General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFox contributor: Liberals who reject that men should dominate women are anti-science
Im so used to liberals telling conservatives that theyre anti-science, Erickson explained. But liberals who defend this and say it is not a bad thing are very anti-science. When you look at biology, when you look at the natural world, the roles of a male and a female in society and in other animals, the male typically is the dominant role. The female, its not antithesis, or its not competing, its a complimentary role.
We as people in a smart society have lost the ability to have complimentary relationships in nuclear families, and it is tearing us apart, he continued, adding that reality showed it was harmful for women to be the primary source of income in a family.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/29/fox-contributor-liberals-who-reject-that-men-should-dominate-women-are-anti-science/
I added this graph for Erickson:
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/29/breadwinner-moms/
Drale
(7,932 posts)have no idea what so ever what science is, so its hard to blame them when they use the word wrong.
AsahinaKimi
(20,776 posts)"Neanderthal" but it would be an insult to smart hunter gatherers.
I WOULD LOVE to see Republicans try to take down a woolly mammoth, just using spears.
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)You have equals who actually are complimentary, or you have dominant and subordinate. You can't have dominant and complimentary, you ass.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)Also, republicans reject the idea that humans are animals or part of the animal kingdom. Using biology then to support dominance of males over females doesn't apply. We're either animals subject to the rules and roles in biological systems, or we're above it as they like to say. You can't have it both ways.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Erickson uses something he doesn't believe in to support his thesis.
Proves he's just in to make money off of the Rubes.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)We need to float a Theory of Devolution for the replublicans. I bet they'd embrace it, too
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)"Are We Not Men?"
kentauros
(29,414 posts)There are a few former co-workers I'd love to send that to (if only I had bothered to remember their email addresses.)
Jim__
(14,083 posts)siligut
(12,272 posts)Probably believing it too.
Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)But was confused about the definition of complementary. They ARE anti-education, you know.
edhopper
(33,623 posts)believes we should only behave according to our primal nature.
BTW asshole Erickson; the gathering of the hunter/gatherers was probably done by woman, keeping the family alive while the men occasional brought in game. They were the main breadwinners.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)which sex tends to kill the supper? Male lions are primarily for territory control.
demwing
(16,916 posts)spiders
spotted hyena
preying mantis
bees
ants
ring-tailed lemur
Matriarchal species, just as a beginning
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)For two reasons - sex and..uhm...more sex?
sinkingfeeling
(51,474 posts)woodsprite
(11,927 posts)With lions, isn't the male a big mooch (he wants sex with multiple partners, wants the kids kept out of the way, has pissing contests and makes a lot of noise) and the female the one that does all the work and is the primary source of income (hunting) in the pride.
The science I prefer is that people be like Canada geese (and other species) - mate for life and have an equal share in raising the goslings, then fly off into the sunset OK -- minus the crapping all over the place.
FSogol
(45,529 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Once again they prove they are living in the 1950's.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)"nuclear families." Who else uses that antiquated term any more, except when speaking of the 1950s?
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)Nuke-u-ler lol
kentauros
(29,414 posts)as I don't watch Fox "news". I would guess that he didn't pronounce it correctly, as most people don't articulate their words to begin with.
Response to Just Saying (Reply #11)
Just Saying This message was self-deleted by its author.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"ox contributor: Liberals who reject that men should dominate women are anti-science"
...the American Way. We need Fox!
Fox Guest Tony Katz: "There's No Such Thing As Income Inequality," Teachers Exist Off "Excesses" Of Stockbrokers, Capitalists
http://mediamatters.org/video/2011/11/20/fox-guest-tony-katz-theres-no-such-thing-as-inc/182230
ruffburr
(1,190 posts)How do morons like Erickson et al, Ever get laid? And might i suggest that the ones that "do" these kinda dorks, Just say NO from now on What a asshat!!!!
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)I suppose that scientifically explains conservatives in general, and Erik Erickson in particular.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)kentauros
(29,414 posts)Is Erickson the monkey or the shit?
JitterbugPerfume
(18,183 posts)NOT!!
Yavin4
(35,446 posts)pokerfan
(27,677 posts)Initech
(100,104 posts)Last edited Thu May 30, 2013, 12:15 PM - Edit history (1)
They believe the earth is 6,000 years old, reject theories of evolution, prefer to teach abstinence over sexual education, claim women's bodies can reject rape, and they have the balls to call us anti science??? Fuck them!
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)dead fetuses because we use birth control.
Initech
(100,104 posts)While searching for a Youtube video I came across an old New Rule that I think applies here:
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)thanks to union-busting/outsourcing/downsizing, many women HAD to fill the gap in family income.
Do they really want MORE poor families?
There are probably MANY women who would LOVE to take 5-10 years "off" so they could see those first steps, read those books to their kids, go on fun outings with the kids whenever the spirit moved them, be a home-room Mom, go on school field trips with the kids, cook nutritious meals for their families, take a nap when the kids do, etc, but they CANNOT because that income is NEEDED to keep a roof over their heads.
there are many more single Moms than before because once women were in the workforce, and started making enough to support a family, maybe they decided to go it alone.. It's a choice women did not have until quite recently in time. Once the stigma of having a baby out of wedlock went away, many young women decided to be a Mom instead of being forced to "give the baby away"...and then there are always women whose husbands/boyfriends bailed on them.
Maybe the writer of this dreck should ponder why men are not like THEY used to be
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)decided to go it alone."
That is exactly the kind of freedom they don't want women to have. They want women to be dependent on a man to take care of them. They are much easier to control that way.
