How Is Feminism Going In The US?

66 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
Hello there fellow warriors!

I'm really glad I am able to finally post this on a forum that I suspect has a majority of American speakers (not only Americans, of course, that would be foolish to think). I have been looking for a forum with many Americans in, because I have always wanted to discuss this kind of topic!

The reason I created this thread is because I am VERY CURIOUS about the progress of feminism in your country because in my country (Sweden), things have gotten out of hands.

The way they have done so, are the observations that a woman cannot feel attraction to a man she perceives to be of lower status than her. Now, I do not mean to throw a buck of oil and then let it all on fire but I think I just did...

It has been suggested that in places in Sweden where feminism has prevailed, you'll find MORE rather than fewer, single people (ironic isn't it?). Now, I am all for equality to certain degrees.

But the feminist movement in Sweden (also known as Feministisk Intiativ, roughly translated to "Feminism's Initiative") have taken things to extremes and regarding happy relationships and marriages are declining.

And, from what I have heard, through word-of-mouth (I know, not the most reliable source), some American women also state that "Swedish men are wussies!" (implying they could NEVER be attracted to such men and therefore would NEVER marry these kind of men)

So, how is the feminism movement going in your country (the US)? And how does the dynamic between men and women work out when both seem to have more "traditional roles" instead of both trying to "achieve equal social status"?

If you have read human psychology, for marketing purposes, you have probably realized the inevitability of social hierarchies, its dynamics and its dynamics between the sexes.

I would really appreciate some humble and honest observations, anecdotes and such! :-) I don't judge anyone's "extreme" view. I am open-minded but still have my own opinions that I stand by due to my own research and experiences.

Take Care & Have An Awesome Day, Fellow Warrior! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    It ranges the full gambit over here, Max. There's people who feel women should be the same thing as men - people who think women are pets, some who feel women are superior. Some want to take our rights - others are busy trying to heap us with so many responsibilities the load would stagger a horse.

    As far as personal relationships -- right now the economy doesn't really allow a women to stay home and take a traditional role even if it's the one she would choose if she had her way. Of course - it's different here in the first place. When I lived in Europe, I found that even though there was a very palpable division of labor - when it came to intellectual respect - women were given as much credit for having brains as the men were so they were equals at the dinner table (at least in the area I was at). In the US, division of labor also accompanied a feeling of male superiority. That makes trouble for men now that women make their own money. If a guy wants to be a neanderthal and claim superiority and dominance, the woman now has the means to just walk away. I've known many whose men think that the woman should work all day to help support them then come home to clean house and cook while his feet are up on the couch. It doesn't fly. At first there was the "superwoman" attitude of "I can do it all" -- now women are just tired and stressed.

    In homes that men respect women as partners (and we do have those men around) and understand that they need to divide the labor so neither is getting crushed under the load, things still seem pretty normal.

    It's a boiling pot where there are many differences - and some groups are louder than others.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959178].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      It ranges the full gambit over here, Max. There's people who feel women should be the same thing as men - people who think women are pets, some who feel women are superior. Some want to take our rights - others are busy trying to heap us with so many responsibilities the load would stagger a horse.

      As far as personal relationships -- right now the economy doesn't really allow a women to stay home and take a traditional role even if it's the one she would choose if she had her way. Of course - it's different here in the first place. When I lived in Europe, I found that even though there was a very palpable division of labor - when it came to intellectual respect - women were given as much credit for having brains as the men were so they were equals at the dinner table (at least in the area I was at). In the US, division of labor also accompanied a feeling of male superiority. That makes trouble for men now that women make their own money. If a guy wants to be a neanderthal and claim superiority and dominance, the woman now has the means to just walk away. I've known many whose men think that the woman should work all day to help support them then come home to clean house and cook while his feet are up on the couch. It doesn't fly. At first there was the "superwoman" attitude of "I can do it all" -- now women are just tired and stressed.

      In homes that men respect women as partners (and we do have those men around) and understand that they need to divide the labor so neither is getting crushed under the load, things still seem pretty normal.

      It's a boiling pot where there are many differences - and some groups are louder than others.

      In my family, both my wife and I work full time hours. We have 2 kids at home, though one is 18 and leaving for college in a few months and our youngest is 9.

      The work is pretty well divided here but only very few household jobs are "exclusive". And this is by choice...

      She does the bulk of the house cleaning - living room, bathrooms (except mine), bedroom, etc. I do all the outside work - cut the lawn, trim the bushes, shovel the snow, etc. (and clean my bathroom).

      Everything else is split up pretty evenly. We both cook, wash dishes, clean the kitchen, and I do my own laundry (although she does our youngest sons wash...).

      This arrangement of work was never really discussed at length as to who does what. It simply turned out this way and we both are fine with it.

      And interestingly, those I know personally all have similar households. My brother comes across very "Me Tarzan, You Jane..." when there's people around, but behind closed doors, his household is similar to mine.

      Frankly, I never experienced any "neanderthal" households...
      Signature

      Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959308].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
        Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio View Post


        She does the bulk of the house cleaning - living room, bathrooms (except mine)[. . . ]
        Good Lord, Mike, what are you doing in your bathroom that your wife won't clean it?! It might be time to lay off the sauerkraut dogs.
        Signature

        Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959341].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author wingman7
          "Feminism" is probably a much misunderstood term.

          Even things like equality and empowerment dont always fit.

          I think its gone too far. And the pendulum may swing back.

          The world of commerce seems to have a big effect on some people and the companies know it. Seeking personal perfection has a financial cost. Which is profit in the hands of commerce.

          I am often amazed that people can spend thousands on their personal appearance and catch the bus and live in rented accommodation? No car, no assets?

          And then there are others who demand everything. Best car, best holidays, best home, best children, best career, private time, personal assets. They roar around dumping their kids in childcare while they go to conferences and run companies. They want it all.

          Personally I have been married to the same person for 40 years (my wife...a woman!). We share responsibility, decision making, personal needs and childcare. It works.

          I wonder where all these perfect people with the "all about me" attitude will be in 20 years. Kids out of a test tube, deposited daily in childcare?

          Or maybe endless broken relationships, in search of ultimate fulfillment?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959473].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
          Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

          Good Lord, Mike, what are you doing in your bathroom that your wife won't clean it?! It might be time to lay off the sauerkraut dogs.
          I'LL never tell.

          Signature

          Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959578].message }}
          • Some women would like to be liberated still. Some women have all the responsibility for raising children and status doesn't seem to matter. Meaning divorced women and married women alike have to work and full responsibility for handling all the affairs of a child or children. Divorced women seem to carry the brunt after being the full custodian of a child with the father getting off with child support. Some men go through great sport hiding access and pay really well below what they could. Most men don't have to do the extra's either. Women have to content with tutoring, camp, school uniforms etc. Women who are divorced can end up really financially devastate as it the divorcee was her fault alone and she alone must suffer. Just the other day a man complained that he had to leave the kids and his home. They are often so bitter that they never come to get the kids and some women complain some times years have gone by before they even hear from him again. If a women is working at the time of divorcee she gets no spousal support. Many women don't bother going back to court to get more after the inital settlement and get meger cost of living adjustments. So her salary all of it is going to raise the kids. She has very little to put away for her own savings. I find men can be hard to live with because they know the system and they treat women poorly because they know how hard it is on her if she leaves. It is a brave women who gets a divorcee in America. Many women are still waiting to be liberated.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7966530].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Lloyd Buchinski
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      I've known many whose men think that the woman should work all day to help support them then come home to clean house and cook while his feet are up on the couch.
      I knew a (Canadian) guy who was married to a nurse who made $40,000 a year. One time he said 'if only I could be married to a second woman like that...'.

      He was unemployed and broke at the time. I didn't understand that until he hired me to do a drywall job for him. Shortly after it was finished he explained that he couldn't pay for it.

      (Does anyone else ever get those feelings like: It's time to buy a gun...'.)
      Signature

      Do something spectacular; be fulfilled. Then you can be your own hero. Prem Rawat

      The KimW WSO

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959954].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    Well, most AMERICAN men NEVER felt women were pets, or treated them like that. HECK, some changes in the US happened out of RESPECT for women. SURE some men are stupid jerks that abuse, etc... Some WOMEN are ALSO....

    I have often made that joke that I am surprised that women aren't called wowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowo.... . Because SERIOUSLY for a time it seemed that ANY time feminists saw ANYTHING that looked like it might have to do with men, they changed it to women or person.

    They take OFFENSE at the famous statement "One small step for ***A*** man, one giant step for mankind.". MAN to mean MALE is supposed to NEVER lack an article! If it does, it means mankind which NEVER means MEN, but humanity. Want to see how bad it can get? Urban Dictionary: ovester SERIOUSLY!

    And some feminists actually expect men to treat them as women when it benefits the women, and yet consider them men.

    UNREAL!

    There was a myth that women got paid less than men and NOW, FINALLY, they are revealing, SURPRISE, it is because many work n less skilled areas, etc...

    It is often FORBIDDEN for men to talk about salaries, but some areas DEMAND that women can, to determine where they are. This certainly helps bargaining.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959525].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

      Well, most AMERICAN men NEVER felt women were pets, or treated them like that. HECK, some changes in the US happened out of RESPECT for women. SURE some men are stupid jerks that abuse, etc... Some WOMEN are ALSO....

      I have often made that joke that I am surprised that women aren't called wowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowo.... . Because SERIOUSLY for a time it seemed that ANY time feminists saw ANYTHING that looked like it might have to do with men, they changed it to women or person.

      They take OFFENSE at the famous statement "One small step for ***A*** man, one giant step for mankind.". MAN to mean MALE is supposed to NEVER lack an article! If it does, it means mankind which NEVER means MEN, but humanity. Want to see how bad it can get? Urban Dictionary: ovester SERIOUSLY!

      And some feminists actually expect men to treat them as women when it benefits the women, and yet consider them men.

      UNREAL!

      There was a myth that women got paid less than men and NOW, FINALLY, they are revealing, SURPRISE, it is because many work n less skilled areas, etc...

      It is often FORBIDDEN for men to talk about salaries, but some areas DEMAND that women can, to determine where they are. This certainly helps bargaining.

      Steve
      Right. Steve -- you have never been on the receiving end and have NO clue. Being treated as servants - and less intelligent ones at that, is actually the main reason that women divorce or often refuse to marry now. There are still a lot of men around who think that they are masters instead of partners.

      And as far as pay -- we are still fighting for equal pay. If you don't believe that - all it takes is a once over of the earning stats in each industry to see we're not completely there in pay yet. Unions helped but unions are being done away with now.

      The generic "he" does not work for us because "she", "female" and "woman" are innately subordinating terms. They work subconsciously to subordinate us. When you have a base morpheme, such as "man" and add morphemes "wo-man" "s-he" what you are doing is creating a sub class of a word. So the use of the word man with tagged morphemes for women is creating women as a sub-class of men -- not one of two genders, but a subclass of the MAIN gender - that is why women don't like it. German, in which adults are either "herr" or "frau", creates no subclass - there are two genders, neither of which are a subclass of the other. It's an extremely valid issue, as the language actually portrays how a culture thinks. Women in the US were traditionally treated as the subordinate person in the relationship. Not just division of labor - but subordinate partner. There are still a hella lot of men that believe that. Once they voice that attitude, they aren't allowed in my home - and I have a LOT of male friends who are, so it's not like that as universally as it was 40 years ago.

      And the real kicker - watch how many men slap the women they pair with around. It takes a lot of "I'm master" attitude to kick someone around like a dog. Fortunately, cops take that crap seriously now. Back when I was in my 20's, they would just tell the guy to cool off and tell the woman to bake cookies for him. Serious.

      I will admit that some feminists take rejecting chauvanism to ridiculous extremes, but being on the receiving end of that kind of treatment can drive someone to that extreme. Some feminists are just as bad, if not worse, than the men they seem to hate. However - there is nothing imaginary about the conditions which brought feminist groups together. It takes a bit of gender-centricity to pooh it off as a myth and a moot issue.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959792].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

        Right. Steve -- you have never been on the receiving end and have NO clue. Being treated as servants - and less intelligent ones at that, is actually the main reason that women divorce or often refuse to marry now. There are still a lot of men around who think that they are masters instead of partners.
        Well, I DID mention there are some abusers. Heck, where I live, there are a LOT of women following the traditional role. They DO do housework, etc... And HEY, the men do ALSO. And they seem to get along well.

        And as far as pay -- we are still fighting for equal pay. If you don't believe that - all it takes is a once over of the earning stats in each industry to see we're not completely there in pay yet. Unions helped but unions are being done away with now.
        As I said, stats are SKEWED.


        The generic "he" does not work for us because "she", "female" and "woman" are innately subordinating terms. They work subconsciously to subordinate us. When you have a base morpheme, such as "man" and add morphemes "wo-man" "s-he" what you are doing is creating a sub class of a word. So the use of the word man with tagged morphemes for women is creating women as a sub-class of men -- not one of two genders, but a subclass of the MAIN gender - that is why women don't like it.
        WOW! I didn't think YOU were one. YIKES! Oh well, thanks for illustrating what I was saying. Is semester out of line also? MAYBE Semis are also!?


