User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 29 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 282

Thread: The (Literal) War on Women

  1. #1
    Points: 100,746, Level: 77
    Level completed: 31%, Points required for next Level: 1,804
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialYour first Group50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    IMPress Polly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    156220
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Vermont, USA
    Posts
    8,575
    Points
    100,746
    Level
    77
    Thanks Given
    10,232
    Thanked 7,643x in 4,358 Posts
    Mentioned
    634 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    The (Literal) War on Women

    When one hears the expression "war on women", I believe they are mostly reminded of the American 2012 election cycle and in that sense the term "war" may be thought to be a hyperbolic exaggeration of legal and cultural conflicts over such things as legal access to abortion and the more general women's health services provided by Planned Parenthood (breast cancer screenings, birth control, etc.), or perhaps of the rhetoric commonly used to describe women and validate sexual violence, or perhaps even simply the problematic ways that women are represented in movies and games. Perhaps it is simply motivational to think of these sexisms as collectively constituting a war? No. One wishes it were only that. One wishes that we lived in a world wherein the term "war on women" could only be motivational hyperbole. Instead though this...

    ISIS marching.jpg

    Yazidi slaves 1.jpg

    Yazidi slaves 2.jpg

    ...is our world. I highlight the Islamic State as an especially pronounced illustration of my point, but it is worth pointing out that none other than the official government of Syria, the Assad regime, also uses rape, most often (though not exclusively) against women and girls, as a weapon of war in that same conflict in Syria on a substantially wider scale than most of the opposition forces (with the obvious exception of the Islamic State). We could say something similar of the current war going on in Yemen. ALL of the wars we see being fought today are, in many respects, essentially wars between men against women. And, as have we have recently been reminded by the terrorist murder spree in Toronto, Canada that killed 10 (8 women and 2 men) and critically injured another 16, militaristic violence targeting women for being female is hardly confined to the Middle East or the ideological framework of physical jihad or existing police states:


    screen shot.jpg
    For those who don't know, Elliot Rodger was that guy who killed six people in a 2014 shooting spree, posting a YouTube video shortly in advance describing his motive as his personal 'involuntary celibacy'. He had not achieved sex with the women he desired, so he decided to lash out at the world by going to a sorority to shoot up the place. He described himself as a "magnificent gentleman". You may not realize it, but Mr. Elliot has many fans and followers online. They are a collection of particularly extreme men's rights activists who call themselves "incels", or "involuntarily celibate". This section of MRActivists contend that sex is a right owed to men by women, that "alpha" females unfairly withhold sex from "beta" males, and that, to remedy this unequal distribution of sexual favors, a revolutionary war is called for. Movement participants describe the aim of such a hypothetical war as, to quote one example I saw from a self-described former "incel" on the CBC Twitter feed, the implementation of a "state distributed girlfriend program", which sounds like something out of The Handmaid's Tale to me. A handful over the years have sought to initiate said war by way of mass killings (most often shootings, but in this case an ISIS-style car attack).

    Continuing my creepy comparison to The Handmaid's Tale, so-called incels often literally describe Elliot Rodger and other similarly-motivated mass shooters as saints, referring to Rodger as "Saint Elliot", the Virginia Tech shooter as "Saint Cho", etc. because of their "virgin suicides", framed that way to intentionally mirror Christian ideas surrounding the virgin birth of Jesus. There is currently a debate in the "incel" community as to whether the Parkland school shooter who killed 17 and injured another 14 recently at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, prompting a 2 million-strong national protest for gun control, should also be canonize in some form or fashion as one of their own. One can find plenty of such communities through such readily accessible venues as the online video game download service Steam.

    It's not just a handful of lunatics though who are legitimizing and advancing the ideology of the so-called incel community that sex is a right owed to men by women and/or that perhaps violence in protest of that right being denied is justifiable. It's also the New York Times! And the Daily Mail! The feminist Internet has reacted to these legitimizations and defenses with rage. (Typical example.) Frankly, I think that hostile reaction is understandable. When the New York Times, "America's paper of record," and the world as a whole it would seem, is more offended by Michelle Wolf's comedy routine at the White House Correspondents' Dinner than by the mass murder of women just for being female, I think we have a right to be angry. That logical contrast illustrates how completely upside down our priorities are. One cannot tell a hostile joke about the White House Press Secretary for her repeated defenses of wife beaters, child molesters, and of course her own boss who has plenty of accusers of his own, without incurring the wrath of both the conservative and liberal press alike and being disowned and condemned by the White House Correspondents' Association itself in response, but murder a bunch of women at random because you can't get laid and your ideas have to be shared and validated to at least some degree!

