|


|
To BLOCK viewing a member's posts, click here.
You must be logged into the site for the BLOCK feature to function! |

Message Board Rules
 |
 |
|
| AUTHOR |
MESSAGE
|
| Wire |
 |
|
Posted: 10/28/2009 12:28 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Male Member
Age: 22
.gif)



Total Posts: 1944
Chicago Illinois United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
This is partially quoted from "Dave Sim on the Merged Void".
The Wife and Kids.
If we‘re going to be able to afford that new dining-room set. I‘m going to have to get that raise. If I‘m going
to be able to get enough money for the down payment on the house, I‘m going to have to pull a lot of overtime.
If I‘m going to pay for the new living-room furniture and the ballet lessons and the tuition at the private school,
I‘m going to have to get that promotion.
In one of those Poor Us studies for which the Emotional Female Void is notorious, it was pointed out that after
a divorce, the average male standard of living rises by (pick you own ungodly number) percent. The average female
standard of living drops by (pick your own ungoddessly Poor Us number) percent. This was presented (of course)
as living proof of the unfairness of the Global Economic Structure. I think the more rational explanation is that
the excision of a five-to-six-foot leech from the surface of a human body is going to have more of its own blood
in its own veins. Unless the leech finds another body, it is going to go hungry. (Please don‘t call us leeches,
huffed the leeches, we prefer the term "asset-challenged".)
Corporations, a living example of the Merged Void if ever there was one, always show a preference for the Family
Man when it comes to promotions and positions of responsibility. In the case of Merged Voids, as with most other
permutations of existence, It Takes One to Know One. Corporations (or companies of any size, really) wink knowingly
at the Little Woman and Her Brood. Once the Male Light has disappeared over the Event Horizon, once the manacle
of gold has been pounded into place on the ring finger of his left hand, he is, indeed, a Wage Slave. What goes
unsaid (or, rather, what has gone unsaid until now) is that he serves Two Mistresses, Twin Voids. As he labours
to make his mortgage payments, pay for groceries, little Axelrod‘s College Fund, the new sofa, the new drapes,
the bigger house, the Company can rest easy. In labouring to fill the insatiable Void Need for material possessions
at home, his time and his energy and his spirit disappear into the Vaginal Bottom Line of the workplace. Divorce,
once badly thought of, has yielded even greater benefits. The employee with a Wife and Mistress, and later a Wife
and an Ex-Wife (and still later a Wife, an Ex-Wife and a Mistress) is very much rocking to the beat of the Merged
Void. Assuming he‘s going to get a little ahead of himself, the Bank Void steps in with an easy-payment schedule.
Ah, success.
|
| Rhiannon |
 |
|
Posted: 10/31/2009 5:47 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Female Member
Age: 0
.gif)



Total Posts: 3277
Lacey Washington United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
Interesting viewpoint!
This is the typical stereotype of the American working male. And yes, it has been the life of many a man I know. But certainly not all. Our "middle class" is disappearing, and a large number of families are headed by two working parents.
We‘ve all been fed a bill of goods about what "success" means in America. Our "buy now, pay later" philosophies caught up with us. Downsizing is more in vogue than ever.
Don‘t forget that many a woman is in the workplace now, and many of us are buying the furniture, making the house payment, making the car payments, and supporting our children. Women are starting to catch up with men in the "heart attack" department.
It isn‘t always the women with the "expensive tastes" and the complaints about needing more material things. I was the bill payer in my marriages - the one who said "No" to purchases we could ill afford - the one who negotiated with creditors re. payments - the one who budgeted the money, and experienced the stress. The only thing that man had to do was go to his job every day. And when we divorced, he was very happy to dump 100% of the debt from the marriage on my shoulders - which crippled me financially for several years - while he did everything possible to also get out of paying child support. Yes, I was paying for the expensive truck that he just "had to have" and the second mortgage that we were forced to get because of all the credit card debt he ran up.
The "bad economy" that everyone is talking about today happened to me 10 years ago! I haven‘t made a credit card purchase in 10 years.
I drove old cars, sat on early attic, garage sale reject furniture, and shopped at the Dollar Tree. I am hardly alone in this. There are single mothers everywhere doing the same thing.
And yes, I did this while that poor bastard was living high on the hog with only himself to take care of.
Men aren‘t the only ones who get screwed.
|
| Wire |
 |
|
Posted: 11/16/2009 8:39 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Male Member
Age: 22
.gif)



Total Posts: 1944
Chicago Illinois United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
Your point is very true. Men aren‘t the only ones who get screwed. But what is the male/female ratio of people who are? What‘s the m/f ratio of child custody wins? What‘s the m/f ratio of suicide? (6.1/1 as of 2005)
Type the words "marrying up" into a search engine and see who the results are aimed toward.
The pressure on men to be "successful" is and always has been much greater than the pressure on women.
I sincerely do sympathize with women who were screwed over by deadbeat husbands and boyfriends but compared to the instances the other way around, you might as well call the entirety of women‘s dating hardship anecdotal. I know it‘s not nice and it‘s not what people want to hear. But it‘s true. Truth cannot be trumped.
|
| Wire |
 |
|
Posted: 11/16/2009 8:41 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Male Member
Age: 22
.gif)



Total Posts: 1944
Chicago Illinois United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
Another round. I believe there is a lot of deep truth hidden in this article that can be applied to more social arenas than one.
"Journalism had been an early casualty in the war between the Female Void and the Male Light. "How do you
feel?" had virtually replaced "who, what, where, when and why" as the journalistic cornerstone.
"What are you feeling right now?" Every once in a great while, the Female void would run afoul
of some military figure or a police captain or a fire marshal: some male who had not been devoured whole, who still
had something of himself left to call his own. His answer would begin, "I think . . ." or "I believe
. . ." and he would proceed to enunciate a belief, a principle, an ideal which was, to him, fundamental. The
Female or Male Feminist (they differ only cosmetically from each other) interviewing him would be dogged in his
or her pursuit: "But how do you feel as an individual, as a person, as a human being?" The interview
subject would invariably look confused, discomfited at this. After all, he had just answered the question.
He would paraphrase his belief, his principle, his ideal. "I think . . ." "I believe . . ."
At this point the he/she interviewer switched, invariably, to another satellite feed: to another journalist or
a psychologist or a social worker. Reasoning, Thinking Males with Systems of Belief, made for very bad television.
I watched an interview the other night on CBC Prime Time with a nineteen-year-old girl from an old-fashioned
(which is to say "principled") Vietnamese family. She had gotten pregnant during her last year of high
school. She knew that she had brought "shame" to her father, to her family. "But this is a free
country, isn‘t it?" she asks the camera. "That means you can do whatever you want, doesn‘t it?"
The camera was indulgently mute on the subject. The girl moved on. She felt scared that she was going to
be a mother. She felt unhappy that she had been disowned by her father, but she also, you know, felt
happy when her mother called to tell her that she would answer any questions that she had about pregnancy. She
felt most enthusiastically about her school guidance counsellor because he had, you know, just listened
to her "spill her guts" and hadn‘t tried to, you know, make her feel bad. At no time, needless
to say, did the word "think" cross her lips. There is, of course, no need for her to think. The taxpayers
of Canada will pay for all of her baby‘s needs. She didn‘t need to be made to feel bad. All that she needed
was someone to direct her to the appropriate agency. The rest of it was just paperwork. It‘s a free country, isn‘t
it?
That means you can do whatever you want.
Doesn‘t it?"
|
| Rhiannon |
 |
|
Posted: 11/16/2009 9:28 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Female Member
Age: 0
.gif)



