How could feminism have been suppressed in western society?

It all began with secularism. The bible teaches that the wife must obey the husband. Also, the pill.

If you call yourself a conservative and you're against religion, you're an utter moron. Religion was the only thing containing women's natural, whorish instincts. Just thought I'd say that.

Roll back the industrial revolution.

Because they saw those roles as imposition and nothing something they actually decided on their own.

>why did women reject their role as mothers and wives?

When?

For what reason?

After WWII women never left the work force. The women that were in the workfoce still needed to prepare food and clean house, and raise the children thus the advent of the multibillion dollar cleaning industry as well as the food economy we all know today, that of convenience. Say goodbye to homecooked meals, its time to take shortcuts. With all of these conveniences, there is no need for a woman to stay home all day, her kids are in school, all she has to do for meal is to assemble or bake it in the oven. So women have nothing to do, no purpose and are bored so they go out in the workforce so that their lives can have 'meaning' (they get to make money just like their husband!). now we have more competition for jobs, not enough jobs, not enough money being produced by two working individuals to take care of themselves and their family.

Now that men and women are basically the same and the role of the woman as mother and wife has been decimated we find a sexual freedom amongst people coupled with birth control. So what we have is pointless sex with no reason, except to pass on numerous fluids between each other potentially getting diseases, and passing them on.
Check out the HPV debate going on right now. get your kid vaccinated for an STD! you know they are going to have more sex than you ever did, so why not protect them early on? You know they are going to have sex earlier than you ever did, and more of it, in more ways.

So, how do you suppress feminism? keep motherhood and wifehood a job. Get rid of convienence for the sake of 'equality and advancement'. Sometimes you just have to do things right, and that means doing it old fashioned. and that means time. which means you might not be able to watch that tv show.

I doubt that it could have.

Beside First and Second Wave feminism brought you porn and wonderful things like BC.

Its the Third wavers that are the problem.

But women were never out of the workforce before industry.

The norm is not for women to not produce things of economic value. That has only ever been the norm for the upper class, and even then it's only gendered because men are capable of fighting, there are plenty of idle men in those classes too; and it's the ideal for upwardly mobile people for reasons I don't really understand. I mean, they must want to be like the cool kids.

Redpill me on first, second and third wave feminism pls?

What percentage of people are feminists?

What percentage of feminists are third wave?

The First Wave are generally credited with the right to vote, and made early inroads for women to be able to work.

Second wave dealt with sexual freedoms after WWII, and allowed more women into the workforce and pretty much established women as equals to men in legal standing.

Third wave is the bullshit were dealing with now, women whom have benefited from the first two waves, have just as many or more rights than men but are demanding more, while asking to sacrifice nothing.

The terms deal with generational effects, not percentages.

Almost all of the First Wave feminists are dead.

>The terms deal with generational effects, not percentages.

Then you're saying that the feminists of today are third-wave?

All of them are third wave.

And they are all interested in getting more rights than men.

Yes?

First wave feminism was mostly moving for equality towards the law. These ones brought about things like voting rights and if you're a burger they also had a hand in prohibition, funny enough.

Second wave feminism was more focused on the social expectations placed on women. Classy bitches like Beauvoir are categorized here. Many in this group were also responsible for sexual freedom and birth control so if you're a hardcore conservative I think your grievances with Feminism actually begin here.

Third wave is honestly pretty crazy but it's hard to tell how much of it can strictly be called "feminism" anymore as the subjects addressed by them are often broader in scope. To me it almost seems like a snarl word where any crazy bullshit leaking out of a social sciences department is labelled "3rd wave".

Because in non western societies even if law avails women's rights people will chimp out on them by rape, assault or murder

I'm a conservative because I hate mass immigration of savages, welfare, pandering and the normalization of mental illness.
Why would I give a fuck about women being slutty? they fuck me.

Educated women sometimes want to explore careers and other pursuits that are incompatible with traditional female roles.

Women dont have whorish natures. They need to be picky about the men because they are the one who needs to take care of the baby if the man runs away

This.

But if you think women brought this about you're wrong. The same way black lives matter was founded by that old white guy who is housing that young black kid who was trying to be the face of BLM, feminism started the same way. The old rich guys funded feminism and riled them up.

