|
|
|
|
|
| | Feminism Your ViewsPage 40 of 44 (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44) |
Holy Shit, man.
You are one of the rabid feminists who make feminism completely distasteful to many.
Everyone has different styles, I don't believe EP said anything distasteful, though he obviously didn't sugar coat his perception. I read 1uk's post in similar way, though I'll be nicer about it. He seems to be a great guy but with a chip on his shoulder from an obviously ugly divorce. And I mean this in the nicest way, having similar past of not seeing my father since I was 3 and having a direct family consisting of only women. The story of helping an old lady, or using an anecdote of a fallen soldier buddy to guilt someone about saying "I don't need a man" is not only irrelevant and a little shameful....and I say that respectfully because it was obviously relayed with some emotion and I couldn't think of a better word for that tact.
I think most people will have some story about how they helped an elderly person, he could have easily been a woman, gender was not involvved in him being kind. I don't think twice about being courteous even for a man, doesn't have any relation to whether I need them or not. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 2:32:59 AM |
It is sick and sad and God help what families and homes and neighborhoods will look like in a few more generations.
You think all this is the fault of feminism? I didn't let my kids outside to play even in the front yard when I moved to CA from KS because everytime I turned the TV on, there was some story of an abducted kid....and those stories always got sensationalized. Women had to go to work too to help because for most families, a man's paycheck no longer cut it to live a middle class life an send the kids off to college. Or even when it did, women had no security that their husbands would always remain that way, so she knew to fend for herself by getting educated and having a career. I'm pretty damn sure this wasn't all the fault of "lesbians out of New York". | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 2:40:36 AM |
Notice when boys want on girls teams, for instance, they ahve to go to court whereas the other way around is much easier. There was a story in the news about it recently.
Sure, the boys may have to go to court to try participate, but when women do get on the team (which I believe is the story you were talking about in the news) the boys simply forfeit and refuse to play...take the ball and go home.
Women pretending to be "the same" only hurt themselves in the long run. That's why they started acting like they can ahve sex without feelings or emotions involved because they're mad that some men can and then they just simply fake it to others and also themselves and develop disorders.
Oh boy, talk about a broad brush. There are some women that can have sex without getting emotional about it, just as there are men that get emotional about the women they have sex with. And developing disorders, sounds like wishing thinking that it's related to their sexual acitivity and not the stress of everyday living. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 5:45:36 AM |
She mentioned it being a disrespectful generation.lmao I didn't have the heart to say it's probably cause all us men are use to hearing how we aren't needed.
I personnally think it's a good example of how we suck in general, as a society, when it comes to take care of the elderly. We have the nasty tendency to stuck them in elderly centers and forget they exist...
Everyone is so terrified of everyone else nowadays, tons of people instead of helping someone, would rather walk by and pretend they don't exist lol. It sucks. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 5:48:47 AM |
Yes, but USUALLY the women who brag about having sex just for sex are not really able to do it without emotion and even ones who seem to are, like i said, building disorders so it only seems they're successful
If you really think that...you obviously need to get out more 
If you want to, I'll hook you up with a friend of mine. She'll ride you like a horse, then when you try and call her, she'll probably threaten to plug your azz... that's the way she rolls. As she says " I don't love A man...I love men. As many as I can, as often as I can.". She don't look like someone building disorders.
Well....there is that sexual disorder, but I think she's got that one under control for now  | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 7:00:20 AM | thinkinginca,
""I didn't let my kids outside to play even in the front yard when I moved to CA from KS because everytime I turned the TV on, there was some story of an abducted kid....and those stories always got sensationalized.""
When neighborhoods were gutted, the sharks swam in. The neighborhood I grew up in had so many eyes on so many porches, it would have been impossible.
""Women had to go to work too to help because for most families, a man's paycheck no longer cut it to live a middle class life an send the kids off to college.""
Women were sold, over and over and over and over again in all the media, that the real goods were at work and for a while things turned to two-income families...........it was AFTER that that prices shot up because of the new earning power families had.....it was the cause, not the effect.
""Or even when it did, women had no security that their husbands would always remain that way, so she knew to fend for herself by getting educated and having a career.""
Which is another way of saying they were preparing for divorce. There were always plenty of opportunities for women to work, it was limited to "female" professions like nursing and teaching and not wide open and I knew many. Most of them that I came into contact with quit work, very gladly, when they married to have children and raise families. The ones who didn't marry just continued to work and support themselves, there was the rare two-income couple ...I can't speak for the whole country, of course, just what I observed.
