How we’ve dealt with stagnant wages

[TomViolenz]

-

[H20nly]

the way we live changes... i.e. evolves, for better or worse. women fought for the right to proudly go to work and earn. in doing so have somewhat lost the ability to proudly stay home and raise their children. that's considered a luxury now. it's the more money = more problems equation. trade offs happen all the time as we subtly take part in the ebb flow of it. one day we look back and say what happened to ________. sometimes that's good... some times... not so much.

[Samuel L. Jizzle]

I feel saddend that I have to point out to you that those things are not mutualy exclusive.

People in power use any hard to avoid political development and turn it to their own favor by muddying the waters and directing it with funding. (That's how they stay in power )

It's like the attacks on the EPA, Global Warming, terrorists, children, freedom...etc. With enough spin, you can spin anything to develop in the way you like it. As we all know, 5 fanatics slipping through lax airport security some 12.5 years ago, means that the state is now entitled to know EVERYTHING about me. See how that works?!

So: Womens lib was NOT a conspiracy, but poweful people certainly conspired to use it in their favor, once it had gotten started. As they always do!

No need to feel saddened, we're just talking here.

Like you said this all boils down to how you want to define "conspiracy", but I would think that a bunch of shady banksters plotting to push a seemingly positive agenda in order to undermine all of western civilisation would qualify. And there is a fundamental difference between using an isolated incident as a justification for action (whether to not it was a false flag), and using your political and financial weight to turn a micro-movement into a full-fledged revolution.

Women's lib only succeeded with the help of those banksters, who rather than subverting the movement simply encouraged it, knowing full well how detrimental it would be to common men and women alike. Never forget that the goal of both the Rockefeller's and the WLM was the same: To see more women with jobs, no longer taking care of their offspring.

This is hardly comparable to 9/11.

That is, unless you believe that the US government's endgame involves fundamentalist Islam annihilating all of Westianity for its sins.

[Samuel L. Jizzle]

But concerning womens lib. Does it even matter?!
Is your desire to roll that back?! Are you of the opinion that they should have known their place and stay unliberated?!
And I also find it important to re-state that in the light of the OP, womens lib is just one of many factors in that development.

This is a loaded question, but I'd argue that calling it a "liberation" is massively dishonest. As we have seen in this thread, women today are wage-slaves who are as free to not work as they are to starve. What should be done today is a political question, so obviously I won't be getting into that here, but I will say that from an economic and historical perspective, women's "liberation" has observably done more to harm women than it has to free them.

[TomViolenz]

-

[TomViolenz]

-

[TomViolenz]

-

[beats me]

I think at this point in history society demanding we still produce offspring is a conspiracy.

[H20nly]

I was sure I had written something as a response, but it seems to have disappeared, strange...

What I wanted to say is, that the word evolution implies an inevitable development. And this was not inevitable, as you can see in many countries all over the world that exist today.

you misquoted at the top of the page... you added your comment before mine and after lowshelf's. i read it though...

evolution implies "inevitable development" when looking forward... or looking at a species... when looking back though you can see evolution as how something happened. that past is not inevitable, the past simply is.
i agree with the gist of what you're saying but you're hyper focusing on my choice of words... still the woman's position as clerk, CEO, mechanic, or business owner of today all came from hunter gather, mother, farmer, cook, and other home-centric tasks... so in this sense i still see it as evolution even if it is not what i meant.

i'm not trying to take anything away from women that they fought for... but while we're on the subject why is a man [still] a loser if he doesn't offer to pay for dinner?
the double standards are ripe with this topic and just waiting for tangents and flame wars... so with that said

[beats me]

Here’s some timely news

http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/06/news/co ... ce=cnn_bin

Another point the doc made is all the labor union busting and demonizing has also contributed to the decline of the middle class. Corporations and the news media have done a top notch job convincing people that labor unions are a cancer on the working force to even those who would benefit from them. Throw in high unemployment and you get “At least those assholes have a job! They should STFU” mentality.

[TomViolenz]

-

[TomViolenz]

-

[beats me]

Here’s some timely news

http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/06/news/co ... ce=cnn_bin

Another point the doc made is all the labor union busting and demonizing has also contributed to the decline of the middle class. Corporations and the news media have done a top notch job convincing people that labor unions are a cancer on the working force to even those who would benefit from them. Throw in high unemployment and you get “At least those assholes have a job! They should STFU” mentality.

I think this is a "conspiracy" as well. It's a masterpiece of deception, but they manage time and time again to turn the people who benefit from something, to directly oppose it!
Unions (IMO of course ) are a big reason why western Europe is so much more social than the US!

The powers that be have successfully convinced us that people of different political affiliation, religious belief, race, or economic level are some kind of Voltron collective mass roaming the land destroying everything in its path instead of individual people who might have more in common with us than they don’t.

[TomViolenz]

-

[Samuel L. Jizzle]

"liberated" women