The benefits of this is that you take the women away from the children, further allowing the children to be raised by the state with thorough indoctrination, plus you get to double the tax on the household.

Basically feminism started because of money.

By not treating women like shit to begin with?

youtube.com/watch?v=zCpjmvaIgNA

spooky

Probably by not treating women like shit.

That's just my two cents

youtube.com/watch?v=zCpjmvaIgNA

spooky

I'm a conservative and i absolutely recognize and appreciate religions value in instilling core morals and cultural unity.

I think anyone who actually believes in a supernatural entity is retarded.

Men are literally more whore like than women

Oy vey boyim, every woman was raped 6 billion times a day

/pol/ criticizes unrealistic statistics than thinks Stalin purposefully with strong intent killed 10 million people in the Holodomor is realistic.

Guess who is disproportionally voting in favor of said policies?

heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/01/24/why-are-women-more-liberal-than-men/

They do. In nature the female is fertilized by many different males. They are biologically programmed to welcome rape. Eggs are expensive, spermatozoids are cheap, etc.

>anyone who actually believes in a supernatural entity is retarded.
Agreed but this comes with a price. Keep it in private.

No.

Only that's not why God commanded women to be behind men. Women are commanded to be behind men, because of the simple fact evil exists.

What feminists, liberals, and general blind followers of women's lib don't understand is that there will be men out there who will see a women attempting to be strong and exploit it. Men who are evil enough to exploit the females relative weakness.

So the command to have women behind men is for the women's own good because there are men who would not hesitate to put a female to the ground. If a female is your protection, essentially if she plays the roll of your wall for protection, it can be over come easily, leaving everything behind her susceptible.

It's part of the curse. She deserves freedom without question, but the world will over come her with ease. So God essentially addresses this fact with a realistic and wise teaching-

Get behind the man.

Now in turn, the man is also commanded to be a good man. It's the man that doesn't understand the teachings that uses this law as a reason to beat and act superior to the female etc etc.

Yes

God shouldn't have engineered evil as a selling point then.

Shitty demiurge.

Chivalry is dead shut the fuck up

Yeah but evil is only a problem if you don't know how to handle it. It's synonymous with the dark and separate from the light, the dark is in turn synonymous with ignorance because without light to shed onto anything, you are unable to perceive the truth and understandings. All of this though, it goes past what we see physically because it directly effects ideals which aren't physical. With all that said though, you get the purpose of Christ though. Man has issues with sin, God has offered a way to escape it. Love and believe in His Son. You love His Son, you love righteousness and love itself. Which is evils opposition.

If you're under the impression that God or the teachings of Christ are intrusive or oppressive, then that's only a product of a personal structure of belief in which you were baited to form in order to separate you from your Creator and father. Love, unconditional love, the love that's needed for the very concept of forgiveness, is everything but oppressive, its understanding and patient in relation to the lessons needed in order for an individual to learn and adjust.

He makes a mistake, he isn't just disposed of. He's forgiven until he figures out how to adjust and correct. The amount of forgiveness and mercy is insurmountable in true unconditional love, which God is.

>letting women vote
>good

That has nothing to do with the discussion
You just wanted to get your daily whine about
>muh /pol/

This is the real answer.

making fornication illegal again

Go look at newspapers at the time feminism is literally described as a religious movement.
Just like Christ cucks saying refugees welcome today in Europe

Only a weakling needs the word of Gods to rule his woman. Patriarchal societies existed before the Christians whom were feminists themselves.

ahhhh the conservative wet dream. When there was no vacations, no day off's, everybody was working 18h per day and making a few changes as sallary

>>

Kill yourself

Why would you want to suppress a movement that's been mostly good?

>this whole thread

No. You kill yourself. You /pol/tards and overall people with that kind of mentality are on verge of extenction. Either accepet the world is changing and things will never be the same or kill yourself.
Veeky Forums is one of the last bastions you dumb turds still have control.

what the FUCK does this thread have to do with HISTORY or HUMANITIES?? take your circle jerk back to your containment board faggot

>good

1/10 because I responded

>How could feminism have been suppressed in western society?

