Do you as a Muslim believe in women's equality?

[Robert.Evans]

Search Results

1. Single-Parent Families Cause Juvenile Crime (From ...
   NCJRS Abstract - National Criminal Justice Reference Service
   by RL Maginnis - ‎1997
   How to Obtain Documents. NCJ Number: NCJ 167327 Find in a Library. Title: Single-Parent Families Cause Juvenile Crime(From Juvenile Crime: Opposing ...

"
Children from single-parent families are more likely to have behavioral problems because they tend to lack economic security and adequate time with parents.:

added with


Feminism partly to blame for family breakdown, says Diane ...
The Telegraph - Telegraph online, Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph - Telegraph › Women › Women's Politics

4 Jan 2013 - The breakdown of the family can be partly blamed onfeminism, the feminist Labour MP Diane Abbott has suggested. ... Affairs: It's never the wife's fault · Baroness Shirley Williams in Westminster. Baroness Williams has ...

 

[Robert.Evans]

added with:
Children from single-parent families are more likely to have behavioral problems because they tend to lack economic security and adequate time with parents.
Abstract: The Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency reports that the most reliable indicator of violent crime in a community is the proportion of fatherless families. Fathers typically offer economic stability, a role model for boys, greater household security, and reduced stress for mothers. This is especially true for families with adolescent boys, the most crime-prone cohort. Children from single-parent families are more prone than children from two-parent families to use drugs, be gang members, be expelled from school, be committed to reform institutions, and become juvenile murderers. Single parenthood inevitably reduces the amount of time a child has in interaction with someone who is attentive to the child's needs, including the provision of moral guidance and discipline. According to a 1993 Metropolitan Life Survey, "Violence in America's Public Schools," 71 percent of teachers and 90 percent of law enforcement officials state that the lack of parental supervision at home is a major factor that contributes to the violence in schools. Sixty-one percent of elementary students and 76 percent of secondary children agree with this assessment.
Main Term(s): Juvenile delinquent family relations

NCJRS Abstract - National Criminal Justice Reference Service

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Search Results

1. Single-Parent Families Cause Juvenile Crime (From ...
   NCJRS Abstract - National Criminal Justice Reference Service
   by RL Maginnis - ‎1997
   How to Obtain Documents. NCJ Number: NCJ 167327 Find in a Library. Title: Single-Parent Families Cause Juvenile Crime(From Juvenile Crime: Opposing ...

"
Children from single-parent families are more likely to have behavioral problems because they tend to lack economic security and adequate time with parents.:

added with


Feminism partly to blame for family breakdown, says Diane ...
The Telegraph - Telegraph online, Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph - Telegraph › Women › Women's Politics

4 Jan 2013 - The breakdown of the family can be partly blamed onfeminism, the feminist Labour MP Diane Abbott has suggested. ... Affairs: It's never the wife's fault · Baroness Shirley Williams in Westminster. Baroness Williams has ...

Point to consider: women...even feminist women... Have been known to carry internalized misogyny from time to time. Abbotts views are certainly hers to own and to claim, but I do not share in her views, and apparently she has stirred the pot, so to speak.

The reason why I do not share her views is here in the states the marriage rates have been getting stronger while feminism has also been seeing a surge in popularity. Divorce rates have seemed to be strongest in the baby boomer generation, while gen x and millenials are seeing marriage differently.

I think it's a generational correlation rather than a feminist causation. Such comments about a movement that has spanned several generations beginning with First Wave are myopic.

Single parent households do carry a larger burden in regards to family members turning to criminal activity more often, though it seems it is due to a stronger tie to poverty than to the absence of an adult gender...poor families with both parents present also find themselves in similar situations overall, so the argument of feminism causing more crime due to it's alleged causation of the nuclear family breakdown doesn't hold much water.

Besides, same sex households with two same sex parents have shown to raise happy, healthy well adjusted children as well as, if not better than, heterosexual marital households.

 

[Draka]

Haha... that is funny. It's I who have the complex hey? funny.

Yeah, it's you that has the complex. It's actually quite apparent to probably everyone but you.

Listen to a women if you like.

1. Feminism partly to blame for family breakdown, says Diane ...
   The Telegraph - Telegraph online, Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph - Telegraph › Women › Women's Politics
   
   4 Jan 2013 - The breakdown of the family can be partly blamed onfeminism, the feminist Labour MP Diane Abbott has suggested. ... Affairs: It's never the wife's fault · Baroness Shirley Williams in Westminster. Baroness Williams has ...

Why should I listen to that woman? She doesn't speak for all women, or all of feminism for that matter. Not to mention that the facts aren't all there. Mystic did a great job at addressing this so I leave it to her.

The question then is do you care about the family?

I believe I have shown that I do. I just don't do or believe the things that you seem to think show that I do based upon your sexist ideals.