    These developments are suited to our times though. We live in a time where we hear a lot about "witch hunts" since the days of Nixon especially, mostly from very powerful men who are somewhat desperate to cover up real crimes. (A certain president of ours is particularly fond of the term at present, as are all those accused of sexual harassment, assault, and rape (er I mean "misconduct", sorry).) Witch hunts are not a legacy for rich and powerful, anti-feminist men to appropriate arbitrarily for their own convenience. Witch hunts were and remain perhaps the most infamous form of warfare against women in Western history. The term refers to a period in Western history in which the property of women was systematically confiscated with support from the Catholic Church and the states they controlled and wherein people, but women in particular, were arrested, convicted by confessions extracted through torture, and executed (often famously by burning) for any display of personal independence (i.e. for being, on any level, what we today would probably call a feminist).

    Wars on women are real things is my point. The expression is not simply a euphemism. When people declare them, we should take it seriously.
    Last edited by IMPress Polly; 05-06-2018 at 11:12 AM.

  2. #2
    Points: 138,403, Level: 89
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 1,047
    Overall activity: 37.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger First ClassSocial50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    stjames1_53's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    58246
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    50,624
    Points
    138,403
    Level
    89
    Thanks Given
    104,286
    Thanked 29,267x in 20,296 Posts
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    why the hell should I pay for another woman's abortion?
    For waltky: http://quakes.globalincidentmap.com/
    "The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools."
    - Thucydides

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote" B. Franklin
    Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to stjames1_53 For This Useful Post:

    Kalkin (05-08-2018),NapRover (05-10-2018)

  4. #3
    Points: 172,963, Level: 98
    Level completed: 83%, Points required for next Level: 687
    Overall activity: 49.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    donttread's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    88554
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    51,915
    Points
    172,963
    Level
    98
    Thanks Given
    18,303
    Thanked 20,522x in 14,781 Posts
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by IMPress Polly View Post
    When one hears the expression "war on women", I believe they are mostly reminded of the American 2012 election cycle and in that sense the term "war" may be thought to be a hyperbolic exaggeration of legal and cultural conflicts over such things as legal access to abortion and the more general women's health services provided by Planned Parenthood (breast cancer screenings, birth control, etc.), or perhaps of the rhetoric commonly used to describe women and validate sexual violence, or perhaps even simply the problematic ways that women are represented in movies and games. Perhaps it is simply motivational to think of these sexisms as collectively constituting a war? No. One wishes it were only that. One wishes that we lived in a world wherein the term "war on women" could only be motivational hyperbole. Instead though this...

    Attachment 23533

    Attachment 23534

    Attachment 23535

    ...is our world. I highlight the Islamic State as an especially pronounced illustration of my point, but it is worth pointing out that none other than the official government of Syria, the Assad regime, also uses rape, most often (though not exclusively) against women and girls, as a weapon of war in that same conflict in Syria on a substantially wider scale than most of the opposition forces (with the obvious exception of the Islamic State). We could say something similar of the current war going on in Yemen. ALL of the wars we see being fought today are, in many respects, essentially wars between men against women. And, as have we have recently been reminded by the terrorist murder spree in Toronto, Canada that killed 10 (8 women and 2 men) and critically injured another 16, militaristic violence targeting women for being female is hardly confined to the Middle East or the ideological framework of physical jihad or existing police states:


    Attachment 23536
    For those who don't know, Elliot Rodger was that guy who killed six people in a 2014 shooting spree, posting a YouTube video shortly in advance describing his motive as his personal 'involuntary celibacy'. He had not achieved sex with the women he desired, so he decided to lash out at the world by going to a sorority to shoot up the place. He described himself as a "magnificent gentleman". You may not realize it, but Mr. Elliot has many fans and followers online. They are a collection of particularly extreme men's rights activists who call themselves "incels", or "involuntarily celibate". This section of MRActivists contend that sex is a right owed to men by women, that "alpha" females unfairly withhold sex from "beta" males, and that, to remedy this unequal distribution of sexual favors, a revolutionary war is called for. Movement participants describe the aim of such a hypothetical war as, to quote one example I saw from a self-described former "incel" on the CBC Twitter feed, the implementation of a "state distributed girlfriend program", which sounds like something out of The Handmaid's Tale to me. A handful over the years have sought to initiate said war by way of mass killings (most often shootings, but in this case an ISIS-style car attack).