It couldn't have been because women convinced too many men it was a good idea.

And as always when men have an idea they put it into fruition.

Men wanted women to become whores obsessed with their careers?

I doubt the men knew what they where getting themselves into when they fought for the voting rights of women

>Men wanted women to become whores obsessed with their careers?

You really think that's how it was pitched?

Making apple pie was a bit to much.

Feminism is a logical consequence of the enlightenment. Arguments that certain groups of people should have privileges as a special case just doesn't hold up without the cultural mythology of the pre industrial era. I think even China and Russia would head down these paths eventually because the structure of liberal capitalism itself necessarily erodes the homely security of nepotism and in group bonding, because they're ultimately more about a sense of security and power than efficiency or profit. I would not be surprised if plants were considered to have a basic form of sentience in 3000AD and given rights. It sounds fucking stupid, just like the treatment of cargots in the middle ages seems totally unjustified today. Feminism already won, nigger. If the men in the late 19th century didn't stop it, then they're sure as fuck not going to today.

Islam is our only hope desu

My sexual instincts can outwhore a woman any day of the week. I have no idea how a sane human being can think women are the most promiscuous sex. If anything they should put out more.

I am a feminist, and the fact that the biggest opponents to feminism are radical Islam, neoreactionary atheist neckbeards and Christian patriotards makes me support it even more. I'll take a fat lesbian with dyed hair over that shit any day of the week.

late 19th-early 20th century feminists were Christian.

Did you want a gold star or something?

Not him, but I am a liberal, and I'm still opposed to large swathes of the feminist project, because some of their goals are just flat out retarded, or involve some insane authoritarian and statist measure that I cannot for the life of me agree to without violating my liberal principles.

Such as the fact that I should be forced to subsidize the negative externalities of every stupid choice women make in their lives.

How does it feel knowing that two of your enemies, Christians and Muslims, will out breed you and likely erase many of your gains in 100 years?

>disagree with right wing echo chamber
>durr ur so snowflake xd

Mary Wollstonecraft was the first feminist she wanted women to be educated because back in the day they were only taught to cook, clean, and rear children so it's her fault that it came over to the West. I will give her credit because she did specify that she did not know if men were the superior sex because back in her day they weren't educated enough to know who was smarter and better. That battle has been waged and is now over... I think we all know who the victors are.

Outbreed what? "Nonreligion" is the fastest growing religious stance in the world. Religions aren't species. The fact that some Ahmed has a baby doesn't mean it will be muslim as an adult, especially when raised in a western cilture. I have have no problem getting along with most religious people anyway, because the majority (in the west) pretty much implicitly accept liberalism in their attitudes and behavior even if they don't realize it. It's not some exclusively reactionary thing.

well the feminism movement is tearing itself apart at the moment. it's in its dying stages now. The only reason it's still relevant is due to the media throwing everything they can to keep propping it up.

I used to be the same, but after a while I felt people were conflating feminist media criticism with supporting bans on the work be analyzed. So often I heard people say "Anita wants to ban GTA" and I could never get an actual quote promoting it. When I read into feminist literature I learned that the second wave was actually the main pro-censorship burst within feminism, and the third wave was actually accomodating to things like pornography and prostitution even when they were critical of certain tropes.

a new war and a draft

>population trends last for 100 years

>the third wave feminist movement is tearing itself apart at the moment.

It's really not. It's just a popular topic of discussion on the internet at the moment which you spend hours discussing with people who share your views. This shit is like an atheist in 2007 watching theamazingatheist and getting worried that the creationists are going to turn america into a theocracy. MRAs have also suffered cultural backlash and in a few years everyone will look back on this shit and cringe.

Except many liberals and former feminists also criticism feminism.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe they have a point and they're not just "hateee" women for the sake of it.

3rd wave feminism is focused garnering as
much privileges for Women as possible over
men to ensure they succeed.

No shit, some illiberal people and ex-MRAs become feminists too. This isn't revolutionary thinking I never considered, faggot. This is something meaningless anyone can say in any argument.

I'd be stupid if I was on Veeky Forums and though misogyny wasn't a big part of opposition to feminism. I wouldn't say every anti feminist is a misogynist, no.