 

[dawny0826]

And if someone says you can't? Then you hit the roof and start the rant about I am not just a baby making machine, yeah I know

If you were a proponent for women's rights, protest against discrimination would not ail you.

When we try to change situations around us as feminism did, that is not because you are secure with the situation you see. I think it is largley mens fault that they did not make you feel valued enough as the role of mother and teacher, and take that job to its fullest potential, which is a shame. It is back to the baby making machine again. So then you hate men and have to come out of the house to support yourself to show you don't need a man. The family is in demise, and, though it might be okay for those of a more philosophical educated position, it is not for the lower classes, where most violence occurs.

To the contrary, feminism acknowledges self-worth and the right to individuality, dignity and opportunity. It aims to leverage rights and freedoms for all people, not just women and to make change where purposefully or inadvertently, women (and men) are disadvantaged.

Such concepts make a lot of people squirmy, particularly when there's an element of comfort, familiarity,power and/or control at stake.

I'm required to serve as a positive agent for change within my field of work. Change is constant to remain relevant and capable of providing services. I can attest to the severity of objection that manifests during change.

Some are able to ride the ebbs and flow of change without issue - they're flexible, fluid and adaptive and do not feel threatened by change.

There are different variances in terms of reaction to change. Many are able to communicate their concerns and feelings and move forward to accept it, even if it's not ideal to them. There are others (more than you'd think) who will not let go of anger and resentment. They'll leave the organization or they'll remain, often creating obstacles when change is ushered.

At the heart of the issue, change can be hard. It can be painful. It can alter that which is very meaningful in our lives. Again, it can also threaten stations of power and control.

When looking change head on, particularly when you're an agent for change, a degree of strength and inner security is required due to the adversity that you will face.

Everyone deals with personal insecurities. We're all human. Usually, those who object to feminism, object because they are personally uncomfortable with the change that feminists push for or misunderstand. It threatens something that is important to them, be it, their station of power, their religious views, their own feelings of worth and importance, etc.

I don't hate men.

You are not the first generation feminist are you. You are not throwing fire bombs through windows, that has been done.

I don't personally condone such types of protest.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Greater involvement from fathers equate to happier and healthier children. Insisting that women as mothers are "naturally better" at parenting is a discouragement to fathers overall, whether men are still married or find themselves in a losing battle during custody hearings.

I encourage greater involvement of fathers in the family and the household. If mom is sick, dad can effectively pick up the slack...and vice versa if dad is sick, mom can effectively pick up the slack.

It's a win-win situation for the kids.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Point to consider: women...even feminist women... Have been known to carry internalized misogyny from time to time. Abbotts views are certainly hers to own and to claim, but I do not share in her views, and apparently she has stirred the pot, so to speak.

The reason why I do not share her views is here in the states the marriage rates have been getting stronger while feminism has also been seeing a surge in popularity. Divorce rates have seemed to be strongest in the baby boomer generation, while gen x and millenials are seeing marriage differently.

I think it's a generational correlation rather than a feminist causation. Such comments about a movement that has spanned several generations beginning with First Wave are myopic.

Single parent households do carry a larger burden in regards to family members turning to criminal activity more often, though it seems it is due to a stronger tie to poverty than to the absence of an adult gender...poor families with both parents present also find themselves in similar situations overall, so the argument of feminism causing more crime due to it's alleged causation of the nuclear family breakdown doesn't hold much water.

Besides, same sex households with two same sex parents have shown to raise happy, healthy well adjusted children as well as, if not better than, heterosexual marital households.

I am not surprised that you do not see feminism as the problem. It would have been quite a shock if you had said it was! But as far as I am concerned, it is. It is blatently obvious when you look around. Women will not admit to it, and men won't mention it, and the government just wants women working so they can tax them and stop them having children. It does not make feminism innocent. It is the greatest change in society over the last few decades, and it greatly saddens me that it is women of all people, who have done it.

And as for pointing out a few cases where it might work as an abnormal family unit, the proves nothing. I can knock a nail in with a plane, that does not make it a good idea.

 

[Robert.Evans]

If you were a proponent for women's rights, protest against discrimination would not ail you.

To the contrary, feminism acknowledges self-worth and the right to individuality, dignity and opportunity. It aims to leverage rights and freedoms for all people, not just women and to make change where purposefully or inadvertently, women (and men) are disadvantaged.

no it doesn't. It is about women having more power and money. Sure, now people realise how chavaunistic women actually are, the tables turn, and we see cases where women are called s-xist. So now you have some power, you change your tactics a little to fit in. Anyone who wants to rule has to know how to play the game, *EDIT*.

Such concepts make a lot of people squirmy, particularly when there's an element of comfort, familiarity,power and/or control at stake.