        German, in which adults are either "herr" or "frau", creates no subclass - there are two genders, neither of which are a subclass of the other. It's an extremely valid issue, as the language actually portrays how a culture thinks. Women in the US were traditionally treated as the subordinate person in the relationship. Not just division of labor - but subordinate partner. There are still a hella lot of men that believe that. Once they voice that attitude, they aren't allowed in my home - and I have a LOT of male friends who are, so it's not like that as universally as it was 40 years ago.
        WOW! BABY? DAS Neuter!!!!!!!!!!!!! Little girl? DAS Neuter!!!!!!! Crazy teenage girl? DER MALE! young woman? DAS Neuter! Woman? DIE FEMALE!

        Oh yeah, that is a LOT better!

        BTW with males? BABY Neuter! Boy-Man? DER Pretty much MALE!

        Yeah, when I heard that German was harder because there were there genders, I thought it would be EASY! Sadly, the three genders don't make that much sense!

        I notice how you left out the idea of spanish where it is senor and senora!

        And the real kicker - watch how many men slap the women they pair with around. It takes a lot of "I'm master" attitude to kick someone around like a dog. Fortunately, cops take that crap seriously now. Back when I was in my 20's, they would just tell the guy to cool off and tell the woman to bake cookies for him. Serious.
        OK, I NEVER saw that! Maybe I was just in a better area. AND, for the record, I NEVER saw a man lay a hand on my mother. The biggest arguments she had were when someone did her a favor, or gave her dinner, and she fought to pay, and they wouldn't have it. She said he broke up with her because she was a bad bridge player!

        I will admit that some feminists take rejecting chauvanism to ridiculous extremes, but being on the receiving end of that kind of treatment can drive someone to that extreme. Some feminists are just as bad, if not worse, than the men they seem to hate. However - there is nothing imaginary about the conditions which brought feminist groups together. It takes a bit of gender-centricity to pooh it off as a myth and a moot issue.
        [/quote]

        That I can KIND of agree with but many feminists, especially many of the really well known ones, are FAR from attractive. It is hard to imagine that they got that much attention as possible female friends. That is maybe why so many were homosexual.

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7960235].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author HeySal

          Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

          Well, I DID mention there are some abusers. Heck, where I live, there are a LOT of women following the traditional role. They DO do housework, etc... And HEY, the men do ALSO. And they seem to get along well.



          As I said, stats are SKEWED.




          WOW! I didn't think YOU were one. YIKES! Oh well, thanks for illustrating what I was saying. Is semester out of line also? MAYBE Semis are also!?




          WOW! BABY? DAS Neuter!!!!!!!!!!!!! Little girl? DAS Neuter!!!!!!! Crazy teenage girl? DER MALE! young woman? DAS Neuter! Woman? DIE FEMALE!

          Oh yeah, that is a LOT better!

          BTW with males? BABY Neuter! Boy-Man? DER Pretty much MALE!

          Yeah, when I heard that German was harder because there were there genders, I thought it would be EASY! Sadly, the three genders don't make that much sense!

          I notice how you left out the idea of spanish where it is senor and senora!



          OK, I NEVER saw that! Maybe I was just in a better area. AND, for the record, I NEVER saw a man lay a hand on my mother. The biggest arguments she had were when someone did her a favor, or gave her dinner, and she fought to pay, and they wouldn't have it. She said he broke up with her because she was a bad bridge player!
          That I can KIND of agree with but many feminists, especially many of the really well known ones, are FAR from attractive. It is hard to imagine that they got that much attention as possible female friends. That is maybe why so many were homosexual.

          Steve
          Now you are just being purposely obtuse. It's not entertaining.
          Signature

          Sal
          When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
          Beyond the Path

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7960857].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kay King
            I don't think many young women today even know what "feminism" was meant to accomplish. They use the term when it's P.C. or convenient.

            The idea of the feminist movement was equality. It wasn't about cleaning or cooking - but about making the choice of how you live and having the right to make those choices.

            Women are their own worst enemies much of the time. The Movement helped women move up in the workplace to be more than the secretary or helper - but what happened after that were women criticizing choices of other women.

            It's quieted recently because most women HAVE to work to support the family. Not that many years ago women who stayed home complained about "no respect" while women who worked thought those who didn't were "lazy or unfulfilled".

            The Feminist movement accomplished more than people realize - it's why women today can be leading the board meetings instead of serving coffee to the board. Women can work their way up in companies as they couldn't in generations past.

            But - women have created their own problems with feminism. Too many young women today enhance their bodies and openly display their assets - drink to drunkenness - get in cars or go home with drunk men....and then cry "rape". They expect to be taken care of in a respectful way but show no respect for themselves as women.

            What many don't understand about the feminist movement is the fear that went with "being equal". Women of that era were raised to be taken care of and in many ways taught they were helpless and less capable - and when you take charge of your own life and destiny you also take on the responsibility of taking care of yourself.

            Genetics certainly plays a part - women want to be independent but also protected. They want to be free and respected but feel the need to be attractive and use their bodies as bait. It's an old song and dance and no "movement" can totally get past it.
            Signature
            Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
            ***
            One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
            what it is instead of what you think it should be.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7962023].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
              Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

              Women are their own worst enemies much of the time. The Movement helped women move up in the workplace to be more than the secretary or helper - but what happened after that were women criticizing choices of other women.
              Well said.

              A longstanding friendship I had with a lesbian girl broke down two or three years ago for precisely this reason.

              After hitting it off with a young woman at university, a "proud feminist", they clubbed together and began attacking her lifelong best friend because they disapproved of her lifestyle.

              She was attacked from every conceivable angle. Everything - the way she looked, dressed, spoke and carried herself; the stuff she read; the company she kept and guys she dated; her hobbies and interests; right through to her career path and aspirations to start a family, etc - was mocked and criticised with such growing intensity that I was sick to my stomach watching it. And I'm not usually one for sticking my nose in other people's business.

              I had never seen such arrogance in all my life.

              Needless to say, after a few words I became another target for their fury and libellous public attacks.

              What is ironic is that this vile woman, this so-called "proud" feminist who had my friend eating out the palm of her hand and thought herself best placed to dish out advice, lacked the courage to come clean about her own sexual orientation until some time later, even though she was pushing 30.

              There's nothing more ridiculous than an overweight jobless nobody besmirching the character of someone better looking, more confident, happier, healthier, wealthier and all-round nicer. Give me a friggin' break...
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7962268].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author travlinguy
    Feminism is out of style. Socialism is en vogue these days.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959581].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
    Came across this on FB - look at the comment underlined in red. Made me laugh and thought the timing was funny...


    Signature

    Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959664].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
    Suffice to say, if I told you what I think about feminism and 99.999999% of the people who identify as feminists (yes - men among them, would you believe?!), I'd be banned or chased out of here quicker than one could scream "YOU'RE A MISOGYNIST!!", which of course I'm resolutely not, just like most guys, but since when did the truth really matter to fanatical preachers of any corrupt doctrine? :rolleyes:
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959699].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MaxTheMarketer
      Thank you very much for all your replies!

      I am wondering if the individualism-vs-collectivism might have some influence in how countries tackle this so called "feminism movement".

      Sweden is considered to be a collectivistic country while US is considered a individualistic country. Btw, how is the salary equality between the sexes right now in different kinds of jobs in the US?

      Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

      Suffice to say, if I told you what I think about feminism and 99.999999% of the people who identify as feminists (yes - men among them, would you believe?!), I'd be banned or chased out of here quicker than one could scream "YOU'RE A MISOGYNIST!!", which of course I'm resolutely not, just like most guys, but since when did the truth really matter to fanatical preachers of any corrupt doctrine? :rolleyes:
      Haha, I feel ya man. As I am in the dating niche, advice for men, and personal experiences, I know that majority of heterosexual women (those are the ones I am interested in and those I teach men to succeed with) must perceive my status to slighty higher than theirs, but not in the sense of "I am better than you" but just in the social hierarchies and in the way we then communicate with each other (she being more "reactive" to me than I to her).

      This is one of the things some feminists really hate and want to label me, including other men sharing this opinion with me, as "misogynistic", "woman-hater", etc., but how could I be that if I love women enough to go out in the real world and figure out what actually works? ;-)

      It's funny, isn't it!

      Take Care & Have An Awesome Day, Fellow Warriors! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7959784].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Devin X
      Banned
      Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

      Suffice to say, if I told you what I think about feminism and 99.999999% of the people who identify as feminists (yes - men among them, would you believe?!), I'd be banned or chased out of here quicker than one could scream "YOU'RE A MISOGYNIST!!", which of course I'm resolutely not, just like most guys, but since when did the truth really matter to fanatical preachers of any corrupt doctrine?
      Yeah, me too. I can't usually give my opinion on many ISMS without ending up in dire straits!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7960264].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
    Overall Feminism is something most people wouldn't even be able to accurately define. Many men recoil in horror over imagined images of castrating feminist monsters, but that is just silly. Historically feminism, by and large, has concentrated on issues that primarily benefit rich white women who want to get higher up the corporate ladder, but are irrelevant to the needs and concerns of women outside of that privileged sphere.
    Signature

    Project HERE.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7962711].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author LarryC
    One thing that's happening in the U.S. (and perhaps elsewhere as well) is that economic power is shifting towards women. This may ultimately be more important than cultural attitudes, though these too are obviously influenced by the economy.

    Women are now better educated and are starting to get higher paying jobs than men. This is obviously a generality, and I know that men still earn more statistically. It is, however, shifting. This is especially true in the middle -as opposed to the very top, where men still tend to dominate.

    I can see evidence of this in daily life. 20 years ago (for those of you who can remember back that far), cashiers and other service jobs were mainly held by women. In just the last few years, this has changed dramatically. Lately, in fact, it seems like the majority of cashiers are young men rather than women. The reason for this is that many of the higher paying jobs traditionally held by men are disappearing.

    Why Women Will Rock the Economic Recovery - Rick Newman (usnews.com)
    Signature
    Content Writing, Ghostwriting, eBooks, editing, research.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7962778].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
      Originally Posted by LarryC View Post

      One thing that's happening in the U.S. (and perhaps elsewhere as well) is that economic power is shifting towards women. <snip>[/url]
      Interesting, come to think of it a large number of wealthy entrepreneurs in my immediate circles -- a majority? -- are women! Oddly, that just occurred to me. I actually find it all to almost be a non-issue. They made it happen, good for them. For the record, most of them are Chinese and don't even know what feminism is because it wasn't part of their cultural context.
      Signature

      Project HERE.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7962816].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author MaxTheMarketer
        Thank you very much for your replies. Really awesome to see some perspectives from people living in the country where I haven't been yet.

        I will maybe later this year to visit my friend who lives in California (stereotype warning from me: are all women there wearing bikini on skateblades? )

        I have also seen a few ladies here on WF and there are probably plenty of them and I find it awesome that women are also getting into the world of internet marketing.

        My opinion regarding feminism, which has to do more with as feminism tries to influence it, is the dynamic between man and a woman (besides equal rights and equal salaries for equal work force):

        "When interacting with a woman, particularly if we are in a relationship, we should find ourselves in a dynamic interaction where she is looking up to me as a leader, but passively, but still at the end of the day."

        I have heard stories (I know anecdotes are not best, but fun though) about highly successful women who are in charge of many men during their days but when they come to their husband they want to feel that the men are "in charge", not in a negative manner, but in just a "stereotypical masucline fashion".

        Due to this, I strongly believe, it is biologically meant that more women are meant to "follow" men (in certain ways, to certain degrees) when it comes to sexual attraction and maintaining healthy relationships and marriages.

        Indeed, this seems to be a very conserative view from me which is strange since I am so young (24) and should know better?! ;-)

        However, my experiences I do have tell me that, "It is better to be 'DA MAN' instead of a 'wuss' when it comes to relationships & sex with women", usually because my experiences tell me that women respond well to this even if massmedia and feminism would state otherwise.

        So, my negative view on feminism is more on the dynamic it seems to create between men and women in the context of sex and relationships. I have no problems with equal rights beyond this; that makes completely sense to me.

        Thank you very much for sharing your experiences, stories and views regarding feminism in the US.

        Let's keep it cool, and let all perspectives come out.

        We are not here to judge who's right or wrong.

        We're just looking at one "issue" from different angles. And everyone's angle is equally right to express itself.

        Take Care & Have An Awesome Day, Fellow Warrior(s)! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963342].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MaxTheMarketer
          To give a typical example of feminism in Sweden that actually non-feminist find riduclous is this quote as follows; this quote is an English translation (with Google Translate since I was lazy) of a Facebook post about ice cream commerical (GB is Sweden's biggest ice cream manufacturer):

          Today we reported this disgusting advertising that is currently papered over the country to the RO. Subscribe you too!

          Below you can take part in our reasoning:

          "The five ice-creams are described with various epithets such as" intense and hot "," genuine and innocent, "" deep and confusing, "" extrovert and enchanting "etc. Women mouths illustrates these by alluding to stereotypical female traits such as uncertainty, heat and innocence. advertisements are designed in such a way that it will bring attention to the women's mouths. by making use of the language by which the various characters are described, further reinforced the perception one gets from advertising in its entirety - it's different women described, not the ice cream.

          Close-up photos of sensual female lips ready to kiss and one of the images ready to take anything in her mouth, reduces women to only a small part of their bodies that also charged erotic by the character descriptions and pouting and parted lips. It would be almost impossible to imagine a similar advertising man's lips, because the design of the advertisement is meant to evoke the idea of ​​heterosexual oral sex. Moreover, there is no reason whatsoever to Magnum must use female mouths to sell their various glasses. Therefore, advertising sexist and schabloniserande.

