sure they slept with one eye open.
I am offended that CNN even gave the time of day to Doug Wilson. He’s self taught and apparently “self-ordained.” Sounds like a cult leader to me. Every cult leader I have ever read about has used religion as an excuse to subjugate women for sex. Why on earth did CNN
Legitimize him by airing that interview in the first place.
I was raised in a fundamentalist Christian home and was subjected to regular sexual violence. When I left the religion at 17, it was a matter of life and death for me, and it felt like pure, exhilirating freedom to escape. Even so, my mother and five of my six brothers rallied around my perpetrator to protect him. More than 30 years on from the day I left, it is a daily experience of dread to see my country fall into the grip of men who think, believe, and act like the people I grew up with. Thank you for your full-throated defense of women, and for showing by example how men can stand up and fight along side us.
Men created this violence, and men must be the first to dismantle it.
I agree with 99.9% of the statement. But men will not be the first to dismantle it because too many men benefit from patriarchy and the violence that is inherent within it.
Men AND women who truly believe that egalitarian society is better for everyone will be those who dismantle it.
And it is we women who have to once again, demand no less for ourselves and our daughters.
Women were property, in a slightly higher category than slaves, until the 1870s saw a raft of married women's property acts, whose significance passes one by as a history student cramming for exams at age 15, is appreciated as one contemplates marriage ten years later and whose long tendrils can come to be despised as one reaches a ripe old age and realises, perhaps for the first time, that a woman is something that he will never himself own.
Until the MWP acts, women could not own property, not such as was registered anywhere. If they wanted to contract a deal, they needed their husband's permission. For the same money, they could pledge his credit. In the days before electronic IDs, it was close-knit society that regulated the coming-into-existence, dealings, goings-about and, above all, reputations of women. Men were free as birds, women were tied to a perch. Then came war.
The exigencies of the First World War were that cannon fodder required to go to the front and women of certain social status required to step up. The higher status women were enjoined to "feather" the cowardly men who would not fight and battle at home for their own votes. WWI saw the first major influx into vital manufacturing of the female sex. Without them, the war effort would have dwindled. The two consequences of this for posterity were (a) the few men who returned after hostilities had ceased, needed a job, and (b) (at least at the time) you need a woman and also a man to produce offspring. The fall in population was somewhat matched by the fall in manufacturing output, which no one especially noticed at the time, other than the capitalists, who were horrified. The mint they had made through armaments would now fall to dust.
I don't know if anyone has ever calculated how much money sank with the Titanic. Not in its hold, but in its first-class passenger lounges. Quite a bit, actually. The post-WWI period was that in which the mantra of producing what people don't need for them to buy with money they don't have earned in jobs they do need to pay for what they don't need started. And, that was an equation that missed one element at the time: ironically, manpower.
The capitalists, who don't keep minutes of their meetings but stay abreast of common developments, ARE SUPPOSED (he says cautiously) to have encouraged the advancement of women's rights in the wake of the grant to them of suffrage. Women always did earn a lower wage than men and the idea was that encouraging women to stand up for themselves, to do just as good a job as a man can (at the lower wage, of course), to defy traditional models of the nuclear family, of the stay-at-home mother, of apple pie, if you like, and get out there to earn a wage like any man can would see the burgeoning of a new, ready-made source of labour that could be tapped and left lying at a whim (the implications of a welfare state came as an annoyance to that formula). So they did (encourage them). Women's liberation was nurtured by the capitalists, who not only wanted to avoid labour shortages for their factories but also put downward pressure on wages generally. To a capitalist, a wage is an unnecessary overhead.
So, your guess is as good as mine: why are women now being accorded less value? Well, working women tend to have fewer children and to have them later in life, and with computerisation, factories nowadays need more consumers than they do workforce.
The word 'company' comes from Latin and means 'those with whom we take bread'. Ironic, in a way. It's not supposed to mean 'and tell us what bread to eat'.
It's been going on for ten thousand years! Thank you for your advocacy for women. I was wondering if any men were going to do it or if women were going to have to defend themselves alone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C12SwHLtAAg
Revolting. But as old as the Patriarchy. No matter, you cannot control the Feminine. It won't work. We are not going backwards.
Horrified that this is even a part of today’s conversation! It seems like we are just going backwards!