Needless to say, it mattered for women to marry an honorable man with a good education and good earning potential and it behooved a man to be honorable and have good earnings. Those things don't seem to be especially valued as much these days, hence the "players" having 30 kids by the time he is 25 with willing women who don't expect or can even conceive of a happy and successful married life and family.
I'm not saying that anything about the 1950's was perfect or even ideal, just how it was and by and large the best way to raise children and some of the most prosperous years we've know in this country. And I have seen any better model in dropping infants off at daycare, men and women competing instead of cooperating together, gutted neighborhoods, kids addicted to video games and junk food because their parents are out to lunch, etc. and only going to get worse, not better......ever.
And by the way........I might be a little paranoid about militant lesbian feminists out of New York.....but what I said about overthrowing the patriarchy and establishing a matriarchy?.. how many female-headed households are there now? How many unmarried mothers? How many children growing up in virtually fatherless homes?
If that isn't the wet dream of militant feminist lesbians come true, I don't know what is. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 7:45:23 AM | | whats wrong is that its ok at some levels but eventually the size and strength disparity becomes a factor...the strongest girl is still much weaker than the strongest guy...its all good til a girl gets seriously injured or killed...the girls that try out for boys teams usually can compete with boys on the low end of the scale but cant compete with the top males...girls wrestle now in the lower weight classes in high school and do pretty well because the guys they wrestle havent fully developed.... | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 7:49:13 AM | girls wrestle now in the lower weight classes in high school and do pretty well because the guys they wrestle havent fully developed....
Chill dude. We ARE talking about kids here and school sports, not the freakin Olympics lol.
I say, anyone can do the job, SHOULD do the job. If the girl can outwrestle other guys, if she's good, go. I'll be behind her as much as any other guy would. Like 1Ukn said, I'd go and defend any girl who got picked on like that...and get my teeth busted. And be happy I did. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 8:11:21 AM | There was a girl who wrestled for another school when my son wrestled. Man, there's a lot of skin-to-skin in wrestling! She was a tiny thing. However, she didn't get a chance to wrestle all that much, as the boys tended to forfeit rather than wrestle her. I don't think it was because they were afraid of being beaten by a girl, though. Son said his teammates were embarrassed to do some of those holds on a cute girl.
Wrestling looked like fun, and would be fantastic exercise, but I'm not sure what the best way would be to address the while adolescent hormone issue. As much of a feminist as I consider myself to be, I'm not quite sure girls wrestling on boys' teams would be my first battle.
Football, now...that's a different story! If the girl is too frail and delicate to compete, then she shouldn't, or only has herself to blame if she gets hurt. For the tougher, bigger girls? I think they could have fun, especially if the padding and mask hides her gender=D | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 10:15:36 AM | And by the way........I might be a little paranoid about militant lesbian feminists out of New York.....but what I said about overthrowing the patriarchy and establishing a matriarchy?.. how many female-headed households are there now? How many unmarried mothers? How many children growing up in virtually fatherless homes? If that isn't the wet dream of militant feminist lesbians come true, I don't know what is.
I'd attribute that more to pure stupidity on the part of both males and females, rather than anything to do with any feminist movement. People who are too young, too incompatible, or too lax in their birth control methods to begin with creating kids when they have no business doing so. Was it the feminist movement or a move by society at large that demanded men be held responsible, at least financially, for the children they helped produce, rather than the responsibility being foisted on society at large? There can only be so many nurse or clerical positions available and only so many women being suited to those good ol' (way old) traditional "female" jobs. Women may not have the same ability as men when it comes to positions requiring strength, however, they're every bit as intelligent as men when it comes to the non-physical jobs. I'll grant that the payment structure needs to be corrected in a number of cases when it comes to child support. Now tell me how you correct stupid when it comes to people in relationships that create kids? | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 10:29:21 AM | | Thanks for an example of what I was saying..a pro female athlete can beat an average Joe..how would she fare against D Howard or Shaq? | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 10:35:06 AM | I'd attribute that more to pure stupidity on the part of both males and females, rather than anything to do with any feminist movement
I have to say in that sentence there are 2 parts to the equation, and both are true lol. YES, too much stupidity between males and females, but also YES, it was the goal of the *die hard trigger happy* Feminists of yonder who wanted to show Men that Women were way better...
They werent about equality, they were more for female superiority. Kind of like the KKK for the single mom I guess. You still see some somtimes in books or Hollywood movies, usually in bag girl roles or Child Protection Services ladies
I personnally think the debate for Men vs Women is sooooo cliche.....there are so many capable men, so many capable women, so many uncapable of both. On God(scratch that, insert politically correct divinity or force of choice here) 's Green Earth, you find all types of human beings. A lot suck, but a lot don't. The ones that suck still argue that others suck, the ones that don't KNOW they don't 
Shaq?