          This type of sexual messages, and the allusions advertising sends out, should not be in the public domain. "
          Link to the commercial they consider to be women-degrading: Magnum Five Kisses

          What some feminists find bad about this commerical is the sexism in the commerical (and someone with some knowledge about marketing knows that sex sells so why not) and they believe the ice cream commercial is trying to suggest women are nothing more than objects to perform oral sex on (WTF?).

          That's one of many example that makes many Swedes being fed up with the "feminism" in Sweden. They kinda "nag" about things that don't really matter that much.

          There have been many banned commercials, but there are still many sexually suggestive commercials in Scandinavia, mostly due to our open attitude regarding sexuality, so why attack ice cream commercial?

          It is a fun example I saw tonight so I thought it would fuel some of this "discussion" ;-)

          Take Care & Have An Awesome Day, Fellow Warrior(s)! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963421].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
            Originally Posted by MaxTheMarketer View Post

            To give a typical example of feminism in Sweden...
            Yikes, man! Those "Lolita lollies" look a bit rotten... like herpes, puke, part-digested pizza, arsenic and crusty shingles. Not necessarily in that order.

            So yeah, you're right... just a typical example of feminism, really.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963860].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kurt
          Originally Posted by MaxTheMarketer View Post

          I will maybe later this year to visit my friend who lives in California (stereotype warning from me: are all women there wearing bikini on skateblades? )
          Yes, and it makes visiting women in Old Folks homes there more than a little disturbing.
          Signature
          Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
          Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963432].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by MaxTheMarketer View Post

          I will maybe later this year to visit my friend who lives in California (stereotype warning from me: are all women there wearing bikini on skateblades? )
          Visit Venice beach CA and you may see a lot! At least when I was there, MOST women were in bikinis, and there is an area where a lot skate. Of course venice beach is not representative of all of california.

          My opinion regarding feminism, which has to do more with as feminism tries to influence it, is the dynamic between man and a woman (besides equal rights and equal salaries for equal work force):
          Yeah! I am ALL FOR fair treatment, fair pay, proper treatment, reasonable respect. I am NOT for unequal rights, equal pay regardless, etc.... And I DEFINITELY hate the idea of boys are boys because they are taught to be, so let's treat them like girls, and force girls into construction toys.

          "When interacting with a woman, particularly if we are in a relationship, we should find ourselves in a dynamic interaction where she is looking up to me as a leader, but passively, but still at the end of the day."

          I have heard stories (I know anecdotes are not best, but fun though) about highly successful women who are in charge of many men during their days but when they come to their husband they want to feel that the men are "in charge", not in a negative manner, but in just a "stereotypical masucline fashion".
          YEP! My favorite anecdote is about a company owned by two women. It is a big company, and has a LOT of employees. Outside of the truck drivers, that are nearly all men, they only have ONE male employee! He is the husband of one of the sisters that owns the company!

          Due to this, I strongly believe, it is biologically meant that more women are meant to "follow" men (in certain ways, to certain degrees) when it comes to sexual attraction and maintaining healthy relationships and marriages.
          It IS ironic! Most women are NOT attracted to the lack of positive characteristics that many feminists want. SOME don't even want the manners like holding the door open for them.

          However, my experiences I do have tell me that, "It is better to be 'DA MAN' instead of a 'wuss' when it comes to relationships & sex with women", usually because my experiences tell me that women respond well to this even if massmedia and feminism would state otherwise.
          EXACTLY!!!!

          So, my negative view on feminism is more on the dynamic it seems to create between men and women in the context of sex and relationships. I have no problems with equal rights beyond this; that makes completely sense to me.
          EXACTLY!

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7964326].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    But - women have created their own problems with feminism. Too many young women today enhance their bodies and openly display their assets - drink to drunkenness - get in cars or go home with drunk men....and then cry "rape". They expect to be taken care of in a respectful way but show no respect for themselves as women.
    I can't believe a woman said that. So you think just because a woman isn't acting or dressing how you feel is "appropriate" she has no right to decide who touches her? WTF. So if a guy gets drunk and flashes a few bills here and there to show off his financial prowess - does he deserve to get robbed and beaten?

    My freedom of expression is not anyone's right to act like a criminal. It's extremely judgmental to decide that a woman "deserved" what she got because you have a problem with what she chooses to wear. Some do put themselves into more dangerous situations than is smart for them to do - but it's not "their own fault" that someone else is a criminal. Nobody has the right to tell someone else how they have to dress or behave to avoid being attacked. A smart woman doesn't go parading through a street gang on her own, but she has the right to walk down that street without being attacked. Siding with a criminal because you have scorn for the attacked person for some reasaon is a very controlling, judgmental, and self aggrandizing position.

    I spent a lot of time at the crisis center re-educating cops and lawyers, etc. about this issue. Back then all rapes were blamed on the victim instead of the perpetrator. One woman's friend called her in the middle of the night because she was upset, so she threw on a pair of jeans and sweatshirt to go over to help the friend. Her car broke down on the way there, she was raped. She lost her case in court because she wasn't wearing a bra so deserved it. THAT is the kind of thing that feminism arose to combat, too. Equality in law.

    And that's a big problem with this country in a nutshell - everyone thinks it's their business what another person wears, eats, thinks, etc. They think they are experts on everyone else's lives. Where I grew up you minded your business and let other people do as they wished -- and it didn't excuse anyone attacking anyone or legislating anyone's daily lives.

    I'm not sure what some feminists problems are that they can't even accept a man opening a damned door for them without spitting in their faces. If you get to a door before someone else, it's just manners to hold it for them. I wouldn't think of not holding the door for someone else that was right there when I was at the door. I wouldn't think of not saying "thank you" and smiling at someone for holding it for me. I don't "get" where doing so is "chauvinistic". Do we really think men are so stupid they think we can't do it ourselves or think we should be in the kitchen instead of walking through doors somewhere besides home?

    What I hate is that women this crazy are held up as the icons of feminism. In reality most women find them bizarrely insane, too.

    As far as women judging each other - yep, they do. The more you don't care about what they think, the worse they get, too. But that is It's not just other women that women target. If you listen, not many men are up to par with women who are like this either. Judging everyone else seems to be America's favorite passtime. Don't like something - take away everyone's right to it. There's nothing that is restricted to women or feminism in this attitude. Our whole population has become nosy busybodies who have nothing better to do but point to everyone else and call them inferior. That's what happens in societies that move toward tyranny.....every....single....time.

    When traditional roles start to change there's always some meyhem. There's always the far left that thinks we aren't changing enough and villainizes anyone not changing enough for them. There's the far right who villainizes anyone and everyone who wants to change anything. If you look around - you'll see it's not just feminism, it's everywhere. Look at the sh** stay at home dads are going through. It's not as loud, but it's just as vicious. Society expects a man to work, and when he doesn't he's all kinds of terrible things and deserves a park bench and a garbage can for take out food.

    The best thing we can do for ourselves in this country is to just chill about the way other people choose to live their lives. If you see someone who is dressed in a way you don't like, don't look, eating what you don't think they should - be thankful that it's not YOUR body they are trashing, staying home with kids instead of working, kewl - we need more stay at home parents of either sex, so if they can afford it, that's really awesome.
    Hear some bitch ranting about hating men? Don't ask her for a date (well, maybe, just to be funny).

    Most of us are just trying to get through life with as much freedom of expression and choice as we can get. It would be really awesome if everyone else would just decide how they want their own life to run and leave everyone else the hell alone.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963426].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MaxTheMarketer
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      I can't believe a woman said that. So you think just because a woman isn't acting or dressing how you feel is "appropriate" she has no right to decide who touches her? WTF. So if a guy gets drunk and flashes a few bills here and there to show off his financial prowess - does he deserve to get robbed and beaten?

      My freedom of expression is not anyone's right to act like a criminal. It's extremely judgmental to decide that a woman "deserved" what she got because you have a problem with what she chooses to wear. Some do put themselves into more dangerous situations than is smart for them to do - but it's not "their own fault" that someone else is a criminal. Nobody has the right to tell someone else how they have to dress or behave to avoid being attacked. A smart woman doesn't go parading through a street gang on her own, but she has the right to walk down that street without being attacked. Siding with a criminal because you have scorn for the attacked person for some reasaon is a very controlling, judgmental, and self aggrandizing position.

      I spent a lot of time at the crisis center re-educating cops and lawyers, etc. about this issue. Back then all rapes were blamed on the victim instead of the perpetrator. One woman's friend called her in the middle of the night because she was upset, so she threw on a pair of jeans and sweatshirt to go over to help the friend. Her car broke down on the way there, she was raped. She lost her case in court because she wasn't wearing a bra so deserved it. THAT is the kind of thing that feminism arose to combat, too. Equality in law.

      And that's a big problem with this country in a nutshell - everyone thinks it's their business what another person wears, eats, thinks, etc. They think they are experts on everyone else's lives. Where I grew up you minded your business and let other people do as they wished -- and it didn't excuse anyone attacking anyone or legislating anyone's daily lives.

      I'm not sure what some feminists problems are that they can't even accept a man opening a damned door for them without spitting in their faces. If you get to a door before someone else, it's just manners to hold it for them. I wouldn't think of not holding the door for someone else that was right there when I was at the door. I wouldn't think of not saying "thank you" and smiling at someone for holding it for me. I don't "get" where doing so is "chauvinistic". Do we really think men are so stupid they think we can't do it ourselves or think we should be in the kitchen instead of walking through doors somewhere besides home?

      What I hate is that women this crazy are held up as the icons of feminism. In reality most women find them bizarrely insane, too.

      As far as women judging each other - yep, they do. The more you don't care about what they think, the worse they get, too. But that is It's not just other women that women target. If you listen, not many men are up to par with women who are like this either. Judging everyone else seems to be America's favorite passtime. Don't like something - take away everyone's right to it. There's nothing that is restricted to women or feminism in this attitude. Our whole population has become nosy busybodies who have nothing better to do but point to everyone else and call them inferior. That's what happens in societies that move toward tyranny.....every....single....time.

      When traditional roles start to change there's always some meyhem. There's always the far left that thinks we aren't changing enough and villainizes anyone not changing enough for them. There's the far right who villainizes anyone and everyone who wants to change anything. If you look around - you'll see it's not just feminism, it's everywhere. Look at the sh** stay at home dads are going through. It's not as loud, but it's just as vicious. Society expects a man to work, and when he doesn't he's all kinds of terrible things and deserves a park bench and a garbage can for take out food.

      The best thing we can do for ourselves in this country is to just chill about the way other people choose to live their lives. If you see someone who is dressed in a way you don't like, don't look, eating what you don't think they should - be thankful that it's not YOUR body they are trashing, staying home with kids instead of working, kewl - we need more stay at home parents of either sex, so if they can afford it, that's really awesome.
      Hear some bitch ranting about hating men? Don't ask her for a date (well, maybe, just to be funny).

      Most of us are just trying to get through life with as much freedom of expression and choice as we can get. It would be really awesome if everyone else would just decide how they want their own life to run and leave everyone else the hell alone.
      Thank you very much for your shared details!

      I find it very interesting when you talk about how people seem to mind more about other's businesses instead of their own! Is that what really seems to become more?

      Stereotypical sayings I remember such as, "Mind your own business!" might not apply to the same extent as it did decades ago in the US?

      To me it seems pretty immature and depressing that one would focus more on what other people are doing instead of what oneself is doing. It almost indicates to me that one is finding no purpose in one own's life and as a way to avoid taking care of one own's problems is to focus on other people's problem (or claim that they do indeed have problems).

      I understand that obesity rates are rising and these will also go up in Sweden as far as I can see how many young people in the fastfood restaurants (disgustingly sad) and obesity has been associated with depression so maybe people don't want to take care of their health problems and then attack other people's health problems?

      I'm just speculating but really interesting if it is the case that people seem to care more about what other people do rather than focusing on themselves!

      Take Care & Have An Awesome Day! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963463].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author HeySal
        Originally Posted by MaxTheMarketer View Post

        Thank you very much for your shared details!

        I find it very interesting when you talk about how people seem to mind more about other's businesses instead of their own! Is that what really seems to become more?

        Stereotypical sayings I remember such as, "Mind your own business!" might not apply to the same extent as it did decades ago in the US?

        To me it seems pretty immature and depressing that one would focus more on what other people are doing instead of what oneself is doing. It almost indicates to me that one is finding no purpose in one own's life and as a way to avoid taking care of one own's problems is to focus on other people's problem (or claim that they do indeed have problems).

        I understand that obesity rates are rising and these will also go up in Sweden as far as I can see how many young people in the fastfood restaurants (disgustingly sad) and obesity has been associated with depression so maybe people don't want to take care of their health problems and then attack other people's health problems?

        I'm just speculating but really interesting if it is the case that people seem to care more about what other people do rather than focusing on themselves!

