After the radio show that Dark Horizon pointed to on this board and die büchse der pandora. I had to wonder if the descriptions were not allegorical of the cultures in which they permeated in the 1920's. Although appearing the same, can one really say that they were flappers in a worldly context? Was this the first true exposition of a youth culture; was there a just similarity of style and behaviour for the young ladies of the time? Although we try to use catch all statements when referring to, what would appear to be a subclass of liberated young ladies of an emerging society in the wake of the First World War. What I would say is not considered that it in a sense was the first true unaligned movement of empowered woman. Becoming enslaved by society in a new layer of control.. We take for granted our rights and liberties, for the girls who were said to be flappers this was truly the first of these. To go out and be what they wanted to be.

Unfortunately society was just waiting with a convenient label. The movies played a part in this, movies made by men idolising woman as they wished them to be their secret lust, manifest in celluloid , skin and in apparel, men are always attracted to young available and apparently vulnerable woman we cant hide that fact. Flappers had a childlike quality.

Men were all too ready to let the young and pretty girls follow a fashion that to them must have been a dream come true after the constraints of the early 20th century. Yet at the same time liberation of the “slave woman”; from many of the constraints of the previous centuries.
In that for the first time there were real choices in clothes in styles and in attitudes.

Women are not just a dictionary definition to be sidelined with convenient labels in society although society persists in re enforcing stereotypical images of woman. In that it is an attempt to define who they are what they wear and how they behave by a mere label.

Well I've left enough for a conversation and discussion I'm sure the members here will wish to put forth their own theories. Such a pity Thomas could not join us for this conversation.

Kate you say;

"Women are not just a dictionary definition to be sidelined with convenient labels in society although society persists in re enforcing stereotypical images of woman. In that it is an attempt to define who they are what they wear and how they behave by a mere label."

Have you actually seen how men are depicted in soaps and advertisements these days? Bullies or idiots who can't do the simplest thing without a "strong, sensible woman" to help them, failing that, they are potential rapists.

Society will always put labels on people, not just women. Black people, Asians, French, British, Americans etc. It's not right, but there you are. Thanks to feminist propaganda "Idiot" or "Bully" or "Potential Rapist" is the label that the spineless, politically correct chattering classes in the UK, and no doubt the US, would like to pin on men. Thankfully men are fighting back against militant feminism. Here's an example;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/t...dio/4200442.stm

Where I do agree with you is that flappers were one of the first youth movements and it was one of the first times in history where women could enjoy their freedom. In a way they were pioneers and that's what makes them so interesting.

I don't buy the "slave woman" thing though, if you'll pardon the pun. I would respectfully suggest that you are looking at history with 21st Century feminist eyes, though I would hazard a guess that your views are not of the rabid anti men variety. I believe there is merit in what you say, certainly a big element of truth but it's not the whole picture and it's subconsciously slanted by the lies of militant feminism, an ideology that thankfully is as defunct as absolute monarchy, fascism and Stalinism.

Why Alan, how are you. Now I have to agree with you on the point that Men most certainly need as you say “ a strong, sensible woman” I couldn't agree with you more, hurray a man that recognizes his limitations…. lol. Just a lil fun Alan, As for the part about

“Men are depicted in soaps and advertisements these days? Bullies or idiots who can't do the simplest thing without a "strong, sensible woman" to help them, failing that, they are potential rapists.”

Are you surprised? Shocked? I should think not, willful nonsense a refusal to see and understand the role that men have played. I think you will find that most of the idiotic bullying and rapes in this world are perpetrated by “MEN”.

Men are far too easily led astray by their carnal desires Alan, They need a strong sensible woman to keep them in their place, that much is obvious. What would a world run by men be like? War’s, Rape, depravity, inequality, Soccer hooligans, an over indulgence in free liquor,. Tobacco, False and empty promises. Poor education for our children and Poor public services, Gas hungry cars. A wave of putrefying pornography in literature and on the INTERNET Men indulging in their sordid little habits of collecting pornography, Ahem Vintage pornography, trying to call it art! Integration, segregation, Pedophiles, Idolatry.
Trans-gender preachers, Homosexual ministers, Abortions with every six-pack!!!
Oh sorry that’s what we do have, I forgot for a split second, silly me.

Sorry Alan you were saying something about labels? Labels being the generic term here. Don’t you think, it is easy to take what one wants from any statement?
Convenient labels in society persist in the re enforcing stereotypical images.

