• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?[W:771]

Men: Would you marry an American Woman?


  • Total voters
    83
I don't know Gathomas, I have the feeling that you believe women have their "place" in society.

Everyone's got a place in society. Some people are better suited towards certain places than others.

However, not even the Church teaches that women should be subservient to men or necessarily have to be mothers (or even married, for that matter).

Do I think it is ultimately preferable for individuals and society in general to stick with the traditional model more often than they do not? Absolutely.

I do not believe, however, that other alternatives should not be available.

Sometimes it is, especially when you are in a true "traditional" relationship. Women do not work or make their own money in such situations. They are maids and baby-delivering machines. The man works.

Going by that logic, couldn't the man in this scenario just as easily be described as being the woman's slave, sacrificing his freedom and leisure to provide her and her children with food, shelter, and clothing?

Even under the most strictly "traditional" of family structures, the exchange isn't quite so one sided as you are making out above. The woman might have to deliver the babies in question, but the man's got to provide for them.

That isn't exactly easy, or fun. :lol:

In any case, however, this is ultimately besides the point. The "traditional approach" is not set in stone anyway, nor should it be.

While many old fashioned families prefer that the mother stay home so that she can provide her children the best care possible, they do not have a problem with her working outside the home if it is necessary to get by, or if she desires to do so. Frankly, as I already pointed out, with modern technology, a person doesn't necessarily have to leave the house to earn money these days anyway.

I've got no desire to the 50-year-old mother of a teenager. :lol: If I had a baby now, I would be 50 when that baby was 15. Normally people are becoming grandparents at that age in their lives.

You don't have to justify yourself to me, Chris. :lol:

It's not my decision what you do with your uterus. lol
 
Last edited:
Everyone's got a place in society. Some people are better suited towards certain places than others.

However, not even the Church teaches that women should be subservient to men or necessarily have to be mothers, or even married.

Do I think it is ultimately preferable for individuals and society in general to stick with the traditional model more often than not? Absolutely.

I do not believe, however, that other alternatives should not be available.



Going by that logic, couldn't the man in this scenario just as easily be described as being the woman's slave, sacrificing his freedom and leisure to provide her and her children with food, shelter, and clothing?

Even under the most strictly "traditional" of family structures, the exchange isn't quite so one sided as you are making out above. The woman might have to deliver the babies in question, but the man's got to provide for them.

That isn't exactly easy or fun. :lol:

In any case, however, this is ultimately besides the point. The "traditional approach" is not set in stone anyway, nor should it be.

While many old fashioned families prefer that the mother stay home so that she can provide her children the best care possible, they do not have a problem with her working outside the home if it is necessary to get by, or she desires to do so. Frankly, as I already pointed out, with modern technology, a person doesn't necessarily have to leave the house to earn money these days anyway.



You don't have to justify yourself to me, Chris. :lol:

It's not my decision what you do with your uterus. lol

Come on, we all know that you look down upon people who aren't holding up their end of your weird "traditional" roles values, so yes, people might feel like they have to justify themselves. :roll:

Yes, I agree that working and providing for a family isn't easy, and that is why it should be a choice, and people who choose not to (or cannot for whatever reason) follow traditional roles or to not have children shouldn't be looked down upon. That's not fair.
 
My ex just had a baby... not mine. She will be 56 when the kid is 15 and her partner will be 62.

Holy crap that would suck. Changing diapers at 47 years old? No ****ing way.

No way, when I'm that age, I want to retire and relax and have life be all about me. I'll live out my teenage years again. :2razz: Probably not, though, because I'll be too tired.
 
Come on, we all know that you look down upon people who aren't holding up their end of your weird "traditional" roles values, so yes, people might feel like they have to justify themselves. :roll:

Project much?

Yes, I agree that working and providing for a family isn't easy, and that is why it should be a choice, and people who choose not to (or cannot for whatever reason) follow traditional roles or to not have children shouldn't be looked down upon. That's not fair.

Just to make sure I have your a priori arguments right, are you suggesting that people should be excused from doing the right thing (assuming that having and taking care of a family is the right thing - which I agree is not true universally but for the sake of argument) if doing that right thing is difficult?
 
Come on, we all know that you look down upon people who aren't holding up their end of your weird "traditional" roles values, so yes, people might feel like they have to justify themselves. :roll:

Yes, I agree that working and providing for a family isn't easy, and that is why it should be a choice, and people who choose not to (or cannot for whatever reason) follow traditional roles or to not have children shouldn't be looked down upon. That's not fair.

Society is ultimately a team effort. The difficulty these days is that we are living in a culture where people basically feel that they have no responsibility to anything other than themselves, and so that team effort is failing.

There's no problem with "choice" in and of itself.

What is a problem is when things get to the point where a majority of people are making objectively poor or unproductive choices, and not stopping to think about the long term implications of their actions for either themselves, or their communities. There's simply no way a system can effectively function under such a short sighted and self-serving paradigm.