        Take Care & Have An Awesome Day! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
        Yeah, it's pretty sad. It might have always been like this, but people didn't yell about it from podiums. I find attacking people's personal life choices is really disgusting. For example - You wouldn't believe how many really just vulgarly obese people have thought it was their "job" to tell me that I should not be smoking. My answer? "One out of three smokers dies of lung cancer - one of three people in general die of cancer of some form. Smoking may or may not kill me, but fat WILL kill you so take a hike.". Another example? I've dated men that after just a few dates have the gall to forbid me to go out rock hunting to some places I go. There are snakes, there are wolves, and cats, and bears. Um...yeah....that's why I take a dog, dude. My answer to them is to leave - and not come back. I don't take someone thinking they have the right to tell me how to spend my time. I refuse pet status. If they don't want a woman who has the propensity I have to go off to the wilderness, then they are with the wrong woman. I'm not going to stop doing what I love because some dude is worried about me. Same with people in general telling me I'm "too old to do that." Well, gee - if I were, then I wouldn't be able to do it, ya think? Seeing how I still have the ability to, I must not be too old." Or - you're too old to wear a halter top and show your stomach. "Hmmm - yeah well if my stomach hung over my belt like yours - I wouldn't." And god help the guy who thinks he has the right to force sex on me just because he can see a few abs. LMAO.

        I get sick of the control freak generation. I have no qualms about telling someone to "f*** off" when they cross the lines - either when they aim at me or at someone else. How someone else chooses to live isn't a problem. People who think someone has a right to attack others for their choices if they aren't violating someone else's right to their own life are a PITA and just need to be told to STFU. It's the only real adult answer to someone who's a bitch about someone else just because of a personal choice they make.
        Signature

        Sal
        When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
        Beyond the Path

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963587].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
          Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

          I've dated men that after just a few dates have the gall to forbid me to go out rock hunting to some places I go.
          I know men like this. They make me laugh...Mr. Macho - which (for the few I know like this) is less about being macho and more about low self-esteem and the need to control.

          But I know women like that too. I was married to one once (a long time ago).

          My wife just got back from a 10 day trip with her daughter to London. They had a blast - and I do know a few men that would have "forbade" them.

          I don't get it. My mother didn't bring me up that way.

          Oh - and I hold doors open for people. Not women - all people. So far, I have not had anyone tell me that I was some macho pig or anything, but if I do run in to someone like that I will simply say "Hey, no problem" and walk in the door in front of them

          Life is too short to let this drivel ruin your day - or hour. To each their own.
          Signature

          Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963731].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
            Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

            The generic "he" does not work for us because "she", "female" and "woman" are innately subordinating terms. They work subconsciously to subordinate us. When you have a base morpheme, such as "man" and add morphemes "wo-man" "s-he" what you are doing is creating a sub class of a word. So the use of the word man with tagged morphemes for women is creating women as a sub-class of men -- not one of two genders, but a subclass of the MAIN gender - that is why women don't like it.
            Damn - who thought that one up? When the english language was invented (or Spanish, as someone else suggested) do you really think that it was in their minds that "we need to come up with a word for the indoor-plumbinged sex that shows that indoor-plumbing isn't as good as outdoor plumbing"? (For the record, indoor plumbing is much better :-) )

            I think it's a contrived slight. I don't think the difference in terms means anything, at least to anyone who's not an academic or a linguist. And to be honest, most academics' opinions mean little or nothing to me, so I don't care what they think anyway LOL

            Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

            I can't believe a woman said that. So you think just because a woman isn't acting or dressing how you feel is "appropriate" she has no right to decide who touches her? WTF. So if a guy gets drunk and flashes a few bills here and there to show off his financial prowess - does he deserve to get robbed and beaten?
            To be fair, I don't think that's what Kay said at all.

            My freedom of expression is not anyone's right to act like a criminal. It's extremely judgmental to decide that a woman "deserved" what she got because you have a problem with what she chooses to wear. Some do put themselves into more dangerous situations than is smart for them to do - but it's not "their own fault" that someone else is a criminal.
            No, it's not their fault - and the criminal is still the criminal. But you get into situations where you have to ask the victim, "What, exactly, did you expect? What were you thinking?" It's not any different than someone leaving a $50,000 car running unlocked at the curb while they ran into the bar for a quick drink. Yes, the person that stole it was the criminal, but c'mon - do you think just maybe you were inviting trouble a little?

            A guy walks through a poor part of town sporting diamond cufflinks and a Rolex - does he bear some small blame for getting rolled and his stuff stolen? Yeah, I think he does. That in no way excuses the criminal(s) who did it, but there is a concept called "asking for trouble".

            Nobody has the right to tell someone else how they have to dress or behave to avoid being attacked. A smart woman doesn't go parading through a street gang on her own, but she has the right to walk down that street without being attacked.
            Don't you think that is taking things a little far? What kind of person would I be if I saw you headed into a dangerous situation and I didn't try to warn you? If I knew that the gang of men standing on the next block would likely as not attack you if you wade through them dressed like one of Robert Palmer's dancers, shouldn't I at least try to get you not to do it?

            Your rights mean nothing to criminals and heathens.

            Siding with a criminal because you have scorn for the attacked person for some reasaon is a very controlling, judgmental, and self aggrandizing position.
            Absolutely no argument there.

            I spent a lot of time at the crisis center re-educating cops and lawyers, etc. about this issue. Back then all rapes were blamed on the victim instead of the perpetrator. One woman's friend called her in the middle of the night because she was upset, so she threw on a pair of jeans and sweatshirt to go over to help the friend. Her car broke down on the way there, she was raped. She lost her case in court because she wasn't wearing a bra so deserved it. THAT is the kind of thing that feminism arose to combat, too. Equality in law.
            People deserve equal treatment under the law, no matter what their sex is. What you describe still goes on in certain parts of the world to even greater extremes, and IMHO it is utterly reprehensible.

            And that's a big problem with this country in a nutshell - everyone thinks it's their business what another person wears, eats, thinks, etc. They think they are experts on everyone else's lives. Where I grew up you minded your business and let other people do as they wished -- and it didn't excuse anyone attacking anyone or legislating anyone's daily lives.
            You mind your own business, and let other people do as they wish - but that doesn't mean you stand idly by and just watch as someone does something idiotic enough to get them killed or injured. You certainly have the right to do as you want - but would I be a good person if I just watched you, without warning you first, climb over that fallen tree when I knew there was a 7-ft Western Diamondback directly on the other side?


            Most of us are just trying to get through life with as much freedom of expression and choice as we can get. It would be really awesome if everyone else would just decide how they want their own life to run and leave everyone else the hell alone.
            No argument there, either. But there will always be Mrs. Kravitz across the street. It's just human nature.

            The biggest backlash against 'feminism' comes when it turns radical and attempts to deny basic biology and common sense. There are just some things that indoor-plumbing-equipped (IPs, for short) can do consistently better than OPs (outdoor-plumbinged people), and vice-versa. That's just the way it is. And there are just things that you shouldn't do, IP, OP, or BP (both-plumbinged, which opens a whole other can of worms), whether you have the 'right' to or not.
            Signature

            The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

            Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7964858].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author HeySal
              Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

              Damn - who thought that one up? When the english language was invented (or Spanish, as someone else suggested) do you really think that it was in their minds that "we need to come up with a word for the indoor-plumbinged sex that shows that indoor-plumbing isn't as good as outdoor plumbing"? (For the record, indoor plumbing is much better :-) )

              I think it's a contrived slight. I don't think the difference in terms means anything, at least to anyone who's not an academic or a linguist. And to be honest, most academics' opinions mean little or nothing to me, so I don't care what they think anyway LOL
              That was an extremely condensed version of the issue. That part of language is not something that is consciously made up. Language works much harder at the subconscious level than it does at the conscious level. When the he/she male/female man/woman aspect of the language evolved, women were actually thought to be subordinate beings in the English speaking cultures. We were not allowed to own property, to vote, to have our own bank accounts, and so forth. Men were allowed to beat their wives at will. Women were not allowed to just walk away from abusive men. Daughters were often given to men of their parents choosing.

              The language evolved to portray this social order. Today, it's not a representational of our culture any more. Eventually, the forms will evolve away from tagged morphemes for women. The word woman itself is no longer pronounced woMAN - but rather womin, an accreditation to the evolving society. Advocates for PC language think that if they change the language they can change people's thinking, but artificial changes don't really work as natural evolution will.
              Actually, the call for change is actually a demonstration that the culture is already changing.

              And ya got to admit. Calling a woman in Congress a Congressman is a little awkward. :rolleyes:

              Linguists don't make up the rules of language. They observe what language does and describe it - in other words, Linguistics is descriptive, not proscriptive. Grammarians are often proscriptive. Writing "rules" actually comes around from observing what goes on then writing the standard usages down so they will stay standardized. When the evolution of a language starts to happen too rapidly, it can cause a lot of really knarled communication.

              I would like to be around 100 years from now to see how some of our terminology has evolved. I'm wondering what the words for "women" and "men" will be. I'm betting they will be two distinct words rather than tagged morphemes.

              As far as warning people who are about to do dangerous things in dangerous places. A warning is not a bad thing. Some people's nativity can get them in trouble. Especially a young woman who dressed up to the hilt to be attractive and sexy. Nothing wrong with a women wanting to turn a few heads. That doesn't excuse anyone from thinking they can just do what they want with her.

              A friendly word from a guy for her to steer clear of someone or someplace shouldn't be offensive to her. That's not what I was saying. What I was saying is that if something DOES happen to her while she's dressed up, it's very wrong to assume just because she was dressed to the nines and looking a little vampish is no reason for anyone to say she deserved it if something bad happens to her. It's not a crime to be naive or even a little stupid. It's also not a crime to not want to look like a boy or a spinster librarian stereotype just to keep people from attacking you. A woman worth her salt that goes into rough places in hot attire does herself well if she knows how to put one of her stiletto heels up a dude's nose if he gets too aggressive. Stilettoes are not only a sharp and sassy addition to any night club attire or suit, they are incredible equalizers in a pinch.
              Signature

              Sal
              When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
              Beyond the Path

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7964939].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

                That was an extremely condensed version of the issue. That part of language is not something that is consciously made up. Language works much harder at the subconscious level than it does at the conscious level. When the he/she male/female man/woman aspect of the language evolved, women were actually thought to be subordinate beings in the English speaking cultures. We were not allowed to own property, to vote, to have our own bank accounts, and so forth. Men were allowed to beat their wives at will. Women were not allowed to just walk away from abusive men. Daughters were often given to men of their parents choosing.
                In some places, that is STILL true. It is NOT true in proper western european/american/canadian cultures.

                The language evolved to portray this social order. Today, it's not a representational of our culture any more. Eventually, the forms will evolve away from tagged morphemes for women. The word woman itself is no longer pronounced woMAN - but rather womin, an accreditation to the evolving society. Advocates for PC language think that if they change the language they can change people's thinking, but artificial changes don't really work as natural evolution will.
                Actually, the call for change is actually a demonstration that the culture is already changing.
                Did anyone EVER emphasize man? And such changes happen EVERYWHERE, een in little words that offend NOBODY!

                And ya got to admit. Calling a woman in Congress a Congressman is a little awkward. :rolleyes:

                Linguists don't make up the rules of language. They observe what language does and describe it - in other words, Linguistics is descriptive, not proscriptive. Grammarians are often proscriptive. Writing "rules" actually comes around from observing what goes on then writing the standard usages down so they will stay standardized. When the evolution of a language starts to happen too rapidly, it can cause a lot of really knarled communication.
                Well, observing such things with a bias is certainly going to "confirm" that bias. It desn't make it true.

                I would like to be around 100 years from now to see how some of our terminology has evolved. I'm wondering what the words for "women" and "men" will be. I'm betting they will be two distinct words rather than tagged morphemes.
                Well, In DANISH they are totally different. But I bet most ARE similar.

                As far as warning people who are about to do dangerous things in dangerous places. A warning is not a bad thing. Some people's nativity can get them in trouble. Especially a young woman who dressed up to the hilt to be attractive and sexy. Nothing wrong with a women wanting to turn a few heads. That doesn't excuse anyone from thinking they can just do what they want with her.
                WOW, THINK about what you just said!

                A friendly word from a guy for her to steer clear of someone or someplace shouldn't be offensive to her. That's not what I was saying. What I was saying is that if something DOES happen to her while she's dressed up, it's very wrong to assume just because she was dressed to the nines and looking a little vampish is no reason for anyone to say she deserved it if something bad happens to her. It's not a crime to be naive or even a little stupid. It's also not a crime to not want to look like a boy or a spinster librarian stereotype just to keep people from attacking you. A woman worth her salt that goes into rough places in hot attire does herself well if she knows how to put one of her stiletto heels up a dude's nose if he gets too aggressive. Stilettoes are not only a sharp and sassy addition to any night club attire or suit, they are incredible equalizers in a pinch.
                DESERVE it? NOPE! Practically ASKING for it?..... Would she carry a huge 1K bar of gold, walk into a bar, and call attention to it? MAYBE she should do they same with HER!

                Did you ever see the average female star trying to live in public? PLAIN JANE ALL THE WAY!

                Steve
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7965367].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author HeySal
                  Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                  In some places, that is STILL true. It is NOT true in proper western european/american/canadian cultures.



                  Did anyone EVER emphasize man? And such changes happen EVERYWHERE, een in little words that offend NOBODY!



                  Well, observing such things with a bias is certainly going to "confirm" that bias. It desn't make it true.



                  Well, In DANISH they are totally different. But I bet most ARE similar.



                  WOW, THINK about what you just said!



                  DESERVE it? NOPE! Practically ASKING for it?..... Would she carry a huge 1K bar of gold, walk into a bar, and call attention to it? MAYBE she should do they same with HER!

                  Did you ever see the average female star trying to live in public? PLAIN JANE ALL THE WAY!