Total Posts: 3277
Lacey Washington United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
| Wire wrote: | Your point is very true. Men aren‘t the only ones who get screwed. But what is the male/female ratio of people who are? What‘s the m/f ratio of child custody wins? What‘s the m/f ratio of suicide? (6.1/1 as of 2005)
Type the words "marrying up" into a search engine and see who the results are aimed toward.
The pressure on men to be "successful" is and always has been much greater than the pressure on women.
I sincerely do sympathize with women who were screwed over by deadbeat husbands and boyfriends but compared to the instances the other way around, you might as well call the entirety of women‘s dating hardship anecdotal. I know it‘s not nice and it‘s not what people want to hear. But it‘s true. Truth cannot be trumped.
|
In response to some of your arguments here:
Truth? Womens experiences Anecdotal? I beg to differ.
Yes, men have had more pressure on them - for quite a few years - to be more "successful" (financially) than women - because traditionally, they have been the hunters, and were expected to provide the sole support for their families.
You must also remember that most of them were only expected to do one thing, and that was to go to work and make a living.
I can personally attest that it is much more difficult and far more challenging to be the parent at home raising the children. Any woman who has ever done it can back me up on this one.
And since I have been in the workforce since 1974, and managed to raise my family while working full-time outside the home, I can speak with some authority that pursuing and dealing with the denands of a career is still far easier than running a household and raising children.
And had I not had children, I‘d be running a corporation by now. My priority was - and still remains - with family. I turned down any opportunities that required travel and too many hours.
And to all the men and women out there who have been doing the same, my hat‘s off to you because it is not easy to do both.
So pardon me if I am not feeling like all those men got screwed because they felt pressured to be successful. When you have people dependent on you, you do whatever you have to do. It costs money to raise a family.
And you‘re forgetting the numbers of women who don‘t need to "marry up" Wire, because they are doing it for themselves. Why put up with **** from a man if you don‘t have to? After my last divorce, I am done with "community property" agreements.
I figured if I had to ask a man for money then I‘d later have to hear "After all I did for you -" I‘d rather not ask permission. And I didn‘t "marry up" at all. I wasn‘t concerned about bank accounts. I married for love.
I can attest that it‘s pretty damn nice to have someone do your laundry, cook for you, clean up after you, and pay the bills. I know the very damn few times it was done for me, I thought I died and went to heaven. It‘s wonderful to come home to a clean house. As a single parent, it hasn‘t happened for me very often.
If you want to talk custody and who wins, it quite often depends on the ages of the children, and who spends the most time with the children involved, and usually, it‘s the mothers. And more often than not these days, parents are sharing custody. I might have considered it myself had I not been married to a psycho, bi/polar asshole. Trust me, child support did not even come close to recouping a tenth of what it cost to raise my kids.
There are many, many single mothers out there who‘ve had the same experience, and raised kids singlehandedly without a dime of child support. Some even post on this website. How can you insult them with these sweeping generalizations? Most of us need "wives" ourselves. And I don‘t really don‘t think you‘re qualified to state than men have been screwed over more often than women have.
I believe the statistics of child custody are changing, and will continue to change. I know lots of kids who are being raised by single dads. I personally think it‘s a good thing.
And before I weep for all these fathers, you might ask yourself, Wire, why we need state organizations like the Division of Child Support, and why we have to hire people to collect child support. It could be because way too many people out there are not providing for the children they‘ve brought into the world. Mine had to practically go to jail before he would pay for his kids‘ braces or eye glasses, and he, too, whined about getting screwed while he lived high on the hog himself, and had money to burn. DCS is alive and well. With father‘s rights, there is also the issue of parental responsibility. You can‘t have one without the other.
Maybe you need to attend a battered women‘s support group sometime. Or look at domestic violence statistics. Or the numbers of women who are murdered by domestic partners. The court system is still a "good old boy" network, and some of your good old boys committing the violence are cops.
Why is the empowerment of women so threatening?
|
| Wire |
 |
|
Posted: 11/18/2009 3:20 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Male Member
Age: 22
.gif)



Total Posts: 1944
Chicago Illinois United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
I think the following warranted replies:
"How can you insult them with these sweeping generalizations? Most of us need "wives" ourselves. And I don‘t really don‘t think you‘re qualified to state than men have been screwed over more often than women have."
I‘m currently dating a single mother, who uses food stamps and rides a bicycle everywhere. About 70% of her money goes toward rent since the prices here are so high. I see exactly how difficult her life is and I have helped her out in countless ways so far.
My mother has 3 children besides me. The youngest is 5 and the oldest is 9. Perhaps I‘m not qualified, but my entire life has been spent in the company of single parents, mostly women. But I see how they behave towards men. I see the men they want in their lives. I‘m not surprised by the circumstances they ended up in.
Perhaps I‘m not qualified. It‘s possible. But it‘s also possible that I‘ve tapped into an entirely different perspective that women and minorities just don‘t want to accept, because it robs them of their status as an oppressed group.
"Maybe you need to attend a battered women‘s support group sometime. Or look at domestic violence statistics. Or the numbers of women who are murdered by domestic partners. The court system is still a "good old boy" network, and some of your good old boys committing the violence are cops."
That last part I can identify with the most. There is a sense of separation between the police and the public; they certainly do look out for their own. My mother was a domestic violence victim for the majority of the time she had custody of me. But.. she was just as physically and emotionally violent as the worst man in her life. My mother (who was drunk at the time) has tried to slam car doors on my
father‘s leg during other-weekend custody exchanges. My brother
in-law‘s wife has tried to both stab and suffocate him in his sleep.
He wants to leave her but he can‘t because he knows the courts will
give custody of the children to her.
I have been on both sides of the fence. If personal experience (the ultimate teacher) isn‘t enough to give a "qualified" opinion, nothing is.
"Why is the empowerment of women so threatening?"
It‘s not threatening in the least. I‘d love to see women empowered, but when you compare male power to female power in all areas of life, the women still come out on top. The feminist portion still sees women as an oppressed group, and they‘re not. Minorities aren‘t either. More power for women is not the same as equal power for everybody.
Here‘s a decent example: Don‘t you know that women only make $.70 for ever $1.00 a man makes? Now it this random statistic is true, why do business hire men at all? Business care more about money than anything else. Either the statistic is wrong or men are worth more.
We have to talk about effects as well as causes for the gendered injustices in our society, and about causes other than the ones that "oppressed" groups want us to accept.
|
| Africanguy |
 |
|
Posted: 11/18/2009 4:27 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver Addict
Male Member
Age: 25
.gif)