Eventually everyone's got everyone else's number. In wrestling, I wouldnt want to have to wrestle Chyna way back when, and I'm sure some guys had the same opinion when she started wrestling LOL. Same deal with Shaq, eventually there will come a girl who can dribble as fast and jump as high as the Shaq. Matter of time. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 12:55:12 PM |
Which is another way of saying they were preparing for divorce. There were always plenty of opportunities for women to work, it was limited to "female" professions like nursing and teaching and not wide open and I knew many. Most of them that I came into contact with quit work, very gladly, when they married to have children and raise families. The ones who didn't marry just continued to work and support themselves, there was the rare two-income couple ...I can't speak for the whole country, of course, just what I observed.
Maybe, or it's just another way of saying that one is ensuring security regardless of what unforseeable circumstance may befall them. Divorce is not the only situation where a female may lose spouse. I'm sure plenty of women were thrown into insecurity after wars (which seems to be primarily a male preoccupation) where their husbands didn't make it home. Either way, for many women that saw their mothers move into the workplace, they simply preferred the indepenence and respect of knowledge and careers brought them. I know that I MUCH prefer my life and career than that of my mother or grandmother who lived more under the traditional family, and it's not because I'm a feminist but rather a human with a independent streak that wants control how I live. There are still women that prefer to be mother and wife foremost, it's not like men don't have choices in the type they choose.
Needless to say, it mattered for women to marry an honorable man with a good education and good earning potential and it behooved a man to be honorable and have good earnings. Those things don't seem to be especially valued as much these days, hence the "players" having 30 kids by the time he is 25 with willing women who don't expect or can even conceive of a happy and successful married life and family.
Have you actually taken time to really read the forums? There are women clamoring for well to do men everyday...and that doesn't automatically mean that they just want to be a wife/mother even if those are the characteristics they seek in a man. People with bad characteristics are always going to be with us, feminism didn't cause that either...they were there even before the modern day.
I'm not saying that anything about the 1950's was perfect or even ideal, just how it was and by and large the best way to raise children and some of the most prosperous years we've know in this country. And I have seen any better model in dropping infants off at daycare, men and women competing instead of cooperating together, gutted neighborhoods, kids addicted to video games and junk food because their parents are out to lunch, etc. and only going to get worse, not better......ever.
I believe since you were a child of the 50's, you have an idealized way of thinking what was better. Me, I look back to the really traditional (Japanese) family I grew up in, and know that I would never want that for my life...has nothing to do with feminism. My daughter met her husband in school. She got pregnant so they married and had two kids, she stayed home as a mom until last year when her youngest was old enough to start pre-school, then went to work. They struggled mightily during that time with only one income but made it through with good planning and coopertion with her husband, and she's a product of a supposed feminist like me, and I'm more than proud of the path they have taken. The thing is, we try to support what works but also makes both man and wife happy.
And by the way........I might be a little paranoid about militant lesbian feminists out of New York.....but what I said about overthrowing the patriarchy and establishing a matriarchy?.. how many female-headed households are there now? How many unmarried mothers? How many children growing up in virtually fatherless homes?
If that isn't the wet dream of militant feminist lesbians come true, I don't know what is.
How many miitant feminist do you actually know that do think like this? Because I know hardly zilch. It's like a caricture, much like overt racists of the old days....we have all evolved because it was necessary and have tasted a bit of every possible outcome to decide which works best for us. I think you may still be stuck in another time....but ask any woman from back then if this is what they prefer to the times now, and you'll probably find that it's a mix. There maybe much to like, but just as much to dislike about those "old" days. Memories are often selective that way too....most people remember more of the good than bad. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 2:00:42 PM | ""Either way, for many women that saw their mothers move into the workplace, they simply preferred the indepenence and respect of knowledge and careers brought them. I know that I MUCH prefer my life and career than that of my mother or grandmother who lived more under the traditional family, and it's not because I'm a feminist but rather a human with a independent streak that wants control how I live. There are still women that prefer to be mother and wife foremost, it's not like men don't have choices in the type they choose.""
I think when women put career first and their own children and family second, it does not bode well. And when we say "career", do we mean doctor, lawyer, accountant? Maybe ten percent of the time. The other 90% is just a job.......we're not talking about losing a place on the corporate ladder here after investing six figures into higher education, etc. ...we're talking about a lot of women paying for child care and only netting a marginal amount of money while their kids are brought up by strangers because its un-PC and retro to make any financial sacrifices to be home with kids, even for a few years....and even infants.