                  Steve
                  Steve - I just described a little bit about how language works at the subconscious level. It's not "different" in any other language. Your mind is programmed to work a certain way. Period - and that is the way a tagged morpheme works. Period. It's not "maybe or maybe not". People don't understand it because it's a very subconscious action.

                  As far as "Think about what I just said". I did. And I believe it. I think it's abominable to suggest that a woman has to dress in a way that men will find her unattractive or she is "asking for it". Men are the ones that are all drooly over the sexy dressed women and try to meet hot women -- -then you say it's a woman's fault for being attacked because she wants to look great? I'm sure some have better taste about what looks great than others. But to say a woman is "asking for it" says not one thing about the woman -- it says that men are complete pigs and we should just put up with that. Ya know something? That attitude disgusts me so deep that I can't even respond to it. I guess women just need their concealed carry permit when they go out in public dressed any better than the average bag lady.
                  Signature

                  Sal
                  When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
                  Beyond the Path

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7968629].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
                    Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

                    Steve - I just described a little bit about how language works at the subconscious level. It's not "different" in any other language. Your mind is programmed to work a certain way. Period - and that is the way a tagged morpheme works. Period. It's not "maybe or maybe not". People don't understand it because it's a very subconscious action.

                    As far as "Think about what I just said". I did. And I believe it. I think it's abominable to suggest that a woman has to dress in a way that men will find her unattractive or she is "asking for it". Men are the ones that are all drooly over the sexy dressed women and try to meet hot women -- -then you say it's a woman's fault for being attacked because she wants to look great? I'm sure some have better taste about what looks great than others. But to say a woman is "asking for it" says not one thing about the woman -- it says that men are complete pigs and we should just put up with that. Ya know something? That attitude disgusts me so deep that I can't even respond to it. I guess women just need their concealed carry permit when they go out in public dressed any better than the average bag lady.
                    I think there's a difference between "asking for it" and "deserving it". No woman deserves to be raped. But many of them don't get that in certain places, under certain circumstances they would be smarter to not dress or act in certain ways or be alone.

                    I am not being sexist either. As a man, I would never go to certain areas of NYC (or any city) wearing an expensive leather jacket and gold bling around my neck - especially alone. Because I am smart enough to know that I am just asking to be mugged. Some would say I even deserved it (cops in particular) even though it's a crime to rob people.

                    I am not suggesting that this is how all rapes occur - just as this is not how all muggins occur. I am merely pointing out that saying "No woman asks for it" may be true in a normal society - but women should always use common sense in certain surroundings and situations - just like I would before hitting a night in NYC.
                    Signature

                    Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7968834].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                    Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

                    As far as "Think about what I just said". I did. And I believe it. I think it's abominable to suggest that a woman has to dress in a way that men will find her unattractive or she is "asking for it". Men are the ones that are all drooly over the sexy dressed women and try to meet hot women -- -then you say it's a woman's fault for being attacked because she wants to look great? I'm sure some have better taste about what looks great than others. But to say a woman is "asking for it" says not one thing about the woman -- it says that men are complete pigs and we should just put up with that. Ya know something? That attitude disgusts me so deep that I can't even respond to it. I guess women just need their concealed carry permit when they go out in public dressed any better than the average bag lady.
                    I am NOT suggesting that the woman deserves it or anything of the sort. And I am certainly not suggesting that she dress in a way that is unattractive.

                    Judaism, Christianity, and certainly moslem religions, ironically, suggested that women SHOULD dress plain(NOT unattractive! I believe the word PLAIN was even used in judiac/christian teachings. I can't speak for moslem there, but they seem to be derived from judeo/christian.), sometimes(like moslem now), they suggest that it be to the point that they may not even be recognizable. HEY, I LIKE women dressing free and in an attractive way. And I won't be forward, etc.... But some may be, Some would to ANY woman, and ESPECIALLY if she seemed over 1/2 naked. And women know that.

                    Steve
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7968969].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Due to this, I strongly believe, it is biologically meant that more women are meant to "follow" men (in certain ways, to certain degrees) when it comes to sexual attraction and maintaining healthy relationships and marriages.
    Um........really?

    Biologically women are the child bearers and men are the physical strength. Biologically, this involves a division of labor. In a non industrialized tribe, the women take care of and socialize the chldren, the village, home and gardens, and men defend (because of physical strength and testosterone, which makes them more aggresive) and hunt. They hunt because 1. physical strength, 2. they are never pregnant or have babies to care for. Ever tried to travel in the wilderness and care for a baby while hunting and defending yourself? Kinda hard to do, ya know?

    None of that is "following" the man. It's pure division of labor. Note - many of these tribes are matriarchal and the women actually "wear the pants" in the tribe.

    In an industrial society, we are freed up to take over roles that we couldn't in a more nature oriented social structure. Allowing a man to take over some things is not a will to be submissive - it's a will to have some of the load taken off. Working outside the home, raising children, cleaning and cooking, organizing home life, taking care of lawns and cars -- is too much for one person to handle. OF course women are willing to let the guy take care of some stuff at the end of the day -- we don't like being driven into the dirt working 24/7 - gee go figure.

    Men are physically stronger. Women who have been raised to defend themselves, don't need a guy for "protection" any more than they appreciate their dogs for "protection". We also don't need a man making decisions for us. No matter how "submissive" women may seem to you, women still expect a man to see her as an intellectual part of a partnership. Maybe she will subordinate to him for some things that she feels he is better at or knows more about -- but if that same man tries to subort her in areas where she's the leading mind, she's not gonna like that any too much. The perfect couple knows each other's strengths and rely on each other for them. There is no "follow". When a woman is glad there's a guy around to move the couch so she can vacuum under it - she's not being subordinate, she's expecting the guy to pull his value...which is upper body strength. Duh.

    It might interest you to realize that a lot of the time when women have a guy around with too much testosterone to be able to accept an idea from her - she just presents things in a way to make it seem like he thought of it. Problem solved. After millennium of socializing kids, women are quite adept at manipulation.

    The next time you ask a woman out on a date - it might entertain you to examine what just happened and exactly how this woman got you to ask her out. Most likely you were HER choice in the first place. Think about it. LMAO.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963480].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MaxTheMarketer
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      *I'm frisky*
      The "following" I am talking about is in the context of courtship, from a man meeting a woman, ending up in the bed and maybe even in a long-term relationship or even a marriage.

      It is noteworthy that more men approach women, more men ask for the number, more men ask for the date, more men ask women to dance (ye, the good ol' days), more men ask women to marry them, more men rather than women mount them during sex.

      Men make things progress assumed the woman is interested enough to allow it (and therefore "follow" them). In the bedrom and in the context of sex, most women are sexually submissive (I never got a complain about being "rough"/"dominant") to the man and many products "helping men to become better in the bed" point this common observation out, "You need to LEAD her more in the bedroom".

      What a woman can is to reject it (not interested or not interested yet) or she can accept it (in a sense "follow" because if she was interested but he didn't move things forward, in most cases things would never progress and she will rationalize that she was never interested in him after all).

      Men have throughout evolution needed women for reproduction and women men for survival/protection so the need for protection is more common than you think and this is why many women prefer taller guys even if they do not always want to admit this "superficial" preference. This preference is although common on dating sites.

      I saw your profile and I do not know whether you are a woman in the first place, your usage of the language seems to suggest it, and if you are just trolling (as your profile indicate you love to do in this part of the forum) or if you are being serious.

      I hope you are not a feminist because then you will become very pissed off at me! ;-)

      Take Care & Have An Awesome Day! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963536].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author HeySal
        Originally Posted by MaxTheMarketer View Post

        The "following" I am talking about is in the context of courtship, from a man meeting a woman, ending up in the bed and maybe even in a long-term relationship or even a marriage.

        It is noteworthy that more men approach women, more men ask for the number, more men ask for the date, more men ask women to dance (ye, the good ol' days), more men ask women to marry them, more men rather than women mount them during sex.

        Men make things progress assumed the woman is interested enough to allow it (and therefore "follow" them). In the bedrom and in the context of sex, most women are sexually submissive (I never got a complain about being "rough"/"dominant") to the man and many products "helping men to become better in the bed" point this common observation out, "You need to LEAD her more in the bedroom".

        What a woman can is to reject it (not interested or not interested yet) or she can accept it (in a sense "follow" because if she was interested but he didn't move things forward, in most cases things would never progress and she will rationalize that she was never interested in him after all).

        Men have throughout evolution needed women for reproduction and women men for survival/protection so the need for protection is more common than you think and this is why many women prefer taller guys even if they do not always want to admit this "superficial" preference. This preference is although common on dating sites.

        I saw your profile and I do not know whether you are a woman in the first place, your usage of the language seems to suggest it, and if you are just trolling (as your profile indicate you love to do in this part of the forum) or if you are being serious.

        I hope you are not a feminist because then you will become very pissed off at me! ;-)

        Take Care & Have An Awesome Day! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
        Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

        I
        BTW to those that haven't figured it out yet, "going dutch" merely means paying your own part of the bill. And these days the english term, at least in the US, for inviting does NOT mean that you don't have to pay. It merely says that you are welcome to come.

        Steve
        I was always taught that the person who asks the other out is the one who pays unless "going dutch" is the agreed pay method for the event. This is how I've always done things. It's really easy. You either have the money and say "ya wanna do this with me? My treat", or you say "I want to do this together, but can't afford it for both of us, you wanna do it dutch?"

        What could be easier. If someone doesn't specify that it's a pay your own way invite, I expect them to pick up the tab whether it's a date or a friend.

        [
        Originally Posted by MaxTheMarketer View Post

        I saw your profile and I do not know whether you are a woman in the first place, your usage of the language seems to suggest it, and if you are just trolling (as your profile indicate you love to do in this part of the forum) or if you are being serious.

        I hope you are not a feminist because then you will become very pissed off at me! ;-)

        Take Care & Have An Awesome Day! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
        I am a female - I had my own pic up for years, and just recently changed it.

        As far as trolling? You feel I am TROLLING? I have been in here for seven years, dude. I KNOW many of the people I am talking to and they know me. I have strong convictions and a tendency to speak freely, regardless of whether others like my position or not. I can support my convictions logically. People also know and respect my work and the honesty I use in my marketing. You've been here for 50 posts and have the nerve to suggest I'm a troll? Go soak your head. Perhaps you, new member with 50 whole posts are the troll calling out long established members as being trolls?

        Am I a feminist? Not hardcore like some people think of feminists. I believe in my right to earn my own living or be a homemaker at my choosing. I have always thought that if one has children they should be willing and able to stay home and raise them at least until they get into school - because babies are a very important priority and need a mother, not a day care center. I also believe too many women try to have it both ways, kids and career. Right now the economy demands they go to work, but I don't think it's been a good thing for society. I feel kids and career should be mutually exclusive choices for the first years of a kid's life, not an "I can do both" decision.

        Other than that, women should be free to pursue their own career, education, bank account, property, etc.

        I also will wear what I want when I want - I have trained in self defense so I can do that without having to fear the idiot who thinks a short skirt or halter top means they have been given permission to do as they please with me. I also agree that there are still places you have to be careful about your appearance or you are courting disaster.

        I believe in a household that works for the betterment of BOTH individuals, and is not a kingdom for one or the other to take pleasure from while making it a nonproductive, work intensive situation for the other. I believe that everyone deserves to be able to bring in and have enough funding security to leave any relationship at will if it proves to be abusive or enslaving.

        I believe we need to respect each other as intelligent human beings and try to work to achieve a good life for BOTH parties in a marriage. I believe that women have the choice whether to have kids or not, since it is their body producing them, and to a large extent they are the ones who are in charge of daily care (however, that is changing a bit). I believe if a man helps produce those children he is 50% responsible for the financial support of his kids, unless he is with the mother and they agree he should be a stay at home parent - and if he is, he deserves the same respect any other stay at home parent would get - including 1/2 of all assets in a divorce and child support if he takes the kids.

        I also believe that if a woman calls rape and can be proven to be lying she should be jailed for malicious prosecution just as a man proven of rape should be jailed.

        So am I a feminist or not? I don't give a rip as long as I'm treated with justice by the system and like an intelligent human with equal value being by whoever I date - and I refuse to date anyone who can't handle that one.
        Signature

        Sal
        When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
        Beyond the Path

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973349].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

          I was always taught that the person who asks the other out is the one who pays unless "going dutch" is the agreed pay method for the event. This is how I've always done things. It's really easy. You either have the money and say "ya wanna do this with me? My treat", or you say "I want to do this together, but can't afford it for both of us, you wanna do it dutch?"

          What could be easier. If someone doesn't specify that it's a pay your own way invite, I expect them to pick up the tab whether it's a date or a friend.
          I AGREE, IF IT IS A DATE. It often doesn't work that way elsewhere. And "my treat" makes it clear! If I invited someone, with the expectation that I would pay, I WOULD say "my treat", or something similar.

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973740].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
            Gabrielle Reece:
            In my house, there is a very old-fashioned dynamic in that, within the four walls of our home, I'm clearly the female, Laird's clearly the male. I'm willing and I choose to serve the family which means dinner and laundry and organizing his schedule as well as my schedule and other things. And I'm choosing this because there's something in this that works well for us because with Laird's strengths and my strengths we can figure out how to complement each other.
            Gabrielle Reece:
            I've chosen to be a wife, I've chosen to be a mother. I've chosen to continue working. I've chosen to try to keep my house in a certain order. If you want to have that dynamic where your guy isn't like your chick, guess what? You better give him some love.
            Bold is mine.