>unironically blaming soggy knee

Do you think people hate Obama cause he's black too?

>literally every atheist society is dying
>Amish and Muslims pop out kids 24/7

>with the exception of Japan.
Bullshit, Japan feels pretty strongly about traditional gender roles.
Singapore, on the other hand...

>mostly good?
It's been at the very least shit and at most downright evil

The problem with Anita Sarkeesian isn't that she wants to censor video games, it's that she believes video games actually has an effect on people's real lives; a sentiment that has been thoroughly debunked by the people who did studies on whether or not violent video games cause violence in real life.

>second wave
>pro-porn
>third wave
>anti-porn

Compare Andrea Dworkin to Wendy McElroy and come back to me

>implying birth control was good

>Because they saw those roles as imposition
When they majoritariluy chose to dco it, it's not an imposition. They only abandoned it once they tasted what it felt like to shirk their responsibilities and lay them at the feet of men while still keeping men under their responsibilities

>I am a feminist
Quit pretending theirs a good or valid reason to be one

This, it's actually pretty eye opening to see how feminists across history have almost universally been ugly bull dykes

She didn't say they cause violence, she said they often reinforce sexist tropes, and would say the same thing about most other mediums. Anita and Jack Thompson actually hate each other.

>studies show I'm correct

Nice citation. The actual consensus on how media affects behavior is really mixed and I'm undecided, but let's say even if some games did influence violent behavior, I would still be against banning them. The Bible and other older mediums certainly inspired a degree of violence back in the day, along with charity and conformity. Advertising certainly affects people's behavior even though everyone thinks they're immune to it. Ask any parent if thir kid has copied some dumb shit off TV and the answer will be yes. I would make the important note that some people are obviously more susceptible to copycat shit than others.

>hurry up and agree with me already ;_;

Better than teenage pregnancy

>implying you wouldn't a Simone de Beauvoir

Honestly none of the men who post here are attractive so let's leave that out of this.

>she said they often reinforce sexist tropes

And if it "reinforces" sexist tropes, it can also make people aggressive, and yet every study you can find with a quick Google Scholar search says exactly the opposite.

>atheist societies are dying

They often have the highest standards of livin in the world. You can cry that the sky is falling all day.

Muslim birth rates lower profoundly when they emigrate to the west or gain wealth, just like Europe had a high birth rate back in the day. Birth rates are primarily not a racial or religious thing, but correlate with standards of living.

FYI there aren't even a billion Arabs in the world. China on the other hand has a massive atheist population

You do realize google tailors your search results to match shit you already agree with? Pulling up a paper on the internet dies nothing to indicate scientific consensus anyway unless its a meta analysis. But you're scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard there to try and make Anita sound like she's supporting the caricature you ascribe to her.

That's really ironic that you're arguing that scientific papers don't matter, and yet the ramblings of a feminist dyke on Youtube is somehow authoritative.

Maybe you should fuck off back to Tumblr.

What "scientific papers" and in what context, in argument

Speak for yourself. I've been complimented multiple times by women on my attractiveness and I'm Veeky Forums

Have some perspective for crying out loud!
>late 19th-early 20th century feminists were Christian
So they used the religion card and society fell for it? Fine, but since then feminism has taken a radical atheist, pagan and anti-clerical turn. If anything, they can't use that card anymore because of the precedent. And now it's our turn to used it against them. Who are the only major orgs in civil society today that dare stand against feminism? Atheists orgs? Neopagan orgs? No, traditional catholics, orthodox and conservative evangelicals are the only ones. And they have a large following...

I mean, you recognize that feminism is an evil. So what are you going to do about it? Complain and do nothing? Then by all means, don't let me distract you from that. But if you actually want to do something about it, in order to make any change in society you need a large support base. Where will you find this? Veeky Forums? Atheist meetings? Good luck with that. But if you are able to swallow your pride, think tactically and see one inch ahead of your nose you will notice that conservative Christian are your (only?) ally againt feminism, and the only one capable of influencing large portions of society. Distance yourselves further away, and push Christiniaty into the hands of the leftists and feminists some more, and see where you stand. Isolated and irrelevant.