    Continuing my creepy comparison to The Handmaid's Tale, so-called incels often literally describe Elliot and other similarly-motivated mass shooters as saints, referring to Elliot as "Saint Elliot", the Virginia Tech shooter as "Saint Cho", etc. because of their "virgin suicides", framed that way to intentionally mirror Christian ideas surrounding the virgin birth of Jesus. There is currently a debate in the "incel" community as to whether the Parkland school shooter who killed 17 and injured another 14 recently at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, prompting a 2 million-strong national protest for gun control, should also be canonize in some form or fashion as one of their own. One can find plenty of such communities through such readily accessible venues as the online video game download service Steam.

    It's not just a handful of lunatics though who are legitimizing and advancing the ideology of the so-called incel community that sex is a right owed to men by women and/or that perhaps violence in protest of that right being denied is justifiable. It's also the New York Times! And the Daily Mail! The feminist Internet has reacted to these legitimizations and defenses with rage. (Typical example.) Frankly, I think that hostile reaction is understandable. When the New York Times, "America's paper of record," and the world as a whole it would seem, is more offended by Michelle Wolf's comedy routine at the White House Correspondents' Dinner than by the mass murder of women just for being female, I think we have a right to be angry. That logical contrast illustrates how completely upside down our priorities are. One cannot tell a hostile joke about the White House Press Secretary for her repeated defenses of wife beaters, child molesters, and of course her own boss who has plenty of accusers of his own, without incurring the wrath of both the conservative and liberal press alike and being disowned and condemned by the White House Correspondents' Association itself in response, but murder a bunch of women at random because you can't get laid and your ideas have to be shared and validated to at least some degree!

    These developments are suited to our times though. We live in a time where we hear a lot about "witch hunts" since the days of Nixon especially, mostly from very powerful men who are somewhat desperate to cover up real crimes. (A certain president of ours is particularly fond of the term at present, as are all those accused of sexual harassment, assault, and rape (er I mean "misconduct", sorry).) Witch hunts are not a legacy for rich and powerful, anti-feminist men to appropriate arbitrarily for their own convenience. Witch hunts were and remain perhaps the most infamous form of warfare against women in Western history. The term refers to a period in Western history in which the property of women was systematically confiscated with support from the Catholic Church and the states they controlled and wherein people, but women in particular, were arrested, convicted by confessions extracted through torture, and executed (often famously by burning) for any display of personal independence (i.e. for being, on any level, what we today would probably call a feminist).

    Wars on women are real things is my point. The expression is not simply a euphemism. When people declare them, we should take it seriously.

    I don't buy that we still have a high level of gender discrimination here in the west. the glass ceiling can be attributed mostly to silly little things like hours actually worked etc. The men die much more often in combat and today's young men don't know if the "base system" is even legal on as date. Versus "positive affirmation" which in my day would of gotten me laughed out of the back seat. And family court has just started to treat men like humans in the past decade or so. If women are an oppressed group in the west they differ from any oppressed group... ever. That's not to say there isn't some gender discrimination, both ways. there will always be some.

    However, yes the radical muslims, many of whom filled into power voids western actions caused, treat women and children like chattle. I think it's based upon some repressed fear of female sexuality and how it can be used for power . But the reason doesn't matter. Once again a religion tells it's faithful to beat, rape, exploit and even murder other humans. In this case including women as a group in many places. 1/2 the damned population! More if you count the shady treatment of kids that's allowed. I've joked that we should stop arming factions and arm the women. Of course because of their cultural exposure that wouldn't work. But it's nice to think about Abdul saying "You poked your uncovered head out of the house to say hello to your friend. I will beat you now"
    Followed by the response "No you won't. Double tap.
    Still if you look at pics of Iran and even Afghanistan from the 60's/70's you will see that western intervention since that time has hurt women's progress, not helped.

  5. #4
    Points: 665,303, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 84.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433316
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,554
    Points
    665,303
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,905x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)


    That is not an image of an Islamic war against women, not if an Islamic woman carries a weapon. The woman wears traditional Islamic garb, as does the man with a weapon. The remaining folk are all in Western garb.

    Just thought I'd point that out.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    stjames1_53 (05-06-2018)

  7. #5
    Points: 4,260, Level: 15
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 290
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    WRITER33's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    17
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    North of Dallas, TX
    Posts
    11
    Points
    4,260
    Level
    15
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 7x in 4 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by IMPress Polly View Post
    Wars on women are real things is my point. The expression is not simply a euphemism. When people declare them, we should take it seriously.
    I am female.
    I learned in the mid-1970s, I was a second/third/fourth class citizen. I got a necessary divorce. Not many credit cards were around then. We both had an Exxon credit card, the same account – his account, only men had credit cards then, but I was the one who paid the credit card bill, he did not. I stopped at an Exxon gas station and couldn’t find my card. He had taken it out of my purse. I had cash so got the gas. Had to figure out how to get some kind of credit card on my own. Went to my bank and was told it was hard for a woman to get a card on her own. I got some kind of card (don’t remember which one), by using the bank as a reference to say I was creditworthy. Women did not have a credit history recorded at that time.