Total Posts: 202
Juanito Brazil
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
My mother has 3 children besides me.
The youngest is 5 and the oldest is 9. Perhaps I‘m not qualified, but
my entire life has been spent in the company of single parents, mostly
women. But I see how they behave towards men. I see the men they want
in their lives. I‘m not surprised by the circumstances they ended up
in.
They are never going to admit it.
Perhaps I‘m not qualified. It‘s possible. But it‘s also
possible that I‘ve tapped into an entirely different perspective that
women and minorities just don‘t want to accept, because it robs them of
their status as an oppressed group.
Women are not "minorities", though. In some states of my country, they are more then 60% of population. but sure they act like it. In my country now they are talking about cottage of women in politics. If you say you are against, you are branded as a chauvinist.
The feminist portion still sees women as
an oppressed group, and they‘re not. Minorities aren‘t either. More
power for women is not the same as equal power for everybody.
100% agreed.
Here‘s
a decent example: Don‘t you know that women only make $.70 for ever
$1.00 a man makes? Now it this random statistic is true, why do
business hire men at all? Business care more about money than anything
else. Either the statistic is wrong or men are worth more.
We
have to talk about effects as well as causes for the gendered
injustices in our society, and about causes other than the ones that
"oppressed" groups want us to accept.
200% agreed.
|
| Rhiannon |
 |
|
Posted: 11/19/2009 7:34 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Female Member
Age: 0
.gif)



Total Posts: 3277
Lacey Washington United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
| Wire wrote: | I think the following warranted replies:
"How can you insult them with these sweeping generalizations? Most of us need "wives" ourselves. And I don‘t really don‘t think you‘re qualified to state than men have been screwed over more often than women have."
I‘m currently dating a single mother, who uses food stamps and rides a bicycle everywhere. About 70% of her money goes toward rent since the prices here are so high. I see exactly how difficult her life is and I have helped her out in countless ways so far.
My mother has 3 children besides me. The youngest is 5 and the oldest is 9. Perhaps I‘m not qualified, but my entire life has been spent in the company of single parents, mostly women. But I see how they behave towards men. I see the men they want in their lives. I‘m not surprised by the circumstances they ended up in.
Perhaps I‘m not qualified. It‘s possible. But it‘s also possible that I‘ve tapped into an entirely different perspective that women and minorities just don‘t want to accept, because it robs them of their status as an oppressed group.
"Maybe you need to attend a battered women‘s support group sometime. Or look at domestic violence statistics. Or the numbers of women who are murdered by domestic partners. The court system is still a "good old boy" network, and some of your good old boys committing the violence are cops."
That last part I can identify with the most. There is a sense of separation between the police and the public; they certainly do look out for their own. My mother was a domestic violence victim for the majority of the time she had custody of me. But.. she was just as physically and emotionally violent as the worst man in her life. My mother (who was drunk at the time) has tried to slam car doors on my father‘s leg during other-weekend custody exchanges. My brother in-law‘s wife has tried to both stab and suffocate him in his sleep. He wants to leave her but he can‘t because he knows the courts will give custody of the children to her.
I have been on both sides of the fence. If personal experience (the ultimate teacher) isn‘t enough to give a "qualified" opinion, nothing is.
"Why is the empowerment of women so threatening?"
It‘s not threatening in the least. I‘d love to see women empowered, but when you compare male power to female power in all areas of life, the women still come out on top. The feminist portion still sees women as an oppressed group, and they‘re not. Minorities aren‘t either. More power for women is not the same as equal power for everybody.
Here‘s a decent example: Don‘t you know that women only make $.70 for ever $1.00 a man makes? Now it this random statistic is true, why do business hire men at all? Business care more about money than anything else. Either the statistic is wrong or men are worth more.
We have to talk about effects as well as causes for the gendered injustices in our society, and about causes other than the ones that "oppressed" groups want us to accept.
|
Okay - granted - it appears that you do have a lot of exposure to single parents, and if your mother was as violent as you describe, I can see where your low regard of women in general comes from. I am sorry you had to be raised by someone like that.
It still does not describe the majority of single parents. Nor does it describe the majority of domestic violence survivors.
I wasn‘t violent, and the majority of women I know who are single parents weren‘t, either. Not all women are like your mother - and not all men are like the men that I was with, either. There are a lot of good men out there who wouldn‘t dream of raising a hand to anybody.
Kudos to you for helping out a single mom. You sound like a good guy.
And yes - I know all about the glass ceiling - and women making less money than men (many times for performing the same job). That discussion was being tossed around long before you were born.
It is very sexist for you to say that perhaps it‘s because the men are "worth more." "Worth" has nothing to do with power.
As far as "hiring men at all" - the general idea when interviewing anyone for a job is that you hire the best candidate for the job among the pool of candidates who applied. You‘re looking for the candidate with the best skills, and who is the best fit for the organization you work in. Gender is not supposed to have anything to do with it. We all know, though, that discrimination is a very hard thing to prove. Quite often your interview panel is looking at who they‘d most like to work with everyday. Personality is often just as important as skills, education and experience.
I can tell you - from my observation - that men usually promote easier and faster. I‘ve seen many a male receptionist hired who quickly advanced into management. Some of those men had less experience and fewer qualifications than their female counterparts. Upper management liked them and took a personal interest, so they promoted these guys..
I can also tell you - from my observation - that female workers also take far more time from work due to sick child care, well baby doctor visits, parent/teacher conferences, and appointments with the schools. The men at work have wives to take care of most of these things. On occasion, you will see one take time off to do these things, but it is usually when his wife cannot do it. Therefore, he has fewer distractions when it comes to his career, and he often doesn‘t have to do as much juggling. He doesn‘t go on maternity leave.
I do work with some single dads. They, too, turn down jobs that require travel and long hours and lots of overtime.
I work in a state with a woman Governor, and most of the agency heads in government are women. Our federal officers in Washington DC are women. I have six stepsisters (all with Masters degrees) who are highly paid professional women. No one handed these women anything. They did it themselves.
It is my opinion that at the beginning of the Women‘s Movement, many of them were oppressed. When I was little, women were either stay at home moms, or nurses, secretaries, and teachers. And if they were nurses, secretaries and teachers, they didn‘t get paid very well, and they didn‘t have kids. Single parents were slim pickins‘ in those days.
A lot has changed in 50 years.
|
| shelbelle |
 |
|
Posted: 11/19/2009 7:39 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Female Member
Age: 22
.gif)