My daughter was in daycare for two weeks just before preschool. She used to sing to herself and I loved hearing it, I knew she was happy........but she stopped when she went to daycare...I asked why and was told that Mrs. Davison told her to not sing to herself because it disturbed the other children. Well, we pulled her right out of there and that was that.... but she never sang to herself again.
I really don't care what other people do or how they raise their families, so if this country wants to put jobs first and children and families second, fine with me!
I do wish that family life could be valued more and there isn't such a taboo against it over work, which seems to be sacred somehow. There are lots of ways to do that.........half the people sit in front of computers all day and don't need to be in an office.......men and women both......but that's not going to happen if work is sacred and family is second rate. As long as women are sold the idea that work is where you get your jollies, even if it is at K-Mart, and talking about the integrity of families is some retro, un-PC, passe things.........families will just drift further and further apart. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 2:11:50 PM | ""I think when women put career first and their own children and family second, it does not bode well. And when we say "career", do we mean doctor, lawyer, accountant? Maybe ten percent of the time. The other 90% is just a job.......we're not talking about losing a place on the corporate ladder here after investing six figures into higher education, etc. ...we're talking about a lot of women paying for child care and only netting a marginal amount of money while their kids are brought up by strangers because its un-PC and retro to make any financial sacrifices to be home with kids, even for a few years....and even infants.""
The same statement could be made regarding men as well - jobs, putting their jobs ahead of their children and family. Both genders "appear" to do it, or are they just trying to make a living to support their household/family and put food on the table. Men AND women are paying a lot for day care and the children are being brought up by strangers. It is rarely different in a two parent household than a one parent household.
None of us are working to "get our jollies"...geez. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 3:12:04 PM |
If women would just BE WOMEN relationships and life would be much better.
Wait... you mean I have the option to NOT be a woman? COOL BEANS!!
So tell me, what are my options? | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 3:44:58 PM |
This girl was anything but frail. She was also a power lifter and had gotten a free ride through school on her athletic ability. She was a very good female athlete and on some levels I personally could not compete. I also have a feeling that a majority of the men on these forums I could easily compete with them. So I am no push over. Trust me I've beaten men 6'8" before. Yeah I'm only 6'1" but still I'm in good shape for a man my age trust me. You guys don't know the girl suing and you don't know the girls I'm talking about. I'm telling you for a fact these girls deserve the opportunity to compete. We had a guy who looked like he had polio for gods sake. I was begged to play but I didn't want to. If she did whats the problem?
Boy, I wish I knew how to get to the moties from my phone, cuz The "applause" would fit beautifully here.
What a practical, levelheaded way to look at it. The world NEEDS this mindset:-)
Most women can't compete physically with men. I'm no shrinking flower, but I can't. For those women blessed with that kind of strength, u go girl!
Not certain what the "suing" part refers to, though. Did a girl sue after getting hurt? | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 3:49:20 PM | OT: I really hate the short timeout period...the more you type, the more likely you'll lose it all on this forum. Lets try again...
I think when women put career first and their own children and family second, it does not bode well.
It's patently absurd that a person who HAS to work to make ends meet cares less about their children....this would surely be indication that men often care less about their children than the women who in aggregate stay home to care for kids more.
And when we say "career", do we mean doctor, lawyer, accountant? Maybe ten percent of the time. The other 90% is just a job.......we're not talking about losing a place on the corporate ladder here after investing six figures into higher education, etc. ...we're talking about a lot of women paying for child care and only netting a marginal amount of money while their kids are brought up by strangers because its un-PC and retro to make any financial sacrifices to be home with kids, even for a few years....and even infants.
Seems to me you've just pulled some forumula to support your beliefs, and using that to indict females that have any ambition and goals. So now any woman that decides to become a doctor/lawyer/accountant doesn't care about her kids? Does that equally mean a man with the same vocation care less than everyone else about their kids too?
A person's career/work is often a way of life for most people, something they have to do for 40+ years to be considered productive, whereas parenting children until they are schoolage is only a temporary state.
Kind of sad that there are people ranting about single women staying home with their kids for similar reasons, that what's left of their paycheck is so miniscule that it's not worth leaving their kids with strangers as caretakers instead of drawing welfare is a leech, but if she does so, she doesn't love her children....they just can't do anything right for the ideologues.
I do wish that family life could be valued more and there isn't such a taboo against it over work, which seems to be sacred somehow.