            Gabrielle Reece:
            I think the language that men understand and they receive - is through food and through sex.
            Bold is mine.

            NBC NEWS EXCLUSIVE KATE SNOW SITS DOWN WITH VOLLEYBALL CHAMPION, MODEL AND FITNESS ADVOCATE GABRIELLE REECE TO DISCUSS HER NEW BOOK, MY FOOT IS TOO BIG FOR THE GLASS SLIPPER | NBCUniversal

            How Is Feminism Going In The US? Sometimes it's just great. :rolleyes:

            Joe Mobley
            Signature

            .

            Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7977101].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kay King
              But isn't that the point of feminism at its core? The freedom to define YOUR relationships and the dynamics/roles that work for YOU.

              However, I expect the bit about her doing everything at home includes the help of a cleaning lady here and there. And that's fine, too.
              Signature
              Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
              ***
              One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
              what it is instead of what you think it should be.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7977906].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Young Financier
    Feminism has made it a crime to be a man in America.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7963796].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MaxTheMarketer
      Originally Posted by Sean Tudor Carter View Post

      Feminism has made it a crime to be a man in America.
      That is becoming more true in Sweden as well. There is this social norm, usually called "the Jante Law" but it is not a real law, but it is something below surface in social conversations and how people tend to look at each other and treat each other.

      The Jante Law simple states that, "don't think you are some body special, don't ever think you will be able to succeed with anything in life - just stay put where you are and jump on the bandwagon of passive individuals; herd behavior".

      In in other words, the "law" suggests that you should never try to do something with your life, just live "the swedish life" (swe. svenssonlivet) by growing up, go to school, get a regular 9to5-job, get a car, get a house, get a wife, get some kids, get less sex as you become more of a wuss, get too drunk one time because your sex-life and general life sucks so much, get divorced due to fights and unhealthy lifestyle, become an alcoholic as a result of the divorce, die from alcoholic poisoning because you realized you have done nothing with your life and you just want to end your mental suffering this causes you.

      Okay, maybe you don't have the unfortunate to have to go through a divorce, but many seem to, usually because you are not allowed to be a real man in the attractive sense. Another way to put what you said:

      "Feminism has made 'being attractive to women' a crime in Sweden".

      Take Care & Have An Awesome Day! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7964001].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Originally Posted by Sean Tudor Carter View Post

      Feminism has made it a crime to be a man in America.
      Well, ya know - it got kinda old being told to get back in the kitchen, too. But - slaves sooner or later declare their freedom and it really sucks for slaveholders, but that's kinda tough noogies isn't it?

      As far as being criminal in America - we have a government expansion into tyranny right now so EVERYONE is getting bit at one point or another, it's not just you poor little dudes who lost your comfy right to tell us every step we were going to take. There are actually men right now that are lashing out on our right to even take birth control if we don't want to have kids. I'm not sure it that's a "male control" thing or some people imposing their religious values on everyone else in the country -- but it's an imposition.

      So there are a few whacked as hell feminist out there - there's whack jobs from different political parties, from different religions, from different ethnic groups, etc and so on that seem to think that it's their right to tell everyone else how to live and demonize everyone else that doesn't want to live that way.

      What we need to do is tell them all to STFU and just keep pushing to keep our constitution in tact so NOBODY can tell us how we're gonna act on our own time and in our own space.

      If you're around women who think you're a criminal just because you have outdoor plumbing....go find a more intelligent and sane bunch of chicks to hang around with.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7964091].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Young Financier
        Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

        Well, ya know - it got kinda old being told to get back in the kitchen, too. But - slaves sooner or later declare their freedom and it really sucks for slaveholders, but that's kinda tough noogies isn't it?

        As far as being criminal in America - we have a government expansion into tyranny right now so EVERYONE is getting bit at one point or another, it's not just you poor little dudes who lost your comfy right to tell us every step we were going to take. There are actually men right now that are lashing out on our right to even take birth control if we don't want to have kids. I'm not sure it that's a "male control" thing or some people imposing their religious values on everyone else in the country -- but it's an imposition.

        So there are a few whacked as hell feminist out there - there's whack jobs from different political parties, from different religions, from different ethnic groups, etc and so on that seem to think that it's their right to tell everyone else how to live and demonize everyone else that doesn't want to live that way.

        What we need to do is tell them all to STFU and just keep pushing to keep our constitution in tact so NOBODY can tell us how we're gonna act on our own time and in our own space.

        If you're around women who think you're a criminal just because you have outdoor plumbing....go find a more intelligent and sane bunch of chicks to hang around with.
        I'm all for equality, but I'm not for people using their fight for "equality" as a front to gain superiority. Feminism has made it to where women only want the positive benefits that comes w/ equality, but wanna jump back to being inferior when the bad side of equality kicks in. For instance: A woman wants to work the same type of job as a man....which I have no problem w/. But this same woman wants to go back to being the inferior sex when its time to use the money made from that equal job to pay bills. She starts saying that a man should take care of her....the way it used to be.

        For starters, that's what I mean. Please don't get me started on the legal system.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7967023].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author HeySal
          Originally Posted by Sean Tudor Carter View Post

          I'm all for equality, but I'm not for people using their fight for "equality" as a front to gain superiority. Feminism has made it to where women only want the positive benefits that comes w/ equality, but wanna jump back to being inferior when the bad side of equality kicks in. For instance: A woman wants to work the same type of job as a man....which I have no problem w/. But this same woman wants to go back to being the inferior sex when its time to use the money made from that equal job to pay bills. She starts saying that a man should take care of her....the way it used to be.

          For starters, that's what I mean. Please don't get me started on the legal system.
          Most women don't want superiority. I'm sure a few do. Some do just in retaliation for what they suffered at the hands of a controlling jerk. That isn't right. Definitely not right. I don't know any women who work and don't pay AT LEAST their fair share of a relationship, though. Wow - money from work AND supported? That'd be kewl. Sorry - but it would be. Does that really happen?

          The "legal system" is very messed up. I've seen guys that were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to have raped someone and got off -- and I've seen guys incarcerated on completely false charges. When my ex and I split up in 2005 I needed some fast help. He had squashed me financially. One agency told me I could get this, that, and the other thing -- all I needed to do is sign a paper stating he hit me. I told them "he didn't hit me. He was financially and emotionally abusive, but he never hit me". They refused help. Now what happens when a woman has kids, finds herself hungry and out on the streets suddenly and needs help right away and is offered that deal?

          I told them I'd sleep in my car, thanks. I didn't end up having to, but it was winter and looked pretty bleak for around a week. I'm tough - I could have done it, but have no kids to fend for either. That kind of situation makes me furious. I called a few legislators about it and they didn't seem to care one whit about it.
          Signature

          Sal
          When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
          Beyond the Path

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7968586].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bluecoyotemedia
    maxthemarketer


    yes.. Feminism has made relationships in the U.S. more adversarial than anything else.

    this is why I originally left.
    Signature

    Skunkworks: noun. informal.

    A clandestine group operating without any external intervention or oversight. Such groups achieve significant breakthroughs rarely discussed in public because they operate "outside the box".
    https://short-stuff.com/-Mjk0fDExOA==

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7964038].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dieselpro
    The problem with feminism in the United States, is many women don't want to relinquish the trappings of pre-feminism, such as men paying for most of the courting process, opening doors, being the male protector etc. Yet, when a man says he's not going to engage in those things anymore, many of these same women accuse him of "not being a real man". Sadly, many men are brainwashed and co-sign this madness. You have women who make over $100K a year, who complain a guy who makes $85K a year asked her to go dutch on the 2nd or 3rd date.

    Both, men and women have certain base level hard wiring, that feminism has tried to stuff out of both genders. Its like trying to force a little boy to play with dolls, his core inner being will rebuke it. It has nothing to do with being insecure or close minded. Recently, President Obama was lambasted for jokingly saying California Attorney General Kamala Harris is the prettiest Attorney General he knows. I guess many women thought he was objectifying her, but what's happening is men, who are more educated, but still masculine, are just putting up walls and ignoring women. A lot of modern woman wear all this ultra sexy tight & sheer clothing, yet get mad when a man looks. I think it really has to do with them wanting, to limit those looks to men they're personally attracted to and every one else get the "you ****in perv" stare. I'm a Black American male, but I listen to Tom Leykis on Youtube sometimes (I think he can be a chauvinist sometimes lol), but his core audience is White guys and they have similar complaints). I remember my former manager (who's male) laughingly tell me after work, a few months after I started years ago, that a mildly attractive female was asking people if I was gay, because I was ignoring her and not giving her attention, when she was flaunting her assets in my face. I don't have time for B.S like this, because next thing you know, when she gets angry, you're sitting in Human Resources explaining yourself, most likely to a female H.R Director (I've worked at 4 companies since graduating from college in the late 90's and each H.R Dept was female dominated), so this is not the environment, you want to defend yourself against sexual harassment charges in. Most females at my job accuse me of being unfriendly. Many Black girls have this thing if they are remotely attractive, you're trying to "bang them", just by mere fact of speaking. It's always some "trojan horse" in their minds, if you speak first. Many White women, Asian women (and Latin women to a lesser degree) in NYC have this Black man paranoia, so I typically just keep my distance from them unless necessary, as I don't have time for people to try to make me feel bad about myself, because of their projected fears. It's something me and many of my Black college educated friends joke about, we all have weekly stories, relating to this "phenomena". I was walking to my dept a couple of weeks ago (I wear suits to work) and a newer middle-aged White female tried to hand me a FedEx envelope, while I was passing by. I make twice as much as her, have a higher position, but I still got the "he must be the mailroom guy" rap, no matter how I was dressed. At work, I typically socialize with older females who are past the "all men want me" stage, the few really sociable girls (these are types with male friends) and men (usually ones I have some common ideology with on core issues, important to me). If feminism sucks for you White guys, it's exponentially worse for Black guys. Now many women are emboldened in their displays of rudeness or ignorance. NYC is the capital of this behavior. Talked to some of the homies and I'm seriously thinking about moving to Brazil, when I get my internet and R.E businesses pulling at least $500K a year faithfully, but my parents are still here and getting older, so are my best friends from childhood and college.

    Listen, I'm all for women making just as much as men and having all the perks and privileges as men. Speaking from the viewpoint of a Black man, White and Black women have it way easier than me anyway, so maybe I'm biased. Nevertheless, I'm all for people having all their human and civil rights afforded to them, I know first hand what's its like to get the shaft over some racial B.S. So, I'm extremely empathetic to that aspect of the female plight. So, don't become what you despise. That's why I always laugh at how racist, many White feminist are. You saw this up, close and personal, after Barack Obama defeated Hilary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic primary. You saw many White homosexuals spew all types of racist crap, after Prop 8 (gay marriage) was defeated in California several years ago, when Blacks make up only 7% of the California electorate. I treat all races with respect and dont think I'm superior to anybody. At the same time, I dont want any special allowances either, even though institutionalized racism is still rife in our society. Money, power and ownership is the only way out of these quagmires, not begging for crumbs. Power concedes nothing! I respect women who feel the same way. Not ones who expect men to wine & dine them, then complain about some guy at work making $2K a year more than them. Or worse, a women who had tons of sexual partners, then expects me to want to marry her and label me as having a "double standard". Men are less forgiving of cheating and promiscuous pasts and I don't apologize for feeling that way either. That's how most men are hard wired. However, men are now accepting this behavior, under the guise of being "secure in their manhood". This is really just reverse psychology, the old Jedi mind trick. Watch an episode of "Jersey Shore" or "Bridezillas" and these fools (simps as we brothas call them) are marrying these women left and right.

    The modern male is supposed to be O.K with sexually promiscuous women, because if men can do it, they can do it. Yet, no sane man, expects a successful women to take them serious, if they are unemployed with 3 roommates. Yet, many successful men can meet a woman in the same situation and be O.K with it, if they are attractive, have goals, a nice, laid back personality and aren't looking for a sugar daddy/sponsor type. I met a women who was laid-off and moved back with her parents temporarily, while she and her friend start a small business. She moved back, so she could pump more of her savings into start-up capital. The sacrifice is to be commended. I offered to help her with a web site and SEO advice, when she was ready. A woman typically would not be so understanding, because they are hard wired to want security and finances are part of that "security". Doesn't mean you have to be rich, but not unemployed, living with your parents either. As a man with his own money, I can see the bigger picture and I'm not hard wired to derive security from my female mate. Every guy I know in a relationship with a woman making more money than him or living in her house, is getting talked down to, disrespected and treated like a child at times. So, this notion of men being insecure about successful women, is a bit intellectually dishonest. Men have their reasons, rooted in some personal experiences. Well, at least the guys I know.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7971386].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dieselpro
    Oh yeah Max, there was an interesting article in the Village Voice, a couple of years ago, talking about why so many good looking, successful people in NYC are single. NYC has an extremely high rate of single men and women over 30, who have never been engaged or married (I'm part of that statistic). It mentioned the night life and all the options NYCers have, but it also touched on NYC woman being more demanding and picky (many times to their own detriment), when selecting a potential mate. The article was watered down, as it was written by a woman, but I agreed with much of her basic premise. The bottomline is, many attractive women in NYC, think it's their birth rite to have some guy who looks like male model, is a millionaire or both. When it doesn't come, then comes the bitterness and the "men are pigs" blame game in their 30's and 40's. No self analysis or catharsis, just sheer projection onto the male species.