In early '70s, I joined N.O.W., to fight for women's rights, the E.R.A., support Roe vs Wade. I took my 2 young daughters to rallies, marches in D.C., on the Freedom train to Illinois. I thought our work was done. Now I'm 80, my daughters in their 50s, and we're living in the worst hell in our lifetimes. Am I a United States citizen? Do I have the right to vote? Does my education mean nothing? Consent to sex is my right -- all else is sexual abuse.
Women Do Not Owe Men Sex.
Women’s Bodily Autonomy Is A Human Right.
Fuck Patriarchy.
Thank you so very much for this article, and for consistently going out of your way to stand up for women's rights. You have no idea what it means to have men step up and stand with women and be willing to take responsibility for making positive changes for women. I would like to refer many white males to you to learn something from you about this. I really like that you went out of your way to give men a strong message that "Men created this violence, and men must be the first to dismantle it". Although I do agree with Solemna that since men benefit from the violence and patriarchy, they are not likely to be the first to dismantle it, I do believe it is so important that you went out of your way to give that strong message that men must step up and take responsibility for women's rights and be in the fight! Thank you for using your powerful platform as a man to get this across. It really means a lot. More men should do this. I will post this article on my Facebook and invite men to get louder and more involved in standing up for women's rights.
I do think there are more men are out there that want to speak out for women's rights but they need to be much louder about it right now. I feel this way because back in 2017, it was transformative for me to experience the first Women's March on Washington DC. I believe that there were over 500,000 people there. No one realized it would be that big. Tears were streaming down my cheeks as I didn't realize how many PEOPLE were in solidarity with women and women identified people's rights. I saw thousands of men standing with women holding signs and chanting, "Her Body, Her Choice". Before this, I didn't think that many men cared. I didn't realize there were that many men that felt this way. It was incredible to me to see how many men showed up! We have to keep on holding public rallies/protests and keep on calling men in to keep on joining and speak out!
I am trying not to get bogged down in cynicism. I know that male loyalty and network is very powerful and the way that men cover for each other when it comes to violence and oppression of women is out of control. But from that experience with the Women's March, I believe there are still thousands of men out there that really do care about women having choices, equity and equality. I'm going to hold on to that hope and keep on believing there are PEOPLE out there who are going to stand up and fight. The consequences are too dire not to!
When women, women identified people, LGBTIQ+ people are healthy, have autonomy, live safely, and have choices, the entire community thrives. I don't know what else to say. I'm so overwhelmed by the hate from this "Christian" nationalist movement. There's nothing Christian about it. It's just about hate, and power, and keeping anyone but cisgender white males out of the workforce and public life so that they can exclusively control resources, jobs and people. I know a lot of Christians who don't agree with them but it's so important for EVERYONE to speak out loud and clear!
Okay Qasim. These attacks on women's "rights" have never changed. The laws enacted to give them rights were never seriously considered. It's because of this deaf, dumb and blind attitude that women still don't report rape, sexual abuse, domestic abuse in the numbers that represent the true nature and number of these crimes. If some females still want to live the life of "barefoot and pregnant" there's nothing anybody can do. Yet those that don't are actually the ones that those women attack! Seems weird I know but either some women are still raised to accept this or are forced to accept this. NO MATTER HOW MANY LAWS THAT ARE PASSED TO PROTECT WOMENS RIGHTS, IT WILL ALWAYS BE THIS WAY. As we are seeing now that laws that are still left on the books, not many, are still being broken. What's next I wonder? A reverse "Handmaiden", not sure how that will look but there was a incident a few years ago where a woman cut off her husbands penis because he was "unfaithful." Her last name was Bobbitt and thereafter the threat of bobbitt haunted most men that I'm sure they slept with one eye open.
I am offended that CNN even gave the time of day to Doug Wilson. He’s self taught and apparently “self-ordained.” Sounds like a cult leader to me. Every cult leader I have ever read about has used religion as an excuse to subjugate women for sex. Why on earth did CNN
Legitimize him by airing that interview in the first place.
Thank you!