I kind of agree...this is only true if your work consist of just being a wage slave and you don't love what you do, or your work has no real value to the world. I've worked for myself for he last two decades, and out of the home for half that time...I made a concious decision to balance work and family equally important. I wish more people had the opportunit to do that too, but I don't see them as caring less for their family if they can't.
| |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 4:15:46 PM | ""Seems to me you've just pulled some formula to support your beliefs, and using that to indict females that have any ambition and goals. So now any woman that decides to become a doctor/lawyer/accountant doesn't care about her kids? Does that equally mean a man with the same vocation care less than everyone else about their kids too?""
I don't know...if you do consulting and travel a lot, work a 60 hour week and 20 more hours at home, etc. and don't have time for a husband or wife or children.........is that really fair to them? I'd have to say yes, their job means more to them than their families.........I had a job where I was out of state all week long and only home weekends.......I couldn't maintain a relationship, missed my daughter's school events, etc. and after two years chucked it and it was more money than I'd ever made. So, yeah, if I made a choice between what was really important to me, others makes them, too.
I guess my point is that it seems to be a free-for-all..........roles and divisions of labor are important, no matter which gender does what......and I don't accept, "why doesn't HE stay home with the kids, why do I have to?".... that kind of competition instead of cooperation.......does not bode well.
Anyway, enough..........I guess it just is the way it is, my daughter is an adult now, I'm not married......none of this really impacts me.......:-) | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 4:30:12 PM |
I don't know...if you do consulting and travel a lot, work a 60 hour week and 20 more hours at home, etc. and don't have time for a husband or wife or children.........is that really fair to them?
It depends on what the family wants....some people have different priorities. If they aspire to higher income household, and plenty do, then who am I to judge?
Wait... you mean I have the option to NOT be a woman? COOL BEANS!!
So tell me, what are my options?
Yeah, sign me up! Sound like the ultimate "choice".
Would it be right for them to allow me to try and not my ex girlfriend? Simply because I have a penis? Either way if she fared well against shaq or not she still would of faired better than you or me. I saw her with my own two eyes kill a sime pro man. That's pretty good considering she had been retired for a number of years and she was 32 years old. I think they got two rings when she was there. Dude, the girl could play. There are those that can compete and they got enough odds against them as it is without a$$holes like you telling them different.
Great attitude! It's obvious you are doing right by your kids if this is indicative of what you are teaching them! "She" may not be able to play football or basketball, but "she" sure can own a team! | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/23/2012 7:08:30 PM | ^^^I think this was exactly what EP was talking about, the part where you think feminism has something to do with the fact that single dad aren't being treated properly. That you're kind of being oppressed, welcome to the club. When I divorced, I felt trounced by the courts for variety of reasons, many of which are that it's just the way the system was setup back then, which was very anti-female (note, not feminist). After years of getting the short end of the stick, now all of the sudden we are the bad ones for getting a little fairness in the system, which of course came at the expense of the opposing gender.
Yeah, sometimes its unfair, I know. I grew up with absolutely zero financial help from my father, and there was no laws forcing him to take care of his two kids. He never once tried to contact us, and I get its hard.
I guess my point is, you 're blaming the wrong people, and focus on the wrong reasons for what's wrong.
I'm sorry, but I have yet to really see real reason from you as to why feminism is broke, though like everyone else, I sympathize with the way the courts have treated you badly....but at the risk of being argumentative, you're wrong about what's cause of your problem. You don't think single mom's aren't just as neglected by the court system? Maybe I missed the single most important reason for your thesis, but I haven't seen it in the disucssions we've had so far. It's the laws which are ridiculously difficult to change, the reason why feminist have to come into being.
But being a little ahead of you in the process of single parent child rearing, believe me, all you have suffered will be rewarded because it's clear that you are a caring father. I've been there as a single mother. I know, you can't help but let your indiviual experience color your view, and the fallout from a bad relationship is a bitter pill to swallow when you're already hurting in many ways from divorce, but I just feel your blame is misplaced.