    Typically, when I met an attractive woman with a really cool personality, 95% of the time, she is not from NYC. Sad, but true.


    If I can remember the title, I post it in this thread, as I can't post the link.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7971445].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      You make some good points but I wonder about something you said. You were angry that someone asked you to deliver an envelope and your assumption was because "because I'm black" and you thought it was rude to as because you make more money than that person does.

      Could it be as simple as you were headed in the right direction to drop off the envelope - and your co-worker was just asking you for a favor?
      Even if your assumption is right - is it any different than asking for coffee and looking at the woman in the conference room? Do you gain anything by being insulted rather than being helpful?

      For a long time, women had to marry to be safe and supported. For many women today - that's no longer true. It's not an easy role and some women become demanding while others give out mixed signals.

      asked her to go dutch on the 2nd or 3rd date.
      If the first date was fun and they decided together to go out again - nothing wrong with going dutch. However, if the man asks her out and then tells her to pay her own way - she might decide to spend her money going out with people she likes better or going out on her own to meet a different man.:p
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7972010].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

        You make some good points but I wonder about something you said. You were angry that someone asked you to deliver an envelope and your assumption was because "because I'm black" and you thought it was rude to as because you make more money than that person does.

        Could it be as simple as you were headed in the right direction to drop off the envelope - and your co-worker was just asking you for a favor?
        Even if your assumption is right - is it any different than asking for coffee and looking at the woman in the conference room? Do you gain anything by being insulted rather than being helpful?
        I think the days of a man expecting a woman at a conference to be one that serves coffee are LONG gone! I don't know if that was true at ANY point in my life. HECK, I am in an industry that is typically MALE, and has typically been male! Yet my current contracts customer is perhaps 50% female and they are full USERS, at least at the application level, and the "super users" and "subject matter experts" are perhaps ALL women! The people on the team I support are about 10% women. Hey, 10% is a LOT considering.

        For a long time, women had to marry to be safe and supported. For many women today - that's no longer true. It's not an easy role and some women become demanding while others give out mixed signals.
        Well, it used to be EXPECTED that people would marry, and that they woman would be the homekeeper. AGAIN, by about the time I was born, in the 60s, that was just about GONE.

        If the first date was fun and they decided together to go out again - nothing wrong with going dutch. However, if the man asks her out and then tells her to pay her own way - she might decide to spend her money going out with people she likes better or going out on her own to meet a different man.:p
        YEP, but if women want to take on ALL the perceived benefits, they have to expect, as some feminists DEMANDED, that they take on the attendant risks and disadvantages.

        BTW to those that haven't figured it out yet, "going dutch" merely means paying your own part of the bill. And these days the english term, at least in the US, for inviting does NOT mean that you don't have to pay. It merely says that you are welcome to come.

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7972800].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MaxTheMarketer
          Someone here (cannot find, too many posts, haha) wrote something very interesting regarding women who earn equally ore more than their husbands and then still expect them to pay the majority of the bills.

          Is this really common these days in US? I posed this question on Sweden's biggest forum (which is not even located in Sweden since they discuss topics illegal to discuss on Swedish grounds) to see if this is common in Sweden too where the woman earns more or equal to the man.

          I find it very sneaky of people abusing feminism in that way where they not only want a piece of the cake, but the whole cake too. So, how common is this really?

          Take Care & Have An Awesome Day, Fellow Warrior(s)! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7972952].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author seasoned
            Originally Posted by MaxTheMarketer View Post

            Someone here (cannot find, too many posts, haha) wrote something very interesting regarding women who earn equally ore more than their husbands and then still expect them to pay the majority of the bills.

            Is this really common these days in US? I posed this question on Sweden's biggest forum (which is not even located in Sweden since they discuss topics illegal to discuss on Swedish grounds) to see if this is common in Sweden too where the woman earns more or equal to the man.

            I find it very sneaky of people abusing feminism in that way where they not only want a piece of the cake, but the whole cake too. So, how common is this really?

            Take Care & Have An Awesome Day, Fellow Warrior(s)! / Max "MaxTheMarketer" K.
            Let me put it THIS way! I took a beginning principals in Real Estate class once in California. It is REQUIRED for all R/E brokers and agents in California. The teacher said that some people have MORE equal rights than others, referring to the idea of womens property rights. If they had nothing to do with purchasing the property, running it, etc... they STILL may demand it all sold and get like 1/2 the proceeds of the entire estate. A man, if he ever had a chance, would have to REALLY fight to do the same. I even know of at least one company now owned by a woman because she got it in the divorce!

            ALSO, men are generally expected to share everything, and no such expectation is true of the woman. If the man shares everything, it is treated like a corporation with 1/2 ownership. The woman could stay as a half partner, or leave with the proceeds. of course the veracity of that may vary from state to state.

            Steve
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973178].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author HeySal
              Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

              Let me put it THIS way! I took a beginning principals in Real Estate class once in California. It is REQUIRED for all R/E brokers and agents in California. The teacher said that some people have MORE equal rights than others, referring to the idea of womens property rights. If they had nothing to do with purchasing the property, running it, etc... they STILL may demand it all sold and get like 1/2 the proceeds of the entire estate. A man, if he ever had a chance, would have to REALLY fight to do the same. I even know of at least one company now owned by a woman because she got it in the divorce!

              ALSO, men are generally expected to share everything, and no such expectation is true of the woman. If the man shares everything, it is treated like a corporation with 1/2 ownership. The woman could stay as a half partner, or leave with the proceeds. of course the veracity of that may vary from state to state.

              Steve
              Bull shit. Without a pre-nup a woman is just as responsible for 50% as the man. It's when kids are involved that she gets leverage if she takes custody of the kids. I've known men who get the custody and they get get edge on that 50%, too.

              But -- guys didn't complain back in the day that women weren't even allowed to own property - and they didn't complain when they were just able to legally drop a wife and the kids off and leave them in poverty with nothing. When I was marrying age, a woman had very few rights at all. If there were kids she got child support (legally - but nobody made him pay if he decided to run on it). Banks wouldn't deal with us, real estate agents wouldn't either unless the woman had money in her own right such as from inheritances, and then sometimes they still required the sig of the husband for some things. I was living with someone out of wedlock and one doctor refused to tie my tubes without his okay. Needless to say I found another doctor.

              But they complain about a woman getting half when they didn't bring an equal amount of dollars? They cook, clean, take care of kids, organize, etc - a job they'd get paid beaucoup to do for someone else and one that keeps a home running. So if she manages the home instead of bringing in bucks some men think that should be a complete freebie - even though she'd be able to support herself when the realtionship broke if she put that effort elsewhere.

              Maybe that's why some feminists have gone to extremes -- because guys went to extremes taking advantage of our lack of rights.

              Ya know what though -- when I hear a guy bitch because some women have become lying little tramps to get vengeance on someone or get greedy -- or talk about men like scum for being men, or spit on them for opening a door for them or anything like that - I can empathasize with that bitching. I've been on the reverse side of the coin where guys expect me to subjugate myself to every whim they have just because they have a dick.
              But when guys whine because they have to be fair about things -- it makes me sick to my stomach.
              Signature

              Sal
              When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
              Beyond the Path

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973207].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
                Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

                Bull shit. Without a pre-nup a woman is just as responsible for 50% as the man.
                Don't look now, but apparently more than one ruling has rendered the prenup something of a moot point. All it takes is for the woman to claim "duress" or else convince the court of some preeminent verbal agreement to have it shredded after conceiving a child.

                A millionaire's wife has won a landmark bid to have her prenuptial agreement torn up after a judge ruled she was forced into signing it. Elizabeth Cioffi-Petrakis, 37, from Long Island, claims her tycoon husband coerced her into accepting the document four days before their lavish wedding in June 1998. In an 'unprecedented' ruling last month, an appellate panel decided Peter Petrakis, 41, had 'fraudulently induced' his wife to sign and that his 'credibility was suspect.' Calling the document 'a knife in my heart from Day One,' she testified that Mr Petrakis threatened to cancel the wedding if she didn't sign the agreement, reported the New York Post. Mrs Cioffi-Petrakis said her husband promised to 'tear up' the document after the couple had children. He also vowed to put their Old Brookville home under both their names.But Mrs Cioffi-Petrakis, who is a stay at home mother, said that he failed to carry out his promise, even after they couple had twin sons and a daughter.On February 20, a Brooklyn Appellate Court panel unanimously affirmed two Nassau County court decisions, saying Mr Petrakis, 'fraudulently induced' his wife to sign the prenuptial agreement and found his 'credibility to be suspect.' Mrs Cioffi-Petrakis' lawyer, Dennis D'Antonio said the decision 'is unprecedented, vacating a pre-nup on the basis of a verbal promise,' even though a clause in the contract says there were no verbal promises.
                (More info - awful newspaper alert.)
                Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

                Wow some wench took you to the bank eh? Funny - I know a lot of women that have had my experience. You move in together and he quits work and tries to live off you while doing nothing on the domestic side to make himself worth a dime to the relationship.
                Hehe, don't sorry, Sal - I was being facetious with that one.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973262].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                  Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                  Don't look now, but apparently more than one ruling has rendered the prenup something of a moot point. All it takes is for the woman to claim "duress" or else convince the court of some preeminent verbal agreement to have it shredded after conceiving a child.
                  On LIAR LIAR, the woman BROKE THE LAW by:

                  1. Lying.
                  2. Giving her husband the wrong age.
                  3. Aiding and Abetting a felony.
                  4. Perjury.

                  5. She ALSO broke any idea of monogamy, etc...

                  But she signed a prenup!!!!!!!!

                  She was a MINOR, and so the prenup was considered INVALID!

                  That ALSO made the MARRIAGE INVALID!!!!!!!!!!!

                  BUT, the marriage became a COMMON LAW marriage!

                  So she got the benefits of marriage without ANYTHING like the prenup limitations.

                  Granted, it was a comedy, but a lot of that stuff is true, and I am sure it all would be. EVEN though HE got none of the benefits of marriage. He could have had sex with a WHORE and had a kid.

                  Steve
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973729].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

                Bull shit. Without a pre-nup a woman is just as responsible for 50% as the man.
                *****WRONG*****! The idea of a prenup is for those that have assets to dictate limitations to the other party to get them BEFORE the marriage, or PRE(before) the NUP(tials) MARRIAGE. WHY? Because the default is as I said!

                It's when kids are involved that she gets leverage if she takes custody of the kids. I've known men who get the custody and they get get edge on that 50%, too.
                NO, she gets ALIMONY JUST for the marriage! She often gets ASSETS JUST for the marriage! The kids just make it a bit easier, the values larger, and add CHILD SUPPORT!

                But -- guys didn't complain back in the day that women weren't even allowed to own property - and they didn't complain when they were just able to legally drop a wife and the kids off and leave them in poverty with nothing.
                Were women in the US EVER forbidden to own property? And I doubt the man could ever leave them in POVERTY. My mother didn't make THAT much and, at the beginning, I don't think my father did. She DID get child support. She always lamented not going back to court for more.

                When I was marrying age, a woman had very few rights at all. If there were kids she got child support (legally - but nobody made him pay if he decided to run on it). Banks wouldn't deal with us, real estate agents wouldn't either unless the woman had money in her own right such as from inheritances, and then sometimes they still required the sig of the husband for some things. I was living with someone out of wedlock and one doctor refused to tie my tubes without his okay. Needless to say I found another doctor.
                Well, in some ways women DID have less freedom there. In a way, it is understandable. A man might want kids, and the woman has certainly had a lot of power there. She might lie about being on the pill, EITHER WAY, for example.

                As for being outside of wedlock, that is hard to believe *****BUT***** certain actions may indicate the desire to have, or actually cause, a COMMON LAW MARRIAGE!

                But they complain about a woman getting half when they didn't bring an equal amount of dollars? They cook, clean, take care of kids, organize, etc - a job they'd get paid beaucoup to do for someone else and one that keeps a home running. So if she manages the home instead of bringing in bucks some men think that should be a complete freebie - even though she'd be able to support herself when the realtionship broke if she put that effort elsewhere.
                Actually, there isn't much of a market at that price, and they ARE her kids ALSO! And SOME don't even have kids!!!!!

                Maybe that's why some feminists have gone to extremes -- because guys went to extremes taking advantage of our lack of rights.

                Ya know what though -- when I hear a guy bitch because some women have become lying little tramps to get vengeance on someone or get greedy -- or talk about men like scum for being men, or spit on them for opening a door for them or anything like that - I can empathasize with that bitching. I've been on the reverse side of the coin where guys expect me to subjugate myself to every whim they have just because they have a dick.
                But when guys whine because they have to be fair about things -- it makes me sick to my stomach.
                WOW! You say it is ONLY because they have a dick? I could reverse that and say why should women get 1/2 just because they have a vagina? I am NOT faulting ANYONE for getting money because of their sex! If the woman provided 50% of the value, she should get recompense, and LIKEWISE for the man!

                AND, as you have CONSTANTLY admitted here, the claim of inability to earn the money or get proper employment, that they used to get this, is NO LONGER VALID! Yet the rules and precedents are still there.

                Steve
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973707].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
            Originally Posted by MaxTheMarketer View Post

            I find it very sneaky of people abusing feminism in that way where they not only want a piece of the cake, but the whole cake too. So, how common is this really?
            This isn't so much a feminist phenomenon as it is a general feature of heterosexual relationships, particularly in matrimony.