Alan said
“I don't buy the "slave woman" thing though, if you'll pardon the pun. I would respectfully suggest that you are looking at history with 21st Century feminist eyes, though I would hazard a guess that your views are not of the rabid anti men variety. I believe there is merit in what you say, certainly a big element of truth but it's not the whole picture and it's subconsciously slanted by the lies of militant feminism, an ideology that thankfully is as defunct as absolute monarchy, fascism and Stalinism.

Sir I find that statement asinine in the extreme, Woman sir have been looking at history through a veil of tears, we have been used abused beaten and used as forced labor we have suffered like no man is capable of. Still now many woman world wide have to endure the century’s old oppression of men to be used as a sex toy a baby machine, laborer a servant and at the end of the day still having to suffer the indignity of man’s patronizing us. And when we resist or fight for a better life for ourselves and our children we are called “militant feminists” , fascist, Another label, I believe we are human beings fighting for the right to be equal, to receive equal recognition for our efforts, to live a decent life without the fear of being beaten used or degenerated. I am not anti men Alan but I do ask for the same respect. Not to be used or abused.
When I used the word keeping men in their place what I mean by that is part of a respectful partnership, not to be given over to following the herd falling into low and vulgar ways.

Know this,
When God made Adam he didn’t make him with a whip in his hand.

You are right of course it was the first tangible youth movement. Alan you know I mean you no harm by my words, you take care now.

Hi Kate

We've been friends a long time, not always seen eye to eye but I know you are never malicious so no, of course I don't think you mean any harm in your words.

That doesn't mean I agree with your neo feminist views though, far from it. However such a well thought out post deserves an equally well thought out answer, so if you'll just give me a couple of days I hope to come up with something that is worthy of your posting.

Ah yes men, the great wicked force that has brought the world nothing but misery, so the neo feminists constantly tell us. Wasn't it Goebbels that said the bigger the lie, the more it will be believed? Kate you are probably the cleverest person I know and I am shocked that somebody with a mind as good as yours would fall for it. You are not the sort of person who easily falls for lies. Please do not think for one moment I am accusing you of being any kind of Nazi, you most certainly are not, but you have been duped I fear.

All those things you accuse men of are quite true of a small minority of males. But are women so innocent? Do the names Myra Hindley, Mary Bell, Karla Faye Tucker, Aileen Wuornos and Ruth Snyder ring any bells with you? I could go on, but this isn't a con-*test*-('") about who can give the longest list of killers.

Every night in the streets of Britain we see women getting drunk, fighting, vomiting in the streets and doing all kinds of things that society could well live without. Are you suggesting that this is all the fault of men? Women wanted equality, they got it and now it seems your gender can not cope with the freedom you fought so hard for and which no reasonable person of either sex would deny you. Perhaps the neo feminists might like to get their own house in order before pointing out the faults of others.

You yourself have got caught up in the stereotyping of men as drunken brutes. This is simply not the case. If it were so, how do you explain the popularity of groups such as Families Need Fathers fighting against the injustice of family courts and their perceived bias against men? Groups I may add that have a great deal of support from women. There is little satisfaction to be gained in making sure you keep your ex wife's hands off your car, bank account and pension when she retaliates by stopping you seeing your child. Ah, but that cannot be an injustice as it is perpetrated by women, so it is either non existant or somehow OK in the eyes of neo feminists. Thankfully things are slowly starting to change in this legal area I believe, but there is a long way to go yet before men are guaranteed justice.

I fully accept that there are parts of the world where women are treated abominably. I don't agree with it and I won't make any attempt to excuse it. But this is not because of the underlying evil of men. It is due to poverty, cultural backwardness and tradition. The way to address these issues is not to vilify men and turn it into some war of the sexes. We need to work to change attitudes whilst still respecting those traditions. Then hopefully we can reach a point where women are no longer treated as chattels. The idea of actually doing something is too much like hard work for the neo feminists though. It's easier for them to rant on about "male brutality", whilst not actually putting forward any positive solutions to a problem that men did not create, at least not consciously and certainly not fully. It suits the feminist agenda to look for a scapegoat, to blame some group. Goebbels knew all about that too.

Kate you are right, Adam was not born with a whip in his hand and the correct place of a man is in an equal relationship with a woman, showing each other mutual respect.