Total Posts: 1092
lalaland North Carolina United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
| Rhiannon wrote: |
| Wire wrote: |
Your point is very true. Men aren‘t the only ones who get screwed. But what is the male/female ratio of people who are? What‘s the m/f ratio of child custody wins? What‘s the m/f ratio of suicide? (6.1/1 as of 2005)
Type the words "marrying up" into a search engine and see who the results are aimed toward.
The pressure on men to be "successful" is and always has been much greater than the pressure on women.
I sincerely do sympathize with women who were screwed over by deadbeat husbands and boyfriends but compared to the instances the other way around, you might as well call the entirety of women‘s dating hardship anecdotal. I know it‘s not nice and it‘s not what people want to hear. But it‘s true. Truth cannot be trumped.
|
In response to some of your arguments here:
Truth? Womens experiences Anecdotal? I beg to differ.
Yes, men have had more pressure on them - for quite a few years - to be more "successful" (financially) than women - because traditionally, they have been the hunters, and were expected to provide the sole support for their families.
You must also remember that most of them were only expected to do one thing, and that was to go to work and make a living.
I can personally attest that it is much more difficult and far more challenging to be the parent at home raising the children. Any woman who has ever done it can back me up on this one.
And since I have been in the workforce since 1974, and managed to raise my family while working full-time outside the home, I can speak with some authority that pursuing and dealing with the denands of a career is still far easier than running a household and raising children.
And had I not had children, I‘d be running a corporation by now. My priority was - and still remains - with family. I turned down any opportunities that required travel and too many hours.
And to all the men and women out there who have been doing the same, my hat‘s off to you because it is not easy to do both.
So pardon me if I am not feeling like all those men got screwed because they felt pressured to be successful. When you have people dependent on you, you do whatever you have to do. It costs money to raise a family.
And you‘re forgetting the numbers of women who don‘t need to "marry up" Wire, because they are doing it for themselves. Why put up with **** from a man if you don‘t have to? After my last divorce, I am done with "community property" agreements.
I figured if I had to ask a man for money then I‘d later have to hear "After all I did for you -" I‘d rather not ask permission. And I didn‘t "marry up" at all. I wasn‘t concerned about bank accounts. I married for love.
I can attest that it‘s pretty damn nice to have someone do your laundry, cook for you, clean up after you, and pay the bills. I know the very damn few times it was done for me, I thought I died and went to heaven. It‘s wonderful to come home to a clean house. As a single parent, it hasn‘t happened for me very often.
If you want to talk custody and who wins, it quite often depends on the ages of the children, and who spends the most time with the children involved, and usually, it‘s the mothers. And more often than not these days, parents are sharing custody. I might have considered it myself had I not been married to a psycho, bi/polar asshole. Trust me, child support did not even come close to recouping a tenth of what it cost to raise my kids.
There are many, many single mothers out there who‘ve had the same experience, and raised kids singlehandedly without a dime of child support. Some even post on this website. How can you insult them with these sweeping generalizations? Most of us need "wives" ourselves. And I don‘t really don‘t think you‘re qualified to state than men have been screwed over more often than women have.
I believe the statistics of child custody are changing, and will continue to change. I know lots of kids who are being raised by single dads. I personally think it‘s a good thing.
And before I weep for all these fathers, you might ask yourself, Wire, why we need state organizations like the Division of Child Support, and why we have to hire people to collect child support. It could be because way too many people out there are not providing for the children they‘ve brought into the world. Mine had to practically go to jail before he would pay for his kids‘ braces or eye glasses, and he, too, whined about getting screwed while he lived high on the hog himself, and had money to burn. DCS is alive and well. With father‘s rights, there is also the issue of parental responsibility. You can‘t have one without the other.
Maybe you need to attend a battered women‘s support group sometime. Or look at domestic violence statistics. Or the numbers of women who are murdered by domestic partners. The court system is still a "good old boy" network, and some of your good old boys committing the violence are cops.
Why is the empowerment of women so threatening?
|
awesome rhianon! 
|
| Africanguy |
 |
|
Posted: 11/19/2009 7:57 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver Addict
Male Member
Age: 25
.gif)



Total Posts: 202
Juanito Brazil
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
And since I have been in the workforce since 1974, and managed to raise
my family while working full-time outside the home, I can speak with
some authority that pursuing and dealing with the denands of a career
is still far easier than running a household and raising children.
I have to jump in here. You must remember the following thing. It‘s your choice to have a family and kids. If it‘s harder or if that is going to get in the way of your carreer, it‘s something that it‘s YOUR responsibility to think about, not the government, or anyone else. I have a friend who is around 24, and in a lot of difficulties these days, because he can‘t get a job, and he has to support his recently born second son. But it was his and his wife decision to have kids. It‘s hard ? No doubt, but that is your personal responsibility to think about it. The reason I have an easy life and money to spare, is because I chose not to do that, and been responsible not to let it happen.
It is my opinion that at the beginning of the Women‘s Movement, many of them were oppressed. When I was little, women were either stay at home moms, or nurses, secretaries, and teachers. And if they were nurses, secretaries and teachers, they didn‘t get paid very well, and they didn‘t have kids. Single parents were slim pickins‘ in those days. A lot has changed in 50 years.
I am not sure what you mean here. Are you saying the reason those women did not had kids is because they did not had money ?
|
| Wire |
 |
|
Posted: 11/24/2009 2:30 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Male Member
Age: 22
.gif)