            The rationale seems to be that guys are basically plonkers who'll blow all their money on trivial crap unless an intervention is staged wherein the bulk is confiscated and duly apportioned to "important household necessities", however fruitless and unimportant in reality, which do nothing for one's contentment. Meanwhile, she banks her wages - of which there are more after Mr. Pushover has taken care of most of the mundanities - and invests in, for example, another pair of disposable clogs or clothing items befitting some specific, ineffable occasion that hitherto was unworthy of special consideration... say, like, school parents' evenings or Thursday brunch in the spring of every other leap year.

            In other words, you pay for the crap and learn to be happy getting your leg over (sex, if she'll give you it) while she sinks the cost of Cyprus' bailout tending to her looks, probably for the secret purpose of bolstering her sex appeal for other guys' benefit (just in case she gives them it instead, on a girls' night out with all that extra disposable income).

            Of course, I could be talking out my posterior. Just one of the many perks of singledom.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973184].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author HeySal
              Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

              This isn't so much a feminist phenomenon as it is a general feature of heterosexual relationships, particularly in matrimony.

              The rationale seems to be that guys are basically plonkers who'll blow all their money on trivial crap unless an intervention is staged wherein the bulk is confiscated and duly apportioned to "important household necessities", however fruitless and unimportant in reality, which do nothing for one's contentment. Meanwhile, she banks her wages - of which there are more after Mr. Pushover has taken care of most of the mundanities - and invests in, for example, another pair of disposable clogs or clothing items befitting some specific, ineffable occasion that hitherto was unworthy of special consideration... say, like, school parents' evenings or Thursday brunch in the spring of every other leap year.

              In other words, you pay for the crap and learn to be happy getting your leg over (sex, if she'll give you it) while she sinks the cost of Cyprus' bailout tending to her looks, probably for the secret purpose of bolstering her sex appeal for other guys' benefit (just in case she gives them it instead, on a girls' night out with all that extra disposable income).

              Of course, I could be talking out my posterior. Just one of the many perks of singledom.
              Wow some wench took you to the bank eh? Funny - I know a lot of women that have had my experience. You move in together and he quits work and tries to live off you while doing nothing on the domestic side to make himself worth a dime to the relationship.

              My ex was banking while I was struggling so bad to get bills paid I couldn't even afford required car insurance. I got pulled over and just by the grace of God avoided a ticket, car impounding, and just dire consequences -- and then found he had been stashing a very healthy bank account. All the while he was making life even harder for me doing things like refusing to help fix my car so I could even get to work. And about that time I found out that he had quit work voluntarily - as had the ex before him. THAT'S where we crashed. I was doing well when I met him and by the time we split I was so destitute that I didn't know if I was going to spend winter on the street without a car or what. Pulled myself out by the skin of my teeth and a bit of help from a relative. The guy before him I just sent home to his mommy and told her to finish raising him.

              It works both ways. People can be vile trash no matter which sex they are. They just have different ways to go about it. We just have to be more careful about making choices about who to be with.

              As far as laws - they go back and forth, at one time favoring men, at one time favoring women -- and even when they equal things out for us pretty well, the person with the sharpest lawyer often wins, and that's like that no matter who it is or what the issue is, not just in the case of sex issues.
              Signature

              Sal
              When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
              Beyond the Path

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973227].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

                Wow some wench took you to the bank eh? Funny - I know a lot of women that have had my experience. You move in together and he quits work and tries to live off you while doing nothing on the domestic side to make himself worth a dime to the relationship.

                My ex was banking while I was struggling so bad to get bills paid I couldn't even afford required car insurance. I got pulled over and just by the grace of God avoided a ticket, car impounding, and just dire consequences -- and then found he had been stashing a very healthy bank account. All the while he was making life even harder for me doing things like refusing to help fix my car so I could even get to work. And about that time I found out that he had quit work voluntarily - as had the ex before him. THAT'S where we crashed. I was doing well when I met him and by the time we split I was so destitute that I didn't know if I was going to spend winter on the street without a car or what. Pulled myself out by the skin of my teeth and a bit of help from a relative. The guy before him I just sent home to his mommy and told her to finish raising him.

                It works both ways. People can be vile trash no matter which sex they are. They just have different ways to go about it. We just have to be more careful about making choices about who to be with.

                As far as laws - they go back and forth, at one time favoring men, at one time favoring women -- and even when they equal things out for us pretty well, the person with the sharpest lawyer often wins, and that's like that no matter who it is or what the issue is, not just in the case of sex issues.
                IRONICALLY, he might have been doing that to try to avoid the chance that you would claim helping him, etc... and get so much of the money. ALAS, today, some lawyers really hunt that stuff out.

                Steve
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973716].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Curtis2011
    Originally Posted by MaxTheMarketer View Post

    The way they have done so, are the observations that a woman cannot feel attraction to a man she perceives to be of lower status than her.
    Welcome to Earth. This occurs all over the globe in women everywhere, because it's a biologically programmed (genetic) thing.

    Although women in different cultures may be attracted to different symbols of status within that particular culture, they are all attracted to status nonetheless.

    I could get into more detail but really you would have to study some PUA (pickup artist) material to get the full explanation.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973442].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Steve -- where do you live that women still get alimony? Must be another "kids" in the divorce thing because women who don't have kids don't get alimony. There's a lot of things the parent that takes custody of kids get no matter which sex. I don't have kids - I would have to fight for my 50% in a divorce. I'd have no chance of alimony. I was divorced decades ago and couldn't get alimony.

    And when I said "just because he has a dick" -- was basically just rough wording for saying that there are guys who think they are to have their own way 24/7 because, and only because, they are male. Don't get me wrong, either - there are men that aren't like that. I was raised in a home where my mother didn't work outside the house and my father had tons of respect for her opinion, and never gave her crap about anything she wanted to do. There was a very huge division of labor - but nobody "ruled" each other. Conflicts were talked about and compromised on. I never heard either say "No, you can't do that."

    When I got older and found out that some men thought they were masters and I was, by virtue of my gender, their servant, it was quite a shock to me. So were some of the laws I ran into along the way. I worked at a rape crisis center and saw first hand how brutally oppressive some of the laws were and how rape victims were victimized all over again by the system.

    All in all - I know there are some women who have gone nuts enough to hate all men and they would put them into a slave status if they could. I also know men that think they are rulers and kings just because they are male. They're crazy and NOBODY should take them serious. They should walk away at the first sign that is what the person is like. There are too many sane people to associate with to pay attention to the lunatics. I don't care whether it's sexual, racial, political party, religious group or what -- when people get crazy on someone else's rights, they need to be ignored completely until the silence is so strong that they just finally realize that nobody cares about their self aggrandizing delusions and they finally STFU.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7978505].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      Steve -- where do you live that women still get alimony? Must be another "kids" in the divorce thing because women who don't have kids don't get alimony. There's a lot of things the parent that takes custody of kids get no matter which sex. I don't have kids - I would have to fight for my 50% in a divorce. I'd have no chance of alimony. I was divorced decades ago and couldn't get alimony.

      And when I said "just because he has a dick" -- was basically just rough wording for saying that there are guys who think they are to have their own way 24/7 because, and only because, they are male. Don't get me wrong, either - there are men that aren't like that. I was raised in a home where my mother didn't work outside the house and my father had tons of respect for her opinion, and never gave her crap about anything she wanted to do. There was a very huge division of labor - but nobody "ruled" each other. Conflicts were talked about and compromised on. I never heard either say "No, you can't do that."

      When I got older and found out that some men thought they were masters and I was, by virtue of my gender, their servant, it was quite a shock to me. So were some of the laws I ran into along the way. I worked at a rape crisis center and saw first hand how brutally oppressive some of the laws were and how rape victims were victimized all over again by the system.

      All in all - I know there are some women who have gone nuts enough to hate all men and they would put them into a slave status if they could. I also know men that think they are rulers and kings just because they are male. They're crazy and NOBODY should take them serious. They should walk away at the first sign that is what the person is like. There are too many sane people to associate with to pay attention to the lunatics. I don't care whether it's sexual, racial, political party, religious group or what -- when people get crazy on someone else's rights, they need to be ignored completely until the silence is so strong that they just finally realize that nobody cares about their self aggrandizing delusions and they finally STFU.
      When I divorced my ex wife, she got alimony for 2 years specifically and only because we had 2 young children and she'd been a "stay at home mom" since they were born. So she got 2 years to get on her feet. But I don't hear much anymore about alimony just because...there's always kids involved (my experience here in NY)

      Speaking of NY, when it comes to kids and custody, the laws heavily favor the mothers - no matter what. My brother and his ex spent over a year going to court over custody of their 4 young kids. In that year, the ex:

      - Missed the court mandated home inspections (to make sure the home was suitable for kids) not once, but 3 times.

      - Failed court mandated drug tests not once, but 4 times.

      - Was a no-show to court about 4 or 5 times.

      Meantime, my brother went through 6 home inspections, many MANY drug tests (passing ALL of them) and showed up in front of the judge every time he was supposed to. On the last "no-show" by his ex, the judge finally (and literally) threw up his hands and said, "Oh well, I guess I have to give you full custody". (I was there for moral support, so I am directly quoting).

      I mention this because there are many laws that go against men simply because they are men...sexism is a 2-way street (although it IS worse for women on many levels).

      Thankfully, my kids are grown now - no more court, alimony or child support (they support themselves now).

      Signature

      Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7978634].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        My Grandmother was raised in another time - where marriages lasted and women did mostly "women's work" - but she always emphasized to me that a woman needs skills "to fall back on".

        It was a risk women who stayed at home lived with - the risk of being left with no income if they depended on their partner to provide everything for them. It was a remnant from a time when women didn't often work and couldn't get jobs that paid decently to begin with. It was also a time when society recognized the value and responsibility of a well run home and raising children to be productive adults.

        That isn't true for many today where both men and women demand their right to "fulfill" themselves - and children too often become viewed as a liability in a failed marriage.

        But - there is something about child support that has always bothered me. So many men resent paying child support - and it can be a huge financial burden on them. But they are only paying money - they aren't the 24/7 person who cares for their children in most cases. They don't have to run the errands, stop the nightmares, help with the homework and all the other daily tasks a "resident parent" does every day. That is somewhat changing as more men are given custody and I see that as a positive step.

        I think 'joint custody' is one of the better legal ideas of our society - but only for those men and women able to put the needs of their children above their own petty bickering.

        It requires the adults to act like adults which is more than some can do. But the benefits to the kids is to have two parents who care about them and take care of them. The ideal custody arrangement is that no one pays "child support" but both parents support the kids by splitting expenses and custody.

        It's an adult concept and too many parents don't act like adults when they get divorced. I doubt that will ever change.
        Signature
        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
        ***
        One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
        what it is instead of what you think it should be.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7979290].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MikeAmbrosio
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          My Grandmother was raised in another time - where marriages lasted and women did mostly "women's work" - but she always emphasized to me that a woman needs skills "to fall back on".

          It was a risk women who stayed at home lived with - the risk of being left with no income if they depended on their partner to provide everything for them. It was a remnant from a time when women didn't often work and couldn't get jobs that paid decently to begin with. It was also a time when society recognized the value and responsibility of a well run home and raising children to be productive adults.

          That isn't true for many today where both men and women demand their right to "fulfill" themselves - and children too often become viewed as a liability in a failed marriage.

          But - there is something about child support that has always bothered me. So many men resent paying child support - and it can be a huge financial burden on them. But they are only paying money - they aren't the 24/7 person who cares for their children in most cases. They don't have to run the errands, stop the nightmares, help with the homework and all the other daily tasks a "resident parent" does every day. That is somewhat changing as more men are given custody and I see that as a positive step.

          I think 'joint custody' is one of the better legal ideas of our society - but only for those men and women able to put the needs of their children above their own petty bickering.

          It requires the adults to act like adults which is more than some can do. But the benefits to the kids is to have two parents who care about them and take care of them. The ideal custody arrangement is that no one pays "child support" but both parents support the kids by splitting expenses and custody.

          It's an adult concept and too many parents don't act like adults when they get divorced. I doubt that will ever change.
          Child support - another pet peeve of mine. I'm sorry to say that I actually KNOW men who resent paying. They think that child support means the money goes in to an account for the child. As for a financial burden - not really. Most fathers who are still married, they typically put their entire paycheck in to the house to support the family. Child support only requires a percentage (in my case it was 25% pre-tax dollars for 2 kids). I survived just fine on the rest. And my ex did the right thing with the money I sent - supported the household where my sons lived.

          As for joint custody, I really think it has its downside too. Unless both parents live in the same school district, it's difficult to do anyway, but even if they do, I think it can wreak havoc on a childs sense of stability. But obviously, that depends largely on the parents. Unfortunately most of the divorcing parents I knew over the years felt more compelled to use their kids as tools and bargaining chips...

          In my case, my ex had custody and I had liberal visitation. But more importantly, we agreed to JOINTLY handle issues and decisions involving our kids. My boys knew they could not play one of us against the other. It worked for us because we felt the quality of the time they spent with us was much more important than the quantity. And we were right. Now, at 24 and 22, they both STILL visit me weekly for Sunday family dinner.

          Divorce isn't easy, but it's also not impossible to do it right. The adults simply need to be adults.
          Signature

          Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7980618].message }}

Trending Topics