How is this relevant to flappers? Well it would have been interesting to see if the same arguments about resisting "male oppresion" were used at the time. Did they see themselves as breaking away from the patriarchal traditions? I doubt it. They probably just wanted to have some of the freedom and fun that was denied their mothers and grandmothers. Nevertheless they were at the vanguard of a new era of liberation for women, whether they realised it then or not. I respect them for that and I hope they enjoyed every minute of it.

"Alan,
Wasn't it Goebbels that said the bigger the lie, the more it will be believed? Kate you are probably the cleverest person I know“

Goebbels was a man, and I am the cleverest person you know lol. I never said woman were innocent either, what I said and you know what I meant was that in a world dominated by men woman always get a raw deal and are subverted and denigrated.


"Alan,

Every night in the streets of Britain we see women getting drunk, fighting, vomiting in the streets and doing all kinds of things“

Yes, I'm beginning to wonder what sort of woman you consort with Alan. How is it their fault in a world run by men, if that is their only outlet? It’s apparent they have not had access to decent education, or opportunities. What do they have to look forward to? What do they find at the end of the night Alan, a man behaving in a bestial way toward them? Limited choices, limited by whom?

"Alan,

How do you explain the popularity of groups such as Families Need Fathers fighting against the injustice of family courts and their perceived bias against men? "

We are talking in general gender terms here Alan not looking at the subdivided nature of cultural and regional legal biases. That is a question best asked of your legislator.

"Alan,
I fully accept that there are parts of the world where women are treated abominably. I don't agree with it and I won't make any attempt to excuse it."

Very good Alan but for someone who does not agree with it you seem to be making a case for it?

"Alan,

It is due to poverty, cultural backwardness and tradition"

Yes that is true but I believe I pointed out the parameters of this conversation in my opening post so a rather superfluous point.





"Alan,

We need to work to change attitudes whilst still respecting those traditions. Then hopefully we can reach a point where women are no longer treated as chattels. The idea of actually doing something is too much like hard work for the neo feminists though. It's easier for them to rant on about "male brutality", whilst not actually putting forward any positive solutions to a problem that men did not create, at least not consciously and certainly not fully. It suits the feminist agenda to look for a scapegoat, to blame some group. Goebbels knew all about that too."

Yes there is a need for change, Neo Feminists as you call them Alan, do far more work towards change than any other in the areas of civil and individual rights.

Alan we are having a debate, I don’t believe you've really read and digested my previous posts, go back over them and consider the point of view in respect of the non personal statements in the third person. Alan perhaps fewer references to Mr Gobbles would be more appropriate to this conversational debate.
Have a nice day.

"Alan,
Wasn't it Goebbels that said the bigger the lie, the more it will be believed? Kate you are probably the cleverest person I know“

Goebbels was a man, and I am the cleverest person you know lol. I never said woman were innocent either, what I said and you know what I meant was that in a world dominated by men woman always get a raw deal and are subverted and denigrated."

"Always" get a raw deal? ALWAYS??? Are you sure that is your definitive standpoint on this? I think I've quite conclusively proved that isn't the case. Your wishing it was otherwise does not make it so.

"Alan,

Every night in the streets of Britain we see women getting drunk, fighting, vomiting in the streets and doing all kinds of things“

Yes, I'm beginning to wonder what sort of woman you consort with Alan. How is it their fault in a world run by men, if that is their only outlet? It’s apparent they have not had access to decent education, or opportunities. What do they have to look forward to? What do they find at the end of the night Alan, a man behaving in a bestial way toward them? Limited choices, limited by whom?"

Limited by themselves. They have free choice and education is there for all who want to take it up. With the occasional exception due to physical abilties, there are very few opportunities that are closed to women. Would you be so quick to aportion blame to women whose husbands drunk to excess or took drugs or generally behaved badly because their wives behaved cruelly? No, I respectfully suggest that your gender bias means that you would not.

Women's right to be treated equally is protected by law. Your argument is that bad behavior is caused solely by having a man at home? You are blaming one gender for all the faults of the other? That defies logic and depicts women as helpless victims at the mercy of tyrants, taking any route for a temporary escape. Your opinion of the strength and resourcefulness of your own gender seems very low Kate.

"Alan,

How do you explain the popularity of groups such as Families Need Fathers fighting against the injustice of family courts and their perceived bias against men? "

We are talking in general gender terms here Alan not looking at the subdivided nature of cultural and regional legal biases. That is a question best asked of your legislator."