The people making these decisions are really neither here nor there. I object to the attitudes which make such a state of affairs possible in the first place more than anything else.
 
Last edited:
What is a problem is when things get to the point where a majority of people are making objectively poor or unproductive choices, and not stopping to think about the long term consequences of their actions for either themselves, or their communities. There's simply no way a system can effectively function under such a short sighted and self-serving paradigm.

The problem here Gatho is that what makes a decision "poor or unproductive" is pretty subjective.
 
The problem here Gatho is that what makes a decision "poor or unproductive" is pretty subjective.

From any objective standpoint, things have become worse, not better, as a result of our society's adoption of a more "Liberal" social model.

Our economy is settling into stagnation due to declining birth rates and aging populations, upwards social mobility is in the toilet while government dependency shoots through the roof due to single motherhood, divorce, and broken homes in general limiting economic opportunities for advancement, and the young adults meant to continue our culture into the next generation grow more listless, debauched, and worthless with each passing year due to the influence of our, quite frankly toxic, youth and popular cultures.

The only thing any of this can be said to "benefit" in any way whatsoever is some nebulous notion of hedonistic "individual freedom." I'm sorry, but I simply do not view "individualism" as being a pressing enough goal to warrant jeopardizing the well being of the collective whole. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Our economy is settling into stagnation due to declining birth rates and aging populations, upwards social mobility is in the toilet while government dependency shoots through the roof due to single motherhood, divorce, and broken homes limiting economic opportunities for advancement, and the young adults meant to continue our culture into the next generation continue to grow more listless, debauched, and worthless with each passing year due to the influence of our, quite frankly toxic, youth and popular culture.

The only thing any of this can be said to "benefit" in any way whatsoever is some nebulous notion of hedonistic "individual freedom." I'm sorry, but I simply don't see "individualism" as being a pressing enough goal to sacrifice the well being of the collective whole. :shrug:

and you assign responsibility for this to the "liberal social model"?
 
and you assign responsibility for this to the "liberal social model"?

In large part, yes. The blame for these problems can be laid at the feet of the changes in attitude and fundamental structure brought about in our society over course of the last half century by such Left Wing socio-political developments as the Cultural / Sexual "Revolution."

Where the broken state of the modern family or the toxic nature of our present youth culture is concerned, the blame can be placed absolutely no where else.
 
Last edited:
In large part, yes. The blame for these problems can be laid at the feet of the changes in attitude and fundamental structure brought about in our society over course of the last half century by such Left Wing socio-political developments as the Cultural / Sexual "Revolution."

The blame for the broken state of the modern family and the toxic nature of our present youth culture can be placed absolutely no where else.

I suppose if taken to the literal interpretation one can see the terms Conservative to indicate societal stagnation and purposeful standstill, and Liberal as the evolution and adaptation of a society. If taken this way, you would have a valid point...yet the evolving nature of all societies will inevitably occur as reality flows in time.

You are certainly "Very Conservative" as proclaimed in your profile, and that is perfectly fine....but, it creates the basis for your perceptions of a broken society, primarily because you do not wish to see it change.
 
I suppose if taken to the literal interpretation one can see the terms Conservative to indicate societal stagnation and purposeful standstill, and Liberal as the evolution and adaptation of a society. If taken this way, you would have a valid point...yet the evolving nature of all societies will inevitably occur as reality flows in time.

You are certainly "Very Conservative" as proclaimed in your profile, and that is perfectly fine....but, it creates the basis for your perceptions of a broken society, primarily because you do not wish to see it change.

I do not think family structure should change to these levels seen in USA.
 
I suppose if taken to the literal interpretation one can see the terms Conservative to indicate societal stagnation and purposeful standstill, and Liberal as the evolution and adaptation of a society. If taken this way, you would have a valid point...yet the evolving nature of all societies will inevitably occur as reality flows in time.

You are certainly "Very Conservative" as proclaimed in your profile, and that is perfectly fine....but, it creates the basis for your perceptions of a broken society, primarily because you do not wish to see it change.

To quote C.S. Lewis here:

"We all want progress. But progress means getting nearer to the place where you want to be. And if you have taken a wrong turn, going forward does not get you any nearer. If you are on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; and in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive man."


I don't deny that change can and will happen. I'm not even necessarily opposed to it if it can be said to contribute something to society as a whole.

Again, however, I simply don't think this has been the case with the social changes the Western World has experienced over the course of the last half century. They have only served to make things more difficult, by and large, not better.
 
To quote C.S. Lewis here:

"We all want progress. But progress means getting nearer to the place where you want to be. And if you have taken a wrong turn, going forward does not get you any nearer. If you are on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; and in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive man."

I don't deny that change can and will happen. I'm not even necessarily opposed to it if it can be said to contribute something to society as a whole.

Again, however, I simply don't think this has been the case with the social changes the Western World has experienced over the course of the last half century. They have only served to make things more difficult, by and large, not better.

In many ways I agree with you...in some not so much. I also feel it important to consider the impact of population growth and migration on society, as well as technology and communications.