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)until they are willing to re-establish wages to a place when a single income can once again sustain a family... and even then, many women enjoy working and will always work outside the home for a paycheck.
and many women will never marry because they "need" to.. yay for that !!
Arkana
(24,347 posts)"Why can't we live in Mayberry circa 1954?"
antigone382
(3,682 posts)And while I don't think his character was overly political, the dear Andy Griffith was a strong Democrat. Mayberry is out of these guys' league.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)Jim__
(14,083 posts)Fox seems to be opposed to their position as primary earner. Is Fox advocating social welfare for these families?
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)especially the ones who dared to be single mothers because they had sex without being married or because they divorced their husband.
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)so naughty...
rightwingers just have to be shaming someone
they would prefer the era of Nathaniel Hawthorne.. with ipods, cell phones, pizza & x boxes though
meow2u3
(24,774 posts)They need to be punished because they had the nerve to outlive their husbands (the ones who died young).
BITE ME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Being born with a penis does not give you the right to dominate someone born with a vagina.
Male domination is not working out very well for the majority of the world's population.
Male domination and religion go hand and hand.
Brainwashing women with religion allows them to be dominated by men.
This is infuriating.
I have to keep reminding myself that I live in the 21st century.
PDJane
(10,103 posts)Agnes is 87, and informs me that 'that shit went out with hoop skirts.'
stopwastingmymoney
(2,042 posts)Thanks for the mental image, I really enjoyed it
fitman
(482 posts)take the lead role in our relationship....Don't get me wrong I don't boss or dominate her. I could never respect a woman if I looked upon her as biblically subservient which is a turnoff to both of us.
She makes more than me, kept her maiden name(for business reasons) and we look at each others as equals..we even have separate checking accounts/credit cards and she runs her own business.
That being said she admits it's a huge turn-on to her when I make the decisions/take charge around the house and our personal life. Maybe because she makes tough, stressful decisions at work every day it's nice to come home and have someone else take the responsibility and be in charge...I don't know. She knows I would never make her do something she did not like or agree and always look out for her best interest. We are best friends besides lovers. .
Little things for instance... She never initiates sex and hates if i grovel or ask for it. She wants me to initiate, start making out and if she does not want to she will tell me which is rare.
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)And they think they hide it so well! The best part is that a lot of them don't believe they're sexist and racist and are genuinely shocked that we're not on board since they know what's best for all of us.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)I see a Brietbart in his future
AndyA
(16,993 posts)An exception to the rule, perhaps.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)This is the kind of crap one expects from a bunch of 12 year olds where women are considered a "theory".
Initech
(100,104 posts)Or they don't think beyond what their pastor tells them to think.
chowder66
(9,084 posts)KT2000
(20,588 posts)the female holds the cards in much of the animal world. The eagle's nest I am watching is run by the female with male in supporting role. Elephants maintain matriarchal societies etc.
What an idiot.
Jennicut
(25,415 posts)Really, he should realize as a Gen Xer that our generation and millenials really had no choice regarding women working more. People rely more on two incomes as expenses increased. And single mothers have no man to come along and be the breadwinner. They live no fairy tale.
I have two kids in elementary school and work part time as a substitute teacher. That will change when they get older and my husband will appreciate the extra income if I work full time. He has no issue if I end up making more money then him or working more. He worked very hard so I could stay home when my girls were really little. Most men could care less today.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)rurallib
(62,451 posts)clarice
(5,504 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)I could make a huge list of creatures in the animal kingdom whereas the female is not only BIGGER, but is the dominate gender in the relationship.
Funny, the Sucknews dribbler wants us to believe subjective and objective mean the same thing!
No wonder people that watch Sucknews are so stupid!
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)These people think the 50s were the golden age of American society.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)You know,...back when the entire administration was going to jail.
alp227
(32,060 posts)Its not true! Many species exhibit different patterns of dominance, and some have no system of dominance at all. Its quite common for females to be larger than males, for instance. Erickson is claiming that something common in primates is a universal.
NATURALISTIC FALLACY, ASSHOLE!
You dont get to spend your pundit career blithering about human (and American) exceptionalism and then turn around when its convenient to your argument to point to some monkey over there and say, See? Thats the natural order!
Erick Erickson is one hella confused dingleberry. Why does anyone listen to a biblical literalist pontificating about science?
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/05/30/oh-no-equality-fire-and-brimstone-coming-down-from-the-skies-rivers-and-seas-boiling-forty-years-of-darkness-earthquakes-volcanoes-the-dead-rising-from-the-grave-human-sacrifice-dogs-a/
Dumb right wingers with repeating names:
Erick Erickson
Lars Larson
Hugh Hewitt
Chris Christie (he's just putting on this bipartisan facade and appearing with Obama for the 2014 NJ gubernatorial election, don't buy into that, he's still a union-busting pig!)
NewJeffCT
(56,829 posts)and will soon meekly line up to follow the scientifically correct dominant leadership of their husbands, fiances or boyfriends.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)That graph to them, shows just what is wrong in America today. Barefoot and pregnant is the only jobs program they support. Send all those women home, and the men will magically get all of those jobs.
No need for unemployment benefits if you fire half the workforce, just as the women were sent home from the defense industry as the men returned from WW2.
http://www.alternet.org/story/154197/4_states_where_right-wingers_are_promoting_shocking_measures_to_keep_women_barefoot_and_pregnant
Domestic tranquility nationwide will be assured!
Do I need a icon?
Use it freely for the above.
They say it's the solution to the problem of unemployment and all other social ills. No kidding. They either never knew, or reject the reasons behind the women's movement. This is what we're up against, folks.