No, we are talking about the "bad behavior" of the sexes when compared with each other. You kindly provided a list of "male crimes"; rape, pornography, depravity etc, but you seem strangely reluctant to acknowledge the "crimes" of your own sex. Like a boxer who is quite happy to throw a right hook but expects his opponent not to throw any punches back. Hiding behind regional legal procedures will not work as you did not use the argument of regional differences in the first place when putting forward your theories. It's a little late now to use it as a flimsy shield for what I believe to be your flawed logic.

"Alan,
I fully accept that there are parts of the world where women are treated abominably. I don't agree with it and I won't make any attempt to excuse it."

Very good Alan but for someone who does not agree with it you seem to be making a case for it?"

Where? Show me please.

"Alan,

It is due to poverty, cultural backwardness and tradition"

Yes that is true but I believe I pointed out the parameters of this conversation in my opening post so a rather superfluous point."

Where please?



"Alan,

We need to work to change attitudes whilst still respecting those traditions. Then hopefully we can reach a point where women are no longer treated as chattels. The idea of actually doing something is too much like hard work for the neo feminists though. It's easier for them to rant on about "male brutality", whilst not actually putting forward any positive solutions to a problem that men did not create, at least not consciously and certainly not fully. It suits the feminist agenda to look for a scapegoat, to blame some group. Goebbels knew all about that too."

Yes there is a need for change, Neo Feminists as you call them Alan, do far more work towards change than any other in the areas of civil and individual rights."

If you can show me what exactly the ranting militant neo feminist harridans have actually achieved, other than putting mens backs up, then I'd love to see it, I really would. Please note, I do not believe that description applies to you.

"Alan we are having a debate, I don’t believe you've really read and digested my previous posts, go back over them and consider the point of view in respect of the non personal statements in the third person. Alan perhaps fewer references to Mr Gobbles would be more appropriate to this conversational debate."

Yes I have read it and I feel I've answered it perfectly well. To imply that I can't have digested it because I don't agree with you shows an arrogance that is staggering, which is strange because I do not believe you to be an arrogant person and even if you were, I'd be the first to admit you have something to be arrogant about.

I chose Goebbels because I wanted to use a master of propaganda to illustrate my point and he seemed to be the most well known and the most notorious. There is no other significance in the choice.

"Have a nice day."

I will, thank you. Talking to you always makes any day nicer.

Hello Kate, your being unusually kind, I take it the insurance coughed up for that storm damage. Alan isn't a attorney Kate, the concept of arguing or debating as a third person with all the vim and verve of belief while not actually having any views on it at all is a foreign concept to most here. Hands up who's legally trained in international law here. Not seeing a big show of hands. Any practicing attorneys or solicitors; barristers?
The other members Kate they mean and believe what they say passionately in some cases. If you want say a debating forum I can set one up here so that everyone who goes there knows what to expect and what they are getting into. set up a few simple rules a structure for debating. It might be a good idea. We could even have a competition once a month in the debate area a choice of subject and you have a month to argue the case.
This is a chat area and while there are no restrictions on subject with a few exceptions. Try to keep it amicable , or at least gloves on. If anyone else has a view on this don't be slow at coming forward.

Alan , Kate is using debating technique's to maneuver you into making statements she can then pick apart. You believe firmly in what you say, Kate hasn't got a view one way or the other.
So if you'd both like to get back on track with the conversation "culturally distinct flappers" I believe the title to have been we'd all much appreciate it. As I pointed out in my personal messages to you both the board owner isn't happy with the turn of events and has asked me to settle it. In case your eyesight is troubling you it says ADMIN under my name on the left hand side. Which means, what I say is Law here. So there will be a debating forum OK. Any complaints?
Well I'm sure we will all enjoy reading the continuing conversation between you both. Oh aye, have a nice day.

how quaint , perhaps you are right a debating forum where there are no holes barred. I do wonder if Thomas will join me there or is he just the coward I believe him to be. Is he man enough. I doubt it, will he join this forum and prove himself. In his own forum I found him ineffectual and , shall I say less of a debtor? He shrank from me in his own forum. Thomas are you man enough to face me at last instead of that pathetic nonsense you perpetrated before?? I wonder, I really quite liked you. There was something about you. Unfortunately you in the end shrank from me in fear, Why?