    Then, needed to buy a car. I was a counselor at a school and was going to use the Teacher’s Credit Union for the car loan. I went to a Chevrolet place, looked at cars, decided on what I wanted and the man clerk said I could not buy a car because I was a woman. I walked out and went to the Credit Union, asked to speak to the manager. He was a nice man and (luckily) his daughter had just gone through a bad divorce. He became angry at the car place because they wouldn’t sell me a car. He called the car place, spoke to the manager/owner, yelled at him for a while, and told him to sell me any car I wanted. Went back to car place and bought the car.

    Later, I bought a house. The real estate company owner said my loan would probably not go through because I was a woman. By that time, women did have a credit history. The woman salesman who sold me the house, said when the real estate company owner called the credit agency, he said my credit rank was higher than his. I bought the house.

    Unfortunately, some men still see women as furniture (Trump is one of those people). These men change their furniture when it begins to age or when they want a different model of furniture.


    Last edited by WRITER33; 05-06-2018 at 11:05 AM.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to WRITER33 For This Useful Post:

    IMPress Polly (05-06-2018),silvereyes (05-07-2018)

  9. #6
    Points: 138,403, Level: 89
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 1,047
    Overall activity: 37.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger First ClassSocial50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    stjames1_53's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    58246
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    50,624
    Points
    138,403
    Level
    89
    Thanks Given
    104,286
    Thanked 29,267x in 20,296 Posts
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by WRITER33 View Post


    I am female.
    I learned in the mid-1970s, I was a second/third/fourth class citizen. I got a necessary divorce. Not many credit cards were around then. We both had an Exxon credit card, the same account – his account, only men had credit cards then, but I was the one who paid the credit card bill, he did not. I stopped at an Exxon gas station and couldn’t find my card. He had taken it out of my purse. I had cash so got the gas. Had to figure out how to get some kind of credit card on my own. Went to my bank and was told it was hard for a woman to get a card on her own. I got some kind of card (don’t remember which one), by using the bank as a reference to say I was creditworthy. Women did not have a credit history recorded at that time.






    Then, needed to buy a car. I was a counselor at a school and was going to use the Teacher’s Credit Union for the car loan. I went to a Chevrolet place, looked at cars,
    decided on what I wanted and the man clerk said I could not buy a car because I was a woman. I walked out and went to the Credit Union, asked to speak to the manager. He was a nice man and (luckily) his daughter had just gone through a bad divorce. He became angry at the car place because they wouldn’t sell me a car. He called the car place, spoke to the manager/owner, yelled at him for a while, and told him to sell me any car I wanted. Went back to car place and bought the car.






    Later, I bought a house. The real estate company owner said my loan would probably not go through because I was a woman. By that time, women did have a credit
    history. The woman salesman who sold me the house, said when the real estate company owner called the credit agency, he said my credit rank was higher than his.
    I bought the house.






    Unfortunately, some men still see women as furniture (Trump is one of those people). These men change their furniture when it begins to age or when they want
    a different model of furniture.



    really................I got shoes older than you and still married to the same woman for 43 years............what was that you were saying?
    For waltky: http://quakes.globalincidentmap.com/
    "The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools."
    - Thucydides

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote" B. Franklin
    Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to stjames1_53 For This Useful Post:

    MMC (05-06-2018)

  11. #7
    Points: 172,963, Level: 98
    Level completed: 83%, Points required for next Level: 687
    Overall activity: 49.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    donttread's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    88554
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    51,915
    Points
    172,963
    Level
    98
    Thanks Given
    18,303
    Thanked 20,522x in 14,781 Posts
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by WRITER33 View Post
    I am female.
    I learned in the mid-1970s, I was a second/third/fourth class citizen. I got a necessary divorce. Not many credit cards were around then. We both had an Exxon credit card, the same account – his account, only men had credit cards then, but I was the one who paid the credit card bill, he did not. I stopped at an Exxon gas station and couldn’t find my card. He had taken it out of my purse. I had cash so got the gas. Had to figure out how to get some kind of credit card on my own. Went to my bank and was told it was hard for a woman to get a card on her own. I got some kind of card (don’t remember which one), by using the bank as a reference to say I was creditworthy. Women did not have a credit history recorded at that time.