Anyway, thanks for actually listening to what was said, that's a very rare thing on the internets. :) The talk was thoroughly satisfying because it felt like it had honest to goodnes exchange of thoughts, not just rant and raves, and that's kind of a rare thing around here. I can't fix your car, but I will fix your computer if you ever need. :) But I will take that offer for cooking, I HATE doing that. Which may explain why I have feminist tendencdies. ;) | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/24/2012 6:27:33 AM | ""^^^I think this was exactly what EP was talking about, the part where you think feminism has something to do with the fact that single dad aren't being treated properly. That you're kind of being oppressed, welcome to the club. When I divorced, I felt trounced by the courts for variety of reasons, many of which are that it's just the way the system was setup back then, which was very anti-female (note, not feminist). After years of getting the short end of the stick, now all of the sudden we are the bad ones for getting a little fairness in the system, which of course came at the expense of the opposing gender. ""
The changes in divorce laws, especially no-fault divorce, were fought for by feminist lawyers, etc. because of their general goal to create a matriarchy and overthrow the patriarchy. The woman gets the traditional "mom is primary parent", hence the custody and with the custody the house and with the house the child support ..........and presto, woman in charge of the family, man on the street.
Do not think for one second that any of this is about "fairness", it is about matriarchy. Or at least it was..........all it is now is a lot of what used to be called "broken homes", now pretty much the new "norm".
In my opinion, they destroyed the model for the American family .... and there is a backlash now, this "war on women" from the right because they are fed up........misguided, but fed up. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/24/2012 6:37:01 AM | yeah capn and like I said... that would be a disorder. lol
Know what else is a disorder? Dating 18-21 virgins ONLY. When your 35.
You know me, just throwing that out there...
bar-b-que?
LOL EVERY time I see that word....lemme tell you a story. My eldest daughter was 2 back then it's her bday, I dont have a lot of money, so I go to a store, and buy her a barbie doll. But NOT the REAL Barbie, it's a generic cheaper brand barbie. She looks at it when I give it to her and goes "Dad, this isn't Barbie...". So I answer "Oh no, YEAH honey, it's her younger sister, Barbie-Q (bar-b-que lol).
It stays that way. Couple of years go by, she 's now 9 years old. One morning when she's at my place, we are watching tv. TYhere's an add for I forget which doll company, and she goes like "Well, it's a nice doll, but she sure don't look as great as BARBIE-Q does....."
LOL My jaw drops open and I am left stunned that an event I had practically forgotten and a joke I had made when she was barely more than a yapping baby stuck with her until that age LOL. I had to explain to her the truth, that there wasn't a BarbQ. She didn't believe me! lol. It took a while, then she was laughing and calling me a liar.
Anyways....I can't see or hear the word Bar-b-cue anymore without falling down laughing, so thanks lol :banger: | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/24/2012 1:06:28 PM | I can cook. :) My kids complain about their mom's cooking.lol That woman would burn water.lmao Ever had a mean texas bar-b-que? I got a huge smoker.
Why, yes, I have and I love it! I consider Rockport, TX my hometown...my mother still lives there and I may join her in a few months if I can sell my house. Careful, I may take you up on that offer. :)
The changes in divorce laws, especially no-fault divorce, were fought for by feminist lawyers, etc. because of their general goal to create a matriarchy and overthrow the patriarchy. The woman gets the traditional "mom is primary parent", hence the custody and with the custody the house and with the house the child support ..........and presto, woman in charge of the family, man on the street.
Do not think for one second that any of this is about "fairness", it is about matriarchy. Or at least it was..........all it is now is a lot of what used to be called "broken homes", now pretty much the new "norm".
Well, Balsamica, I'll have to disagree with the reasoning. I'm sure you're right that pro-female lawyer may have pushed for no-fault divorce, although I don't know for sure because I'm not versed on that. But I don't see that it only benefited women, I'm sure plenty of men sighed in relief when they didn't have to beg and fight to get out of bad marriages. Regardless, I'm pretty certain that laws skewed in favor of the man prior and you're objecting because it went the other way.
Recently, a friend of mine divorced in Texas (as an anecdote, his judge was the one that was splashed all over the news for beating his daughter on video which got huge play last year). He was awarded equal joint custody and not only did he get the house, but there was absolutely no child support ordered. It's really not as bad as the men make it out to be in reality....not even in Texas, but I'm sure it varies from district to district. | |
|
| Feminism Your Views
Posted: 5/24/2012 4:37:52 PM |
It's most likely to do more upward mobility at work because now the only person he needs to look out for is himself. He can downsize his living space if need be, travel more if the job requires it, has more reign of the financing of his money, among several other factors. It only makes sense if you ask me.
But how does this track with "if the man/father earns more,he should get primary custody"? If he's going to be mostly absent from the childrens' lives because he needs to be upwardly mobile at work, are the children going to be constantly under the care of a nanny or daycare establishments?
I can well imagine that the compensation package for a live-in nanny or daycare flexible/responsive enough to handle children whose parents have an unpredictable schedule, would cost MORE than what the average child-support payment is.