Alan, I am sure you understood my way of debate. Rather annoyingly I have to obey Dark Horizon. Not the sort for debate over rules ...lol I think you know him well, while being the amicable man he dose have a steely quality. I look forward to as he suggested the no holes barred debating forum. Members only, One of the best ideas he's had one believes. Do support it Alan, you know what he's like mean, mean mean....lol

OK then, I shall check in there regularly to see what's hot and what's not in the world of stimulating and controversial debate. In the meantime, have you come round to my way of thinking in the current discussion or shall we continue it in the new forum? Perhaps we should call it a draw? Final score: England 1-1 USA?

Certainly not, I most certainly do not give in or consider it a draw! As you put it, as I believe its not over until the defense finds its position untenable, or at the least on their collective knees, I shall most certainly be continuing. So far I have seen no evidence to the contrary to my previous statements.

I am indeed correct in respect of the context and framework of this conversation. If you would care to present any evidence in support of your claims, I will be happy to prove them if not entirely incorrect then at least misguided. How many thousands of years of evidence dose one need Alan.

My "claims"? I didn't claim anything, I merely defended my gender, quite successfully too I think you will find. Now, I'm not a lawyer, the nearest I ever get to a court is watching the Crime and Investigation channel.... ah, no, hang on, there was that one time when somebody reversed into my car without a licence or insurance, I did go to the Magistrates Court to see what the outcome would be. Most tedious, I waited there the entire morning, watched a whole load of dull cases, the majority of which were adjourned and all that happened when the one I was interested in came up was that he got a fine and was ordered to pay my insurance costs. It was very disappointing and quite a boring experience really....ummmm where was I again? Oh yes lawyers and stuff, that was it.....

Well anyway, unless they've changed the rules and I wasn't paying attention to the news that day, doesn't the prosecution have to do all the proving? The defence doesn't have to prove anything. At least that is my understanding of it.

All I can see by way of "evidence" is a few, admittedly well worded, feminist concepts that were probably de rigeur in the 1960s (I wish I could remember more of the 60s, England won the World Cup in 1966 but I was only 10 months old at the time. Scotland have never won it by the way) but those concepts are pretty much discredited now.

So, do you want to continue this most stimulating discussion here or on the new debates board?

As always it's a pleasure exchanging views with you, I wish you would answer your e mails though! Still, in all the years I've known you, (quite a lot of them now), you have often been frustrating but you've never, ever been dull.

Alan, your thinking is as woolly as your arguments. You know perfectly well that you made a number of claims by definition. I don’t have the time to teach you English, if you don’t read my posts properly you will find your answers failing.
Also you’re not following the framework of the conversation. My rhetoric if you will was based on cultural and socioeconomic fundamentals, one cannot disregard gender as part of this since I see no such thing as a male flapper, or are you trying to tell us something.... lol

However, you sought to make this a tirade on gender alone, which I countered.
As for your defence which you believe you acquitted yourself so well, if we were not friends I'm afraid I would have to be a little more stringent.

So far I have presented a point of view for the sake of argument. Alan I asked you to present your evidence to support your argument within the framework of this conversation. This is not a court of law; however, one would hope that sensibilities and common sense would apply. Do read what I write Alan, it’s most annoying to have to go over statements again and again. I don’t expect you to be conversant with all aspects of gender, and the social viewpoints of the early 20th century. It would be nice if you would at least step back and consider them from the third person.
I have this terrible feeling that your about to say , well I'm going home ...lol I do wish Dark Horizon would not edit my posts without approval first.

Go home? When I am doing so well? Nah.

I don't need to "learn English" lol, I AM English. "To be born English is to win the lottery of life." Cecil Rhodes.

You are merely dressing up your gender bias is the disguise of "cultural and socio economic fundamentals" and have singularly avoided all the counter arguments and questions raised by me in my response. I recall a certain month long discussion we had four years ago about The American Civil War, you used similar techniques then. It was hardly surprising that you were at the back of my mind as I walked around Gettysburg and Antietam!!! Now here you are again, using the same methods of argument and almost getting away with it.

OK, forget for a moment we are friends and be more "stringent" with me. I like a challenge and if you can frame your reply in the context of Louise Brooks and flappers then so much the better.

Bye for now.

"To be born English is to win the lottery of life." Cecil Rhodes

He must have been describing the booby prize; First prize was to be American, born free with constitutional rights under god.

Well at least you won something Alan, never mind I'm sure if you buy some more lottery tickets you will win something of worth eventually. I wouldn’t hold my breath though.
Try scratch cards; if you get enough liberty bells you may even win some money next time.
I understand that’s what the poor try when they have no other hope.

Your still not reading my posts properly, kindly do so before we continue.