Total Posts: 1944
Chicago Illinois United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
| Rhiannon wrote: | It still does not describe the majority of single parents. Nor does it describe the majority of domestic violence survivors.
It is very sexist for you to say that perhaps it‘s because the men are "worth more." "Worth" has nothing to do with power. As far as "hiring men at all" - the general idea when interviewing anyone for a job is that you hire the best candidate for the job among the pool of candidates who applied. You‘re looking for the candidate with the best skills, and who is the best fit for the organization you work in. Gender is not supposed to have anything to do with it. We all know, though, that discrimination is a very hard thing to prove. Quite often your interview panel is looking at who they‘d most like to work with everyday. Personality is often just as important as skills, education and experience. I work in a state with a woman Governor, and most of the agency heads in government are women. Our federal officers in Washington DC are women. I have six stepsisters (all with Masters degrees) who are highly paid professional women. No one handed these women anything. They did it themselves. It is my opinion that at the beginning of the Women‘s Movement, many of them were oppressed. When I was little, women were either stay at home moms, or nurses, secretaries, and teachers. And if they were nurses, secretaries and teachers, they didn‘t get paid very well, and they didn‘t have kids. Single parents were slim pickins‘ in those days. A lot has changed in 50 years. |
That is absolutely true but I think there is a critical point being missed in the discussion about women in the workforce.
I‘ll illustrate it with some quotations:
"Women lawyers who have succeeded often have done so at tremendous personal sacrifice. Many attribute their achievements to a willingness and ability to adapt to a work culture that is defined by and for white men. Many placed family or personal life at risk as the emulated the male model of ‘commitment‘ to the law... By refusing to play a role created by and for men, women will ascend the mountain free of constraints." -"Unfinished Business American Bar Association Report on Women in the Legal Profession
Do the people who wrote this report actually suppose that men are "free of constraints"?
What makes the "male model" male other than men‘s willingness to submit to it?
Options are commodities that come with a price whether they are exercised or not. Women can‘t demand more options and also demand equal pay.
Oh, but they can if they want to. And they do.
"In the 1960s, when women first muscled into the workforce, at-home moms all but apologized for what they did. But once those same boomer women started families (often late into their 30s), staying home with the kids became the preferred thing to do... ‘A lot of women my age don‘t feel a big need to work because they know they can if they want to,‘ says... a (32-year-old) mother of two... (Barnard College economics professor Diane) Macunovich says... ‘Women are using their earnings to buy back personal time.‘... A higher portion of women are choosing ‘women‘s work,‘ such as nursing and teaching. It‘s no coincidence that these jobs offer many options for part-timers." -Jane Bryant Quinn, Newsweek, July 17, 2000
And it‘s no coincidence "women‘s work" pays less.
"As women"? Didn‘t they say they wanted to come to work "as equals"?
"Why should commitment (to work) be demonstrated by working 100 hours per week? As women, we have other options to explore..." -Laura Bellows Chair of the American Bar Association Commission on Women in the (Legal) Profession Ms. Magazine, November 1995
"The most important reasons for the ‘gender gap‘ have little to do with employer bias. Increasingly, the gap is the result of choices women make as they seek to maximize their own happiness and achieve a broad mix of life goals." -Katherine Kersten Newsletter of the Women‘s Freedom Network, Spring 1996
Last one..
"Single women who have never married, live alone and have full-time jobs earn more than their male equivalents by 28 cents per hour... Single women earn 101.6 percent of single men‘s hourly earnings across the full spectrum of occupations, education levels and age." -press release from the Employment Policy Foundation, April 2, 2002
So yes, personality and skill level have a lot to do with who is being hired and promoted, but it also is dependent on (especially in the corporate world) how much of an asset that employee is going to be to the business in the long run. Time not spent at work is wasted time, in the business world.
Here‘s a deal: we‘ll make sure that women are equally represented in corporate boardrooms when they make sure we are equally represented among employees who take family leave.
Sounds fair to me.
|
| Wire |
 |
|
Posted: 11/24/2009 2:53 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Male Member
Age: 22
.gif)



Total Posts: 1944
Chicago Illinois United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
| Africanguy wrote: |
Perhaps I‘m not qualified. It‘s possible. But it‘s also possible that I‘ve tapped into an entirely different perspective that women and minorities just don‘t want to accept, because it robs them of their status as an oppressed group.
Women are not "minorities", though. In some states of my country, they are more then 60% of population. but sure they act like it. In my country now they are talking about cottage of women in politics. If you say you are against, you are branded as a chauvinist.
|
Of course women aren‘t minorities. I just wanted to kill 2 birds with one stone by pointing out that while there is a little bit of difficulty here and there in certain circumstances, as a whole there is no such thing as an "oppressed group" in America anymore, unless you count the public as a whole, entering the globalist police state.
|
| Rhiannon |
 |
|
Posted: 11/24/2009 8:48 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Female Member
Age: 0
.gif)



Total Posts: 3277
Lacey Washington United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
| Wire wrote: |
| Rhiannon wrote: |
It still does not describe the majority of single parents. Nor does it describe the majority of domestic violence survivors.
It is very sexist for you to say that perhaps it‘s because the men are "worth more." "Worth" has nothing to do with power.
As far as "hiring men at all" - the general idea when interviewing anyone for a job is that you hire the best candidate for the job among the pool of candidates who applied. You‘re looking for the candidate with the best skills, and who is the best fit for the organization you work in. Gender is not supposed to have anything to do with it. We all know, though, that discrimination is a very hard thing to prove. Quite often your interview panel is looking at who they‘d most like to work with everyday. Personality is often just as important as skills, education and experience.
I work in a state with a woman Governor, and most of the agency heads in government are women. Our federal officers in Washington DC are women. I have six stepsisters (all with Masters degrees) who are highly paid professional women. No one handed these women anything. They did it themselves.
It is my opinion that at the beginning of the Women‘s Movement, many of them were oppressed. When I was little, women were either stay at home moms, or nurses, secretaries, and teachers. And if they were nurses, secretaries and teachers, they didn‘t get paid very well, and they didn‘t have kids. Single parents were slim pickins‘ in those days.
A lot has changed in 50 years.
|
That is absolutely true but I think there is a critical point being missed in the discussion about women in the workforce.
I‘ll illustrate it with some quotations:
"Women lawyers who have succeeded often have done so at tremendous personal sacrifice. Many attribute their achievements to a willingness and ability to adapt to a work culture that is defined by and for white men. Many placed family or personal life at risk as the emulated the male model of ‘commitment‘ to the law... By refusing to play a role created by and for men, women will ascend the mountain free of constraints." -"Unfinished Business American Bar Association Report on Women in the Legal Profession
Do the people who wrote this report actually suppose that men are "free of constraints"?
What makes the "male model" male other than men‘s willingness to submit to it?
Options are commodities that come with a price whether they are exercised or not. Women can‘t demand more options and also demand equal pay.
Oh, but they can if they want to. And they do.
"In the 1960s, when women first muscled into the workforce, at-home moms all but apologized for what they did. But once those same boomer women started families (often late into their 30s), staying home with the kids became the preferred thing to do... ‘A lot of women my age don‘t feel a big need to work because they know they can if they want to,‘ says... a (32-year-old) mother of two... (Barnard College economics professor Diane) Macunovich says... ‘Women are using their earnings to buy back personal time.‘... A higher portion of women are choosing ‘women‘s work,‘ such as nursing and teaching. It‘s no coincidence that these jobs offer many options for part-timers." -Jane Bryant Quinn, Newsweek, July 17, 2000
And it‘s no coincidence "women‘s work" pays less.
"As women"? Didn‘t they say they wanted to come to work "as equals"?
"Why should commitment (to work) be demonstrated by working 100 hours per week? As women, we have other options to explore..." -Laura Bellows Chair of the American Bar Association Commission on Women in the (Legal) Profession Ms. Magazine, November 1995
"The most important reasons for the ‘gender gap‘ have little to do with employer bias. Increasingly, the gap is the result of choices women make as they seek to maximize their own happiness and achieve a broad mix of life goals." -Katherine Kersten Newsletter of the Women‘s Freedom Network, Spring 1996
Last one..
"Single women who have never married, live alone and have full-time jobs earn more than their male equivalents by 28 cents per hour... Single women earn 101.6 percent of single men‘s hourly earnings across the full spectrum of occupations, education levels and age." -press release from the Employment Policy Foundation, April 2, 2002
So yes, personality and skill level have a lot to do with who is being hired and promoted, but it also is dependent on (especially in the corporate world) how much of an asset that employee is going to be to the business in the long run. Time not spent at work is wasted time, in the business world.
Here‘s a deal: we‘ll make sure that women are equally represented in corporate boardrooms when they make sure we are equally represented among employees who take family leave.
Sounds fair to me.
|
When men can get pregnant and breast feed, I am more than sure legislation will be passed to grant them maternity leave.
And where I work, men are granted sick leave for sick children and family leave the same as women are.
And regarding the quotes of requirements to work 100 hours a week, I feel that no one should be required to work that many hours a week. I believe that the person who does that does so mostly by choice. It‘s not uncommon for attorneys to work long hours - male or female. It also depends whether they‘re corporate lawyers, divorce lawyers, or work on personal injury cases, and if they are preparing for trial. Doctors - same deal. Veterinarians - same deal. You don‘t sign on for those professions unless you are willing to do those things.
Workaholics occur among either sex. I can also tell you that it‘s a Type A personality and a highly competitive person who succumbs to this. (I have a female boss who works about 75 hours a week - and is answering her e-mail on Sundays)
I do know that all of the women I have known who have risen to the top worked very hard for everything they got. They‘re shrewd, smart, and competent, had to compete for their jobs and had to prove themselves. Washington‘s Governor was the former State Attorney General. During her tenure as the AG, she sued the tobacco companies and won. That takes some doing. She wasn‘t a "token female" who was being handed a job to meet quotas. Gosh, and she did all this with a husband and children too.
There are a lot of smart, talented, professional women out there, which is why I have no tolerance for sexist arguments like this.
|
| Africanguy |
 |
|
Posted: 11/24/2009 11:36 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver Addict
Male Member
Age: 25
.gif)



Total Posts: 202
Juanito Brazil
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
I do know that all of the women I have known
who have risen to the top worked very hard for everything they got.
They‘re shrewd, smart, and competent, had to compete for their jobs and
had to prove themselves. Washington‘s Governor was the former State
Attorney General. During her tenure as the AG, she sued the tobacco
companies and won. That takes some doing. She wasn‘t a "token female"
who was being handed a job to meet quotas. Gosh, and she did all this
with a husband and children too.
There are a lot of smart, talented, professional women out there,
which is why I have no tolerance for sexist arguments like this.
But what is your main argument ? Are you on favor of such "quotas" ?
|
| Rhiannon |
 |
|
Posted: 11/25/2009 3:26 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Female Member
Age: 0
.gif)



Total Posts: 3277
Lacey Washington United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
| Africanguy wrote: | |
I do know that all of the women I have known who have risen to the top worked very hard for everything they got. They‘re shrewd, smart, and competent, had to compete for their jobs and had to prove themselves. Washington‘s Governor was the former State Attorney General. During her tenure as the AG, she sued the tobacco companies and won. That takes some doing. She wasn‘t a "token female" who was being handed a job to meet quotas. Gosh, and she did all this with a husband and children too.
There are a lot of smart, talented, professional women out there, which is why I have no tolerance for sexist arguments like this.
But what is your main argument ? Are you on favor of such "quotas" ?
|
Am I favor of quotas? No.
I am in favor of hard work, and paying ones dues.
What is my main argument? That women are worthy of far more respect than they are getting here.
|
| Africanguy |
 |
|
Posted: 11/25/2009 1:54 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver Addict
Male Member
Age: 25
.gif)



Total Posts: 202
Juanito Brazil
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
We all are in favor of all that.
In my country, they are trying to pass a law that will give a minimum % of women elected to office. It means that even though a women might have less votes, she would have a right to earn the seat, if the minimum of women aren‘t met yet. I don‘t need to say that I am against this.
Here‘s a decent example: Don‘t you know that women only make $.70 for ever $1.00 a man makes? Now it this random statistic is true, why do business hire men at all? Business care more about money than anything else. Either the statistic is wrong or men are worth more.
I heard also about this statistic in many other places, including on CNN, and it is smoething weird to say the least. Where does this data come from ? It‘s almost 50% difference which is very significant. If it was around 5 to 10%, wouldn‘t be much, but almost 50% ? Does anyone have anymore info on this statistic, on who did, and how the data was coleted, etc ?
|
| Wire |
 |
|
Posted: 11/26/2009 2:07 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Male Member
Age: 22
.gif)



Total Posts: 1944
Chicago Illinois United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
It‘s just a little frustrating to me that nobody acknowledge that just perhaps, the social programs and standards out there favoring women are just another form of sexism, just like all the social programs favoring minorities are another form of racism.
Breast cancer research being touted out even though in proportion to funding received, more men die of prostate cancer than women dying of breast cancer. I‘ll reference that one if anyone needs me to.
It‘s about a holiday that almost no men look forward to because they seldom actually get anything out of it. 3 guesses which one.
It‘s about the ratio of male/female spending power versus earning power.
It‘s about the fact that while a woman and man together create a child, only the woman can opt out of the responsibility by getting an abortion and only the woman can decide if the other person is going to be a parent against his wishes.
This is much more fundamental than what kind of genitals you are born with. Women can do what men can do. I get it. But the inverse is also just as true; men can do what women can do. Only problem is, quite a few women seem to have a problem with that. Choice for men is not nearly as supported as choice for women and a lot of people insist on denying this.
I‘m not saying there aren‘t strong, independent, successful women out there. I‘m not talking about individuals or even entire subcultures. I‘m talking about the big picture. The BIG picture. Women have, by far, more opportunity to grow than men do, yet a lot of women out there still act as though conditions are the same as they were 300 years ago.
Being male isn‘t all it‘s cracked up to be. Some women agree. The rest still think they‘re entitled to preferential treatment.
|
| Rhiannon |
 |
|
Posted: 11/27/2009 8:59 AM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver MoFo
Female Member
Age: 0
.gif)



Total Posts: 3277
Lacey Washington United States
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
| Wire wrote: | It‘s just a little frustrating to me that nobody acknowledge that just perhaps, the social programs and standards out there favoring women are just another form of sexism, just like all the social programs favoring minorities are another form of racism.
Breast cancer research being touted out even though in proportion to funding received, more men die of prostate cancer than women dying of breast cancer. I‘ll reference that one if anyone needs me to.
It‘s about a holiday that almost no men look forward to because they seldom actually get anything out of it. 3 guesses which one.
It‘s about the ratio of male/female spending power versus earning power.
It‘s about the fact that while a woman and man together create a child, only the woman can opt out of the responsibility by getting an abortion and only the woman can decide if the other person is going to be a parent against his wishes.
This is much more fundamental than what kind of genitals you are born with. Women can do what men can do. I get it. But the inverse is also just as true; men can do what women can do. Only problem is, quite a few women seem to have a problem with that. Choice for men is not nearly as supported as choice for women and a lot of people insist on denying this.
I‘m not saying there aren‘t strong, independent, successful women out there. I‘m not talking about individuals or even entire subcultures. I‘m talking about the big picture. The BIG picture. Women have, by far, more opportunity to grow than men do, yet a lot of women out there still act as though conditions are the same as they were 300 years ago.
Being male isn‘t all it‘s cracked up to be. Some women agree. The rest still think they‘re entitled to preferential treatment.
|
Wire - Men didn‘t have to fight for equal opportunity because many of them had it all along. Women and people of color fought for it because they didn‘t have it.
Read the history books. If things changed, it is because people weren‘t willing to settle for being treated like second class - or no-class - citizens anymore. It needed to change.
Racism is far from being a "thing of the past." It still exists. What is different now is that it‘s no longer "politically correct" to have laws and policies that discriminate. Things have improved, but it‘s not over.
Affirmative Action was created so that people of color could get jobs. The same is true for people with disabilities. There would have been no need for these programs if employers had been willing to hire them to begin with. And why should anyone be not considered for a job based on those things anyway?
At one time, it was illegal for women to own property, to use contraception, and to vote. It was also legal for men to beat their wives. It was these things that inspired the women‘s movement a very long time ago.
Now as far as what‘ "fair" here among the sexes:
Women have so many things to put up with that men don‘t. Here a few:
1) Periods. Messy, inconvenient, expensive, and embarrassing.
2) Cramping and bloating from periods, not to mention PMS the week before.
3) Birth control. So many varieties, and so many that areinconvenient and ineffective. Having the choice of : taking a pill every single day, getting a shot of Depo Provera that makes you put on about 50 lb. that never wants to come off, a "coat hanger" in your uterus (i.e., IUD), the patch (that can come off), the "sponge" (that can fall out), the diaphragm (pain in the butt to insert, and you have to make sure you do it properly), etc., etc., etc. So glad that part of my life is over!
4) Being panicked anytime your period is late. Often being the only one to suffer the consequences if contraception fails. Being yelled at by the partner if it fails, and hearing only about what an "inconvenience" it is to him.
5) Pregnancy and childbirth. Joyous events in a woman‘s life, but full of pain and misery and discomfort as well. I venture to say if the average man endured that kind of pain, the human race would have died out long ago. Add to that "discomfort" the episiotomy during childbirth, or the need for a cesarean section, or nipples that can crack and bleed from breastfeeding.
6) Menopause, uterine fibroids, the danger of getting STDs with no symptoms, hot flashes, and this process can go on for a lot of years.
7) A man can father children late in life. Women have a limited shelf life for being able to conceive. A man can have two families in his lifetime. A woman can only have one.
8) Sterilization on a man can be performed in 30 minutes in an outpatient clinic. Tubal ligation is abdominal surgery and requires anesthesia
Breast cancer research is a result of women organizing, fund raising, and bringing breast cancer to a high level of public awareness. They worked to make it happen. There is nothing to prevent men from doing the same.
And the holiday that men do not look forward to because they get nothing out of it - would you be referring to Mother‘s Day? The last time I checked, there is a Father‘s Day too. Hey, I celebrate them all!
Now when it comes to a male and female being able to create a child, that only a woman can "opt out":
This argument doesn‘t hold a lot of water with me.
When it comes to pregnancy, yes, it does take two.
But men have every choice when it comes to where they put their dick. And they have always had that choice. It wasn‘t until AIDS became a national crisis that it would even occur to most men that they should wear a condom, and I can‘t tell you the number of times that the men I was with tried to talk me out of it. Contraception was overwhelmingly the female‘s "responsibility."
Let‘s not even begin to discuss the men who have "opted out" of parenthood - who don‘t pay child support, who don‘t take an active role in their children‘s lives, who won‘t assist with changing diapers, taking children to appointments, or think that "parenting" is "babysitting." and many who don‘t honor their obligations. Some who have fathered children with several different women and left the women holding the bag. And then there are the men who "work under the table" - put vehicles and assets in a girlfriend‘s name - so that the IRS and support enforcement can‘t go after them - or their "support obligation" amounts to $25.00 a month They do all this so that they won‘t have to pay for their kids. There are a lot of schmucks out there that do this. We wouldn‘t have social service agencies, the public assistance programs, and Child Support Enforcement agencies if all parents took responsibility.
Women have abortion rights because they are the ones who will ultimately take responsibility for the child. I did not "opt" for abortion when I was "unexpectedly pregnant" because I just couldn‘t do it.
I think the lesson that needs to be learned - for both sexes - is that you need to be really careful about who you choose to have sex with.
Yes, there are terrible women who choose to get pregnant on purpose. I don‘t agree with that, think it‘s horrible, and I have never done that. And the majority of women I know would not do that either. What would be the point? They‘d be the ones raising the kids, and a responsible person doesn‘t make that decision lightly.
In my case - I had the opposite happen. A partner who told me he‘d had a vasectomy. I believed him, had unprotected sex, and ended up pregnant. Hence - a really big lesson on being really careful about who you date and who you sleep with.
And there are a lot of great dads out there that don‘t meet any of the descriptions I described of the men above. I know quite a few dads who are custodial parents that do a fabulous job. I know a lot of dads who have joint custody, who I think are a lot better with their kids than the moms are. There are a lot of good men in this world.
Look at it this way - if a woman doesn‘t have custody, she has to pay child support too. And community property laws don‘t always rule in a woman‘s favor.
I don‘t expect "preferential" treatment and never did. Most of the women I know don‘t expect it either. And as far as women talking as though things are the same as they were 300 years ago, I am really not hearing that. If anything, I think a lot of women have forgotten that the privileges they enjoy today weren‘t available to them as recently as 50 years ago. It‘s easy to turn up ones nose at the word "feminism" when your life is the way you‘ve always known it, and you‘ve never lived anything different. Women really aren‘t as angry as they once were, because progress was made.
The flip side to women "having it all" is "doing it all." Trust me - there is nothing preferential in any of that. Working all day at a full-time job, and coming home to pick up a house, do laundry, cook, clean, help kids with homework, and take them to sports practice is like having two full-time jobs, and you are never caught up. And if you‘re a single parent, everything is your responsibility. I am not whining about this - it is the way life is. But it‘s not easy, and now women are catching up with men in the heart attack & stroke department. You have to be a master juggler and good at multi-tasking, and there is nothing "glamorous" about it.
Now that my kids are older, life is a whole lot easier. They cooked Thanksgiving dinner yesterday, and did a great job! I loved it. It was the most relaxing holiday I have ever had. I really enjoy and appreciate my family, and while many things in my life were not "fair" either, I have a really good life now.
|
| Africanguy |
 |
|
Posted: 11/27/2009 12:50 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver Addict
Male Member
Age: 25
.gif)