Was lstening to David Sirota's podcasts on the collapse of male friendship in America that makes an interesting parallel to this story
"The Male Friendship Collapse": https://www.levernews.com/the-male-friendship-collapse/
Includes a link Sam Graham-Felsen’s New York Times article referenced in this episode
"Where Have All My Deep Male Friencships Gone?": https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/25/magazine/male-friendships.html
David Sirota’s full interview with journalist Sam Graham-Felsen on the far-reaching political implications of the male loneliness crisis:"Why Everybody Should Care That Men are Losing Their Deep Friendships": https://www.levernews.com/why-everybody-should-care-that-men-are-losing-their-deep-friendships/
Cruel Christianity!
I was raised in a fundamentalist Christian home and was subjected to regular sexual violence. When I left the religion at 17, it was a matter of life and death for me, and it felt like pure, exhilirating freedom to escape. Even so, my mother and five of my six brothers rallied around my perpetrator to protect him. More than 30 years on from the day I left, it is a daily experience of dread to see my country fall into the grip of men who think, believe, and act like the people I grew up with. Thank you for your full-throated defense of women, and for showing by example how men can stand up and fight along side us.
My sympathy for your past experiences. Hopefully the rest of your life will be much happier.
And we will tell them to eff off, in no uncertain terms.
Men created this violence, and men must be the first to dismantle it.
I agree with 99.9% of the statement. But men will not be the first to dismantle it because too many men benefit from patriarchy and the violence that is inherent within it.
Men AND women who truly believe that egalitarian society is better for everyone will be those who dismantle it.
And it is we women who have to once again, demand no less for ourselves and our daughters.
I really appreciate that you said all this. Thank you Solemna.
Women were property, in a slightly higher category than slaves, until the 1870s saw a raft of married women's property acts, whose significance passes one by as a history student cramming for exams at age 15, is appreciated as one contemplates marriage ten years later and whose long tendrils can come to be despised as one reaches a ripe old age and realises, perhaps for the first time, that a woman is something that he will never himself own.
Until the MWP acts, women could not own property, not such as was registered anywhere. If they wanted to contract a deal, they needed their husband's permission. For the same money, they could pledge his credit. In the days before electronic IDs, it was close-knit society that regulated the coming-into-existence, dealings, goings-about and, above all, reputations of women. Men were free as birds, women were tied to a perch. Then came war.
The exigencies of the First World War were that cannon fodder required to go to the front and women of certain social status required to step up. The higher status women were enjoined to "feather" the cowardly men who would not fight and battle at home for their own votes. WWI saw the first major influx into vital manufacturing of the female sex. Without them, the war effort would have dwindled. The two consequences of this for posterity were (a) the few men who returned after hostilities had ceased, needed a job, and (b) (at least at the time) you need a woman and also a man to produce offspring. The fall in population was somewhat matched by the fall in manufacturing output, which no one especially noticed at the time, other than the capitalists, who were horrified. The mint they had made through armaments would now fall to dust.
I don't know if anyone has ever calculated how much money sank with the Titanic. Not in its hold, but in its first-class passenger lounges. Quite a bit, actually. The post-WWI period was that in which the mantra of producing what people don't need for them to buy with money they don't have earned in jobs they do need to pay for what they don't need started. And, that was an equation that missed one element at the time: ironically, manpower.
The capitalists, who don't keep minutes of their meetings but stay abreast of common developments, ARE SUPPOSED (he says cautiously) to have encouraged the advancement of women's rights in the wake of the grant to them of suffrage. Women always did earn a lower wage than men and the idea was that encouraging women to stand up for themselves, to do just as good a job as a man can (at the lower wage, of course), to defy traditional models of the nuclear family, of the stay-at-home mother, of apple pie, if you like, and get out there to earn a wage like any man can would see the burgeoning of a new, ready-made source of labour that could be tapped and left lying at a whim (the implications of a welfare state came as an annoyance to that formula). So they did (encourage them). Women's liberation was nurtured by the capitalists, who not only wanted to avoid labour shortages for their factories but also put downward pressure on wages generally. To a capitalist, a wage is an unnecessary overhead.
So, your guess is as good as mine: why are women now being accorded less value? Well, working women tend to have fewer children and to have them later in life, and with computerisation, factories nowadays need more consumers than they do workforce.
The word 'company' comes from Latin and means 'those with whom we take bread'. Ironic, in a way. It's not supposed to mean 'and tell us what bread to eat'.
Oh Debra, that was a given. MAGA just can't get past their white, male, sucky selves.