So is it REALLY the better decision to award custody based solely on who has the bigger income if earning that income entails being away from home a lot?
My intent was to try and assure any potential mates that I had no inclinations to bleed them dry emotionally or financially. Most of the decent women here would certainly want you to know that we are not the type of users and opportunists that many of you have had the misfortunes of dealing with in the past.
that's pretty much what I mean when I identify myself as self-reliant. And yeah, that self-reliance includes knowing when to HIRE someone to do things I'm not skilled at, or when it actually makes more economic sense to hire a job done. I'm not looking for a SO to be a free mechanic and handyman...and no, I don't regard sex as "currency" to be used as payment for practical services.
However, I can see why that statement would sound to some as if the woman considers all males to be fripperies, inconsequential and small.
Yanno, I don't guess I ever thought that men would take it that way-that saying " I don't NEED a man" would be seen as across-the-board devaluation and dismissiveness of the male gender. If this is what men THINK they are hearing, no wonder they have their boxers in a knot about "feminism".
You don't get it. For the original lesbian feminists of the 60's, men WERE useless and unnecessary and they saw to it that women were conditioned to think that way.
I don't think the conditioning took all that well, I don't know ANY women personally of any age who think that men are useless and unnecessary. I manage to get along alright without having to find a man to sign a contract with ASAP because certain aspects of feminism have permitted me the luxury of CHOICE. I can look for a man with whom I share a mutual desire to pair up, I don't have to quick get with the first man that comes along as a matter of survival.
Oh, I get it alright-that is, I get what is REALLY at work here. Be that as it may, other than the value that alleged "lesbian feminists"(which ones were they?)writings/rhetoric played in getting the attention of the media and goverment, I don't think all that many women really followed or bought into radical feminism or man-hating philosophy.
It is women who have made the wholesale abandonment of husbands and families, not men.
Really? then why is it that women still are the ones expected to take full custody and major responsibility for the children. I don't think anything was "wholesale abandonment", I think it was simply a matter of more choice and better utilization of talents, abilities, skills and gifts of roughly half of our human resources.
Not everyone is going to want what feminism brought, but the point is, it gave women choice to decide how they wanted to live their lives, and gave them access to do just that.
Precisely!
For me, "need" implies that the person cannot function without the other.
Are you implying you can function in a society with no men?
Are you implying that someone actually SAID "MEN"-as in collective, plural, the entire gender? I've observed at various times in various threads that women have said they don't need a man,singular, and since this is a dating site,I think many reasonable people of both genders interpreted that as " I don't need to form a pair bond with a man simply because I can't survive on my own". Which way is it guys? Do you want a woman capable of managing her own life, so that the man in her life knows he was a CHOICE? Or do some men REALLY want it to be so that a woman MUST find a man to provide for her, protect her, fix things for her, pay her bills, support her kids,etc? You don't get to have it both ways, and trust me, I see TONS of couples where HUMANISM reigns and roles are worked out so that both social constructs and individuality are served.
A strong, modern woman is deprived of innate femininity and because of interdependency men are forced to abandon masculine traits.
Sorry, but I must respectfully disagree, I'm not seeing any huge groundswell of men or women being deprived of their innate anything.
Yes, there are always a few "knee-jerk reactionists" and those who will retreat into ridiculousness because they resent or feel threatened by the re-adjustment of the 1950s traditional roles. But I'm not seeing "deprivation" or "abandoment" of innate femininity or of masculine traits.
We loaded her groceries in her car for her and she didn't say "I don't need a man" she simply said "thank you". She said she had been struggling for a while and no other men would help her despite seeing it.
I won't stand by and see ANYBODY struggle with anything. I don't think that helpfulness and kindness are man/woman things. And if someone helps me with something, or holds a door for me, I always say thank you. People who believe that feminism has destroyed simple good manners and consideration have been exposed to a DISTORTION of true feminism-which is nothing more than the belief in the opportunity for men and women to be equal in politics,protection under the law,and educational and economic matters.
Some of us see the biggest problems with this transition toward civilization having more to do with insecure former dominant types, being able to come to terms with equality in all of it's manifestations. Karma bites especially hard on the previously dominant insecure types.
Earthpuppy, I agree that this issue has significant bearing on the conflict, I'm not sure it's the sole root of the whole problem.
Do you think it will bite the future matriachy that you and your ilk would so like to see?
I think it will eventually bite sh*theads and "game the concept" people of both genders.
He seems to be a great guy but with a chip on his shoulder from an obviously ugly divorce.
I concur.