Total Posts: 202
Juanito Brazil
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
At one time, it was illegal for women to own property, to use contraception, and to vote. It was also legal for men to beat their wives. It was these things that inspired the women‘s movement a very long time ago.
When was that time ?
|
| Africanguy |
 |
|
Posted: 11/27/2009 1:20 PM |
 |
Subject: Experiment |
 |
|
|
WomanSaver Addict
Male Member
Age: 25
.gif)



Total Posts: 202
Juanito Brazil
offline
Invite To Chat Room
Send Note

|
Wire - Men didn‘t have to fight for equal opportunity because many of them had it all along. Women and people of color fought for it because they didn‘t have it. I don‘t think he is talking about equal opportunities. Read the history books. If things changed, it is because people weren‘t willing to settle for being treated like second class - or no-class - citizens anymore. It needed to change. Maybe it is true. But the fact is, equality and privilegies are things different. Racism is far from being a "thing of the past." It still exists. What is different now is that it‘s no longer "politically correct" to have laws and policies that discriminate. Things have improved, but it‘s not over. I am a person of color myself, but since we are almost majority in my country, and my country never had segregation laws, I guess I can say that I never been discriminated against because of hat. Of course, in the USA, things might be different. Affirmative Action was created so that people of color could get jobs. The same is true for people with disabilities. There would have been no need for these programs if employers had been willing to hire them to begin with. And why should anyone be not considered for a job based on those things anyway? My country does‘nt have any affirmative action, and people of color get jobs normally. Now as far as what‘ "fair" here among the sexes: Women have so many things to put up with that men don‘t. Here a few:1) Periods. Messy, inconvenient, expensive, and embarrassing... ...nic. Tubal ligation is abdominal surgery and requires anesthesia None of those things are men fault. I don‘t see a reason why I should be discriminated against in a job selection or in a election for office because women have periods. This is again women acting like victims and such. Breast cancer research is a result of women organizing, fund raising, and bringing breast cancer to a high level of public awareness. They worked to make it happen. There is nothing to prevent men from doing the same. Of course, but the fact is, in our culture, talking about women problems is something politicly correct, while talking about men problems is not. Women are seen always as victims, that need to be protected from this, this and that. Look for example, the name of this site: "WOMANSAVERS". It is like they need help. Now when it comes to a male and female being able to create a child, that only a woman can "opt out": This argument doesn‘t hold a lot of water with me. When it comes to pregnancy, yes, it does take two. But men have every choice when it comes to where they put their dick. Yes, of course, but women can have more choices in terms of birth control, AND they can opt to abort or give the child for adoption. Men cannot. Women can also choose who they sleep with, yet they are always crying about being cheated on, abused, about child support, so on and on. In other words, you think it‘s fair for women to play the victim roles when it comes to their sexual life and problems it comes with, but men cannot. It‘s kinda ironic to use that argument.
Contraception was overwhelmingly the female‘s "responsibility." Really ? Cause I am always interested in doing anything i can to avoid spending the rest of my life paying child support. My options, though, are limited. Let‘s not even begin to discuss the men who have "opted out" of parenthood - who don‘t pay child support, who don‘t take an active role in their children‘s lives, who won‘t assist with changing diapers, taking children to appointments, or think that "parenting" is "babysitting." and many who don‘t honor their obligations. Tha is exactly what is he talking about. If women DONT WNAT to be a parent, she can opt to use an effective contraceptive, or have abortion. Men do not have those options, so if a girl do get pregnant, and want a baby, they will become fathers, even when they don‘t want to. It‘s taht simple. Some who have fathered children with several different women and left the women holding the bag. And then there are the men who "work under the table" - put vehicles and assets in a girlfriend‘s name - so that the IRS and support enforcement can‘t go after them - or their "support obligation" amounts to $25.00 a month They do all this so that they won‘t have to pay for their kids. There are a lot of schmucks out there that do this. We wouldn‘t have social service agencies, the public assistance programs, and Child Support Enforcement agencies if all parents took responsibility. And there are women who father child with some men, and put others fools to take care of them. Others fool men into believing the child is their when it is not. What is your point ? If you are going to talk about bad behaviour here, I am sure I can come up withseveral things unhealthy or criminal that women do. The thing is, I, as a man, have nothing to do with it, and I don‘t see any of that as reason for punishing men as a role, or for special treatment for women. Women have abortion rights because they are the ones who will ultimately take responsibility for the child. I did not "opt" for abortion when I was "unexpectedly pregnant" because I just couldn‘t do it. Yeah, but again, in the end, the women have the choice when it comes down to becoming a parent. I, do not. Therefore, I might ending up having to take care or pay child support for a child that I DONT WANT TO HAVE. With women that can‘t happen, cause of abortion and adoption. I think the lesson that needs to be learned - for both sexes - is that you need to be really careful about who you choose to have sex with. That needs to be said in a site called womansavers, where women put slander personal info about other people, without their consent. Yes, there are terrible women who choose to get pregnant on purpose. I don‘t agree with that, think it‘s horrible, and I have never done that. And the majority of women I know would not do that either. What would be the point? They‘d be the ones raising the kids, and a responsible person doesn‘t make that decision lightly. The problem is that some women do that to force men into commitment and child support. In my case - I had the opposite happen. A partner who told me he‘d had a vasectomy. I believed him, had unprotected sex, and ended up pregnant. Hence - a really big lesson on being really careful about who you date and who you sleep with. Vasectomy doesn‘t always work. I know many couples that had 2 kids AFTER vasectomy. I don‘t know if your case it‘s about liying or not, but even if a man HAD vasectomy, and you seen it, you should not trust it for a good time. Look at it this way - if a woman doesn‘t have custody, she has to pay child support too. And community property laws don‘t always rule in a woman‘s favor. As far as the statistics go, I think men pay around 95% of child support. And obviously, when it comes down to custody, unless the women is crazy or something, the court will decide for them.
|
|
|
|