Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?
Some of the things you say on this forum with regards to women's rights issues causes me to get this visual image of you as some fat old dude, almost bald with crazy grey hair , sitting around in his boxers and wife beater smoking a cigar and playing cards wit da boys.
Only in spirit, I'm afraid. Only in spirit.
IOW, bitching because the world is changing and those dames are fagetin' der place.
What can I say? Living in a doomed society on the fast track to decay when you're one of the few people around forward thinking and "big picture" oriented enough to actually give a damn about it tends to be somewhat grating. :shrug:
It makes it sound as if there was some kind of envy for the life you imagine they imagine their men were leading.
You're joking, right? What else can much of modern feminism be said to be about
if not a generalized sense of "gender envy?"
Do you think ultra high powered CEO women are putting on their best "alpha male" impressions and stomping around with the "big boys" for nothing?
Equal rights and equal standing are one thing, and I fully support them as such. However, that's generally not what many modern incarnations of ideological feminism aim for.
They're basically out to "even the score" and put men in their place.
They want to work like men, fight like men, and even
f*ck like men (frankly, not even
most men at that, but an exaggerated male stereotype), and they take the slightest suggestion that many women might not be naturally interested in doing so as being tantamount to blatant heresy.
I would argue that. I believe a child raised in a happy home with a single parent is better off then in a home with two where each are miserable.
I'm sorry, but by any objective measure, you would be wrong.
Single mothers are almost universally worse off in terms of finances and parental workload than married women. They are far more likely to live in poverty or on welfare than any other group, and they're far more likely than married women to be the victims of domestic abuse and violent crime as well.
Keep in mind that we haven't even begun to factor in the negative impacts that being brought up in households without consistent opposite sex role models can often be observed to have upon the children of single parents either.
You sound as if you bought in to that 1950s Ozzie and Harriet storyline. We both know that wasn't real. Fantasy
My parents did it, and their parents before them. I see no problems with them. :shrug:
Men aren't "necessary" to female affairs. You couple with someone because you love them and want to share your life with them, not because they are "necessary".
Men and women are equally "necessary" to one another's affairs.
The kind of people who are content to go it completely alone are rare, and, IMO, likely more than a tad broken.
I, personally, have never met a woman that has this point of view.
They are all over this thread.
Again, I simply find it ironic that "feminists" who would preach that women do not "need" men would be so reflexively offended at the idea of men taking the same view towards them
It's kind of amusing to see so many women (and feminist men, for that matter) bristle at the idea of young men doing exactly what many women have been doing for the last half century. They basically seem to want to "shame" such men back into conformity. :lol:
"Falling out of love," "irreconcilable differences," "unhappiness," feeling that one can "do better," petty egotistical disputes, etca, etca.
The number of divorces initiated for legitimately irreparable marital problems these days is vanishingly small. Under most circumstances, the decision is born out of simple fickle laziness more than anything else.
I do now and always have found intellectual men very sexy. Men who are balanced and have a little higher emotional IQ then the frat boy or construction worker archetype you referenced. My guess is that you would provide this guy as YOUR example of weak or effeminate. So maybe your definition is a little broad.
Ummmm... I
am one of those men. :lol:
I might be a somewhat prickly varient of the archetype, but I certainly fit well within it's confines.
With regard to my earlier comment, while completely clueless (as opposed to merely unlucky) "nice guys" may qualify to a certain extent as well, I was referring more to "skinny jean" wearing "Hipster," "Emo," or "Metrosexual" types than anyone else. They are men who either make a conscious decision to reject their masculinity, or who lack the confidence in their societal role to display any in the first place. You would likely assume many of these men were homosexual if you did not know them.
Also, keep in mind that I did not bring the "frat boy" type of man into this discussion as a positive example of male virtue either. They might be more traditionally "masculine" than their counter parts above. However, they are generally no more ambitious.
To the contrary, they often exemplify the modern trend towards "extended adolescence" to its fullest exent.