I'm required to serve as a positive agent for change within my field of work. Change is constant to remain relevant and capable of providing services. I can attest to the severity of objection that manifests during change.

Some are able to ride the ebbs and flow of change without issue - they're flexible, fluid and adaptive and do not feel threatened by change.


There are different variances in terms of reaction to change. Many are able to communicate their concerns and feelings and move forward to accept it, even if it's not ideal to them. There are others (more than you'd think) who will not let go of anger and resentment. They'll leave the organization or they'll remain, often creating obstacles when change is ushered.

At the heart of the issue, change can be hard. It can be painful. It can alter that which is very meaningful in our lives. Again, it can also threaten stations of power and control.

When looking change head on, particularly when you're an agent for change, a degree of strength and inner security is required due to the adversity that you will face.

Everyone deals with personal insecurities. We're all human. Usually, those who object to feminism, object because they are personally uncomfortable with the change that feminists push for or misunderstand. It threatens something that is important to them, be it, their station of power, their religious views, their own feelings of worth and importance, etc.

Haha.... wonderful. So all along it was me that was wrong...haha. Good. So now we will say that you cannot have the righ tto vote, and you must stay home and be married. Okay? Or are you now becoming a little insecure and having difficulty with change? haha. When I was younger, that would have gone right over my head. Now I see these things.

I don't personally condone such types of protest.

But you have benefitted from them.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Greater involvement from fathers equate to happier and healthier children.

No problem. So get rid of the feminist attitudes and then they might hand around long enough to do it, rather than showing that they are worthless once you have what you want. We have to look at the masses when we do this you know, the lower classes, not just a small group you know

Insisting that women as mothers are "naturally better" at parenting is a discouragement to fathers overall,

No it is not, it is called being honest. Most men would have no problem with that.

whether men are still married or find themselves in a losing battle during custody hearings.

I encourage greater involvement of fathers in the family and the household. If mom is sick, dad can effectively pick up the slack...and vice versa if dad is sick, mom can effectively pick up the slack.

It's a win-win situation for the kids.

Sure it is. So what? You don't think I can see a man helping out when needed? That is an exception, not the rule.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I am not surprised that you do not see feminism as the problem. It would have been quite a shock if you had said it was! But as far as I am concerned, it is. It is blatently obvious when you look around. Women will not admit to it, and men won't mention it, and the government just wants women working so they can tax them and stop them having children. It does not make feminism innocent. It is the greatest change in society over the last few decades, and it greatly saddens me that it is women of all people, who have done it.

The greatest changes to society was mostly done by the first two waves of feminism, which are much older than the last few decades. I encourage you to research the works from first wave and the historical advancements made for women's equality after women being relegated to the limited opportunities of choosing domestic life or choosing death by extreme poverty, hunger, and illness.

Opening domestic violence shelters due to the advancements from Second Wave also was a societal change in that it established a precedent that spousal abuse...and eventually spousal rape...is not to be tolerated by the whole of the culture. Civil rights for bodily autonomy for women began to be taken more seriously in our courts.

There is still some work to be done, but wives being murdered and raped by their husbands and ex-husbands continue to find a slow decline. Rates are still high, but progress is progress.

And as for pointing out a few cases where it might work as an abnormal family unit, the proves nothing. I can knock a nail in with a plane, that does not make it a good idea.

It certainly proves that a deviation from a social norm does not equate to collapse of civilization.

 

[Robert.Evans]

The greatest changes to society was mostly done by the first two waves of feminism, which are much older than the last few decades. I encourage you to research the works from first wave and the historical advancements made for women's equality after women being relegated to the limited opportunities of choosing domestic life or choosing death by extreme poverty, hunger, and illness.

Opening domestic violence shelters due to the advancements from Second Wave also was a societal change in that it established a precedent that spousal abuse...and eventually spousal rape...is not to be tolerated by the whole of the culture. Civil rights for bodily autonomy for women began to be taken more seriously in our courts.

There is still some work to be done, but wives being murdered and raped by their husbands and ex-husbands continue to find a slow decline. Rates are still high, but progress is progress.



It certainly proves that a deviation from a social norm does not equate to collapse of civilization.

If you are speaking now about violence within relationships, then that is another matter altogether.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

No problem. So get rid of the feminist attitudes and then they might hand around long enough to do it, rather than showing that they are worthless once you have what you want. We have to look at the masses when we do this you know, the lower classes, not just a small group you know

I'm a feminist. Where have I said in this thread that men are worthless?

Dawny is a feminist. Where has she said that men are worthless?

In fact, where has anyone stated in this thread that men are worthless?[/quote]

No it is not, it is called being honest. Most men would have no problem with that.

Have you read anything in the men's rights forum expressing a profound desire to smash the myth of "mother=better parent"? You might be surprised how many men truly desire to be an integral part to their children's daily upbringing and welfare. And I support that.

Sure it is. So what? You don't think I can see a man helping out when needed? That is an exception, not the rule.

It would be beneficial for children IMO that more involved fathers ARE the rule.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

If you are speaking now about violence within relationships, then that is another matter altogether.

In an attempt to return the focus of the thread to Islams take...

There have been numerous Muslim members who have defended the custom of wife-beating for disciplinary measures in a marriage. It would be helpful if we can return the primary focus of thread back to gender equality within the framework of Islam.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I'm a feminist. Where have I said in this thread that men are worthless?

Dawny is a feminist. Where has she said that men are worthless?

In fact, where has anyone stated in this thread that men are worthless?

It is taken from many sources. Are you the only two feminist?
A feminist on UK TV said, we set out to ''destroy the family''. Who would have thought a woman would have said that! Then she said she ''realised that they would need men if they had kids'' like that was a brain wave right? So they we are. First we see that women have a problem with men being in control of them, as they see it, now we also see that clouded their judgement, and also we see that the family is women's domain and not men's. Sure now you have more power freedom and money, so now you can say, hey, may be I will take a slice of that (men) as well.

Have you read anything in the men's rights forum expressing a profound desire to smash the myth of "mother=better parent"? You might be surprised how many men truly desire to be an integral part to their children's daily upbringing and welfare. And I support that.

It would be beneficial for children IMO that more involved fathers ARE the rule.

I am not interested in men's rights or women's rights. We are supposed to be keeping the commands of God. That one might be tough for you eh?

And men getting involved in the family more, good. Till they split up, and then the man goes insane. Hey, but who cares, he's just a man right, not a woman. And that unfotunately is the attitude of women. I wonder if the man always had the kids when they broke up, how many would do so.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I have not read this yet, nor do I know anything abou thim. I post it as I found it in a search:

ike Buchanan, leader of Justice for Men and Boys, told The Independent that feminists "hate men" and accused women of thinking they're "divine creatures".

Buchanan quit the Tory party in 2009, after David Cameron announced support for all-women parliamentary candidate shortlists and has applied himself to promoting anti-feminism, and has written three books on the topic. As well as saying that feminism is "vile", Buchanan and his party also believe that “fatherhood is being systematically removed from society” which means “taxpayers are subsidising sperm banks for single women and lesbians”.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Then there is this off the site:
We consider the denial of fathers’ access to their children following family breakdowns to be nothing less than state-sanctioned emotional abuse of fathers, children, grandparents and others. There are no areas in which the state assaults the human rights of women. The state advantages women over men in many areas, although men collectively pay 72% of the income taxes which largely finance the state.

This is good ol' UK

 

[Parsimony]

It has nothing to do with looking down on things and more to do with what is God given.

So a woman doesn't have a God-given right to have a job or what?

We have roles, and they have worked well for generations.

Inversion of those roles can also work well. If a father is good with children and a mother has a high-paying job, why should there be anything wrong with them flipping stereotypical gender roles? All of a child's needs can be met with this arrangement just as well as with the traditional one.

Now men largely have made the world an easier place to live in, women want a slice of it, because, for some reason, they don't seem to value themselves as women unless they dress and act like men.

What do you mean when you say "act like men"? Having a job? Voting? Joining the military?

 

[Robert.Evans]

Speaking passionately on the subject of fathers' rights, Buchanan said: "Men are stripped out of their families and become walking wallets because that suits the state. It’s a very well documented feminist objective of 40 years to destroy the nuclear family. You only need to go back to Germaine Greer’sbook [The Female Eunuch, 1970] and women like Harriet Harman and Patricia Hewitt have been doing it ever since," he said. "Oh, God they hate men."

'Feminists hate men': Meet Mike Buchanan, the leader of Britain's new Justice for Men and Boys party - People - News - The Independent

 

[Debater Slayer]

no it doesn't. It is about women having more power and money. Sure, now people realise how chavaunistic women actually are, the tables turn, and we see cases where women are called s-xist. So now you have some power, you change your tactics a little to fit in. Anyone who wants to rule has to know how to play the game, and women are always good at manipulating people.

Haha.... wonderful. So all along it was me that was wrong...haha. Good. So now we will say that you cannot have the righ tto vote, and you must stay home and be married. Okay? Or are you now becoming a little insecure and having difficulty with change? haha. Like I say, women are good at manipulating people. When I was younger, that would have gone right over my head. Now I see these things.

But you have benefitted from them.

I genuinely don't mean this as an insult; I think it is actually good advice for you. If you can do it, I suggest seeing a therapist and telling him/her about your hatred and disdain for women. I don't think it is normal or healthy at all, and it seems to be causing you to feel bitter and angry. Therapy could help with those feelings.

 

[negar]

When two persons are basically different you can't consider them equal
It's not reasonable.