    Then, needed to buy a car. I was a counselor at a school and was going to use the Teacher’s Credit Union for the car loan. I went to a Chevrolet place, looked at cars, decided on what I wanted and the man clerk said I could not buy a car because I was a woman. I walked out and went to the Credit Union, asked to speak to the manager. He was a nice man and (luckily) his daughter had just gone through a bad divorce. He became angry at the car place because they wouldn’t sell me a car. He called the car place, spoke to the manager/owner, yelled at him for a while, and told him to sell me any car I wanted. Went back to car place and bought the car.

    Later, I bought a house. The real estate company owner said my loan would probably not go through because I was a woman. By that time, women did have a credit history. The woman salesman who sold me the house, said when the real estate company owner called the credit agency, he said my credit rank was higher than his. I bought the house.

    Unfortunately, some men still see women as furniture (Trump is one of those people). These men change their furniture when it begins to age or when they want a different model of furniture.




    I remember the 70's differently. As a time when a man had to work and a women could choose to work or be a stay at home wife/mom. A time when family court automatically handed custody to the woman and did not +do anything if she screwed with the ex's visitation rights.
    Perspective I guess.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to donttread For This Useful Post:

    MMC (05-06-2018)

  13. #8
    Points: 4,260, Level: 15
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 290
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    WRITER33's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    17
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    North of Dallas, TX
    Posts
    11
    Points
    4,260
    Level
    15
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 7x in 4 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stjames1_53 View Post
    really................I got shoes older than you and still married to the same woman for 43 years............what was that you were saying?
    I am likely the oldest person on this forum. You don't have shoes older than I am. The purpose of my post was to show women had a difficult time living on their own with the same benefits men had at that time. It is also true SOME men (see, I qualified it is "some", as different from ALL) treat women as furniture. So you stayed married to the same woman. Maybe you have treated your partner well and she has treated you well. I had that with my second husband until he died from cancer.

  14. #9
    Points: 432,155, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteranOverdriveSocial
    Awards:
    Frequent Poster
    Tahuyaman's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    307976
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington
    Posts
    183,457
    Points
    432,155
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    20,178
    Thanked 76,991x in 55,613 Posts
    Mentioned
    700 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by WRITER33 View Post
    I am female.
    I learned in the mid-1970s, I was a second/third/fourth class citizen...


    I don't ever recall a time when women were considered a "second/third/fourth class citizen". Certainly that wasn't the case in the US in the 1970's.

  15. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Tahuyaman For This Useful Post:

    donttread (05-06-2018),MMC (05-06-2018),nathanbforrest45 (05-06-2018),stjames1_53 (05-06-2018)

  16. #10
    Points: 80,720, Level: 69
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 1,730
    Overall activity: 46.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    countryboy's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    28222
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    28,649
    Points
    80,720
    Level
    69
    Thanks Given
    10,475
    Thanked 21,459x in 13,509 Posts
    Mentioned
    230 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by WRITER33 View Post
    I am female.
    I learned in the mid-1970s, I was a second/third/fourth class citizen. I got a necessary divorce. Not many credit cards were around then. We both had an Exxon credit card, the same account – his account, only men had credit cards then, but I was the one who paid the credit card bill, he did not. I stopped at an Exxon gas station and couldn’t find my card. He had taken it out of my purse. I had cash so got the gas. Had to figure out how to get some kind of credit card on my own. Went to my bank and was told it was hard for a woman to get a card on her own. I got some kind of card (don’t remember which one), by using the bank as a reference to say I was creditworthy. Women did not have a credit history recorded at that time.

    Then, needed to buy a car. I was a counselor at a school and was going to use the Teacher’s Credit Union for the car loan. I went to a Chevrolet place, looked at cars, decided on what I wanted and the man clerk said I could not buy a car because I was a woman. I walked out and went to the Credit Union, asked to speak to the manager. He was a nice man and (luckily) his daughter had just gone through a bad divorce. He became angry at the car place because they wouldn’t sell me a car. He called the car place, spoke to the manager/owner, yelled at him for a while, and told him to sell me any car I wanted. Went back to car place and bought the car.

    Later, I bought a house. The real estate company owner said my loan would probably not go through because I was a woman. By that time, women did have a credit history. The woman salesman who sold me the house, said when the real estate company owner called the credit agency, he said my credit rank was higher than his. I bought the house.

    Unfortunately, some men still see women as furniture (Trump is one of those people). These men change their furniture when it begins to age or when they want a different model of furniture.


    I stopped reading after, "only men had credit cards in the mid seventies". Can your ideas not stand on their own without lying?
    Cutesy Time is OVER

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to countryboy For This Useful Post:

    nathanbforrest45 (05-06-2018),Tahuyaman (05-06-2018)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts