I won't pretend I'm a history buff, but I've never heard of that in our culture (western). Celtic Druid I believe has a good insight into history thoguh, so perhaps he can shed some light on this.

Quote from nick

I have been having a discussion with this woman about how female oppression in the past is exaggerated. To save me from explaining what she said in my words, I will copy and paste exactly what she said.

The first quote...



Now I do believe that marriage works this way in other parts of the world such as the middle east. But did it EVER...yes...ever be this way in countries such as America, Australia, UK, Canada? Or is she talking through her ass? Can anyone provide any proof/links to debunk this (what I think) faulty claim?

Another thing she said was this...



In other words, she is saying that women faced arrest for leaving their husbands. Sure, this happens in the middle east but did it ever happen in western societies as I mentioned above? Are there any sources out there to prove this wrong?

Yeah, that's called intellectual dishonesty!
A lot of women especially feminists are good for spewing misinformation!

Quote from Marx

I won't pretend I'm a history buff, but I've never heard of that in our culture (western). Celtic Druid I believe has a good insight into history thoguh, so perhaps he can shed some light on this.

Hey thanks Marx. I tried sending him a message but I kept getting this error saying BB code font not allowed.

Quote from nick

Hey thanks Marx. I tried sending him a message but I kept getting this error saying BB code font not allowed.

That means don't use the quote, bold, italics etc. to format your message - just use plain text.

It was recently revealed that 20% of the victims of forced marriages here in the UK are men.

Given that said victims are almost always from the Indian subcontintent, then the same statistic almost certainly applies to 1/4 of the world's population!

No need to look at history, just look at what's going on right now!

Edit some links to sources:

http://therightsofman.typepad.co.uk/...-revealed.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7224109.stm

Dowries and arranged marriages were uncommon in the Anglophile world and used only occasionally amongst aristocratic families. The vast majority of families had no money for dowries and very little 'control' of children was even possible after they were young teens. Where marriage discretions were used, it was far more the purview of the mothers than the fathers.

As for 'jobs', such things that we consider 'jobs' did not exist before the late 18th century. Men did what manual labour they could and were heavily restricted by guilds and such if they had any sort of education or aspiration. Most people worked the land for thousands of years. The idea that a man could do anything he wanted is fatuous nonsense.

Quote from Percy

The idea that a man could do anything he wanted is fatuous nonsense.

What??? You mean to suggest that my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather didn't own his own gigantic castle with 1,000 maids to his disposal?

Aww, I feel so disillusioned now.

Hey thanks guys.

Quote from nick

In other words, she is saying that women faced arrest for leaving their husbands. Sure, this happens in the middle east but did it ever happen in western societies as I mentioned above? Are there any sources out there to prove this wrong?

Firstly, as with any feminist/misguided soul making outlandish claims, the onus should be on her/him to substantiate that, not for you to prove it's wrong (remember this time-saving approach).

As Percy notes, money in historical terms wasn't available generally to reinforce something that had it's roots in the middle east. Her claim that a dowry was necessary until only 80 years ago in western countries is absolute ideological bullshit!

Get back to her first and ask her to provide evidence. Once she bites I'll join in with some hard facts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nick
In other words, she is saying that women faced arrest for leaving their husbands. Sure, this happens in the middle east but did it ever happen in western societies as I mentioned above? Are there any sources out there to prove this wrong?

Firstly, as with any feminist/misguided soul making outlandish claims, the onus should be on her/him to substantiate that, not for you to prove it's wrong (remember this time-saving approach).

As Percy notes, money wasn't available generally to reinforce something that had it's roots in the middle east. Her claim that a dowry was necessary until only 80 years ago in western countries is absolute ideological bullshit!

Get back to her first and ask her to provide evidence. Once she bites I'll join in with some hard facts.

Feminists don't need to prove their claims, they are instictively right. Thousands of years of Patriarchy allows them this peculiar distinction... and all the pussies say... "yes, dear"

Nick, Celtic Druid is exactly right. Feminists will believe what they want to believe; but when they make their outrageous claims, just ask them to put up or shut up.

A good example is the old "rule of thumb" canard which they regularly trot out as being based on some mythical law that allowed a man to beat his wife with a stick, as long as it was no thicker than his thumb. Despite there being no historical basis for such a claim, and common sense dictating that it would be ridiculous (just look at your thumb - then imagine a stick that big - then imagine beating a woman with it. She would be severely injured or dead within a few blows) they still cling to it and will try to dupe the gullible into believing it. I am sick and tired of hearing it - it's like that bad smell that won't go away.


The only answer is to ask them to quote the law. What was the title of the legislation, which monarch or parliament passed it and when, and quote the exact text. Also ask them if it has ever been repealed, when and by whom. It won't do them any harm to spend hours scouring the history books looking for something that doesn't exist. They might even learn some facts while they do so. And of course when they can't find any historic basis to back their claim, ask them why they therefore insist on peddling what they now know to be lies.

That will stump them.

I read there is some connection to a Judge who apparently made some comment in a hearing, pertaining to this, and someone took it literally. That's the nearest connection I've ever encountered. The rest of it all goes back to carpenters using it as a rough-guide.

Quote from Percy

Dowries and arranged marriages were uncommon in the Anglophile world and used only occasionally amongst aristocratic families. The vast majority of families had no money for dowries and very little 'control' of children was even possible after they were young teens. Where marriage discretions were used, it was far more the purview of the mothers than the fathers.

As for 'jobs', such things that we consider 'jobs' did not exist before the late 18th century. Men did what manual labour they could and were heavily restricted by guilds and such if they had any sort of education or aspiration. Most people worked the land for thousands of years. The idea that a man could do anything he wanted is fatuous nonsense.

""
The idea that a man could do anything he wanted is fatuous nonsense. ""

possibly still is the case for most men - need s must when the Devil drives - anon

Actually, the marriages weren't arranged, but families sort of had to approve of it. And I'll disown my daughter if she marries an idiot, by the way.