Fortunately, I was blessed to grow up in a family of 5 children where BOTH parents worked and we all contributed to running a small farm as well.
There are BIOLOGICAL advantages and disadvantages, for example.
No, what there are, is biological DIFFERENCES.
There are some women that can have sex without getting emotional about it, just as there are men that get emotional about the women they have sex with. And developing disorders, sounds like wishing thinking that it's related to their sexual acitivity and not the stress of everyday living.
eah, if it were REALLY more sexual freedom causing "disorders", then how come lots of married women develop disorders?
Yes, but USUALLY the women who brag about having sex just for sex are not really able to do it without emotion and even ones who seem to are, like i said, building disorders so it only seems they're successful.
Really? and you know this because...? Are you an impartial and TRAINED researcher? Are you a doctor,psychologist or social worker?
Women were sold, over and over and over and over again in all the media, that the real goods were at work and for a while things turned to two-income families...........it was AFTER that that prices shot up because of the new earning power families had.....it was the cause, not the effect.
Hmmm-then how come I know so many women in their 70s and 80s who were working wives and mothers? I also think that WWII had a lot to do with the situation,because women were needed to work. And I'm sure that earning their own money was an empowering factor. But hey, if there are those who think we would have been better served to LOSE WWII so as to keep women out of the workplace,it's a free country(and it might very well not have been, without the efforts of Rosie the Riveter)-people can think whatever they want to.
Now tell me how you correct stupid when it comes to people in relationships that create kids?
Oh, I can think of several ways but they'd all be violations of human civil rights.
I think when women put career first and their own children and family second, it does not bode well.
Are you kidding me? I don't know many women like that-but I know tons of women who managed-very nicely I might add-to balance work/career and family.
I do wish that family life could be valued more and there isn't such a taboo against it over work, which seems to be sacred somehow. I don't know where you live or who you hang out with-but I see no evidence that either work or family are being devalued, or women being forced to make an either/or decision.
I think this is another case of an adverse personal experience causing blame to all be shifted onto some social or political movement.
If women would just BE WOMEN relationships and life would be much better.
Wait... you mean I have the option to NOT be a woman? COOL BEANS!!
So tell me, what are my options?
FV, you may not WANT to know, LOL. I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing any big trend of women NOT being women. They may not be women who've been conditioned to think that her ONLY value and validity is having a man pick her for his wife,but I don't see where women have stopped being women, or men have stopped being men.
Money means nothing when you neglect time with loved ones.
I volunteer at a local emergency food pantry. Money means PLENTY when you don't have any to buy food for your kids.
you 're blaming the wrong people, and focus on the wrong reasons for what's wrong.
I think you are right. I do not for a minute doubt that there are those here who may have been negatively impacted by what seems to be a feminism-based issue. Or the mis-application of a principle associated with feminism.
Feminism is broke because
According to other posters here, feminism is FAR from "broke"-it is alive and well and destroying the fabric of society.
Feminism in it's simplest definition says nothing about hating anyone with a penis. Feminism is a philosophy, not some kind of hate group. Yes, as I understand it, some of the 1960s feminists wrote and said some outrageous(IMO) things.
Let you in on a little secret-a lot of women who were in favor of equal educational and economic opportunity were laughing their asses off over some of the rabid rantings of damaged women who used feminism as a disguise for their real issues. I honestly think that if it weren't for the rabid feminists and the alarmist anti-feminists, we might have suceeded in full national ratification of the ERA.
Do not think for one second that any of this is about "fairness", it is about matriarchy. Or at least it was..........all it is now is a lot of what used to be called "broken homes", now pretty much the new "norm".
That is your OPINION. I'm not seeing this, and.offhand, I can't think of anyone I know personally who feels the way you do, and I'm talking about both genders and a variety of ages and family status.
In my opinion, they destroyed the model for the American family ....
I see examples every day of 2 parent, dual income happy families. I see elderly people who are financially secure because both husband and wife contributed to the family income.
I know that there is a tendency to want to see one's own situation as "the norm"-and I suppose if one has had a failed marriage and broken family, that it might give a sense of comfort to think that the majority of American families are broken and failing. But I'm NOT seeing it, and-other than HERE(PoF forums)I'm not hearing from men who think that the American family is broken and that "feminism" is to blame.
Again, I do not identify myself as a feminist( probably BECAUSE of some of the rantings of the man-hating faction-I can only pity those individuals for whatever horrific happenings fostered that hate.
I consider myself as a humanist.
Cindy O
. | |
|
|
|
|
Page
40
of
44 (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44)
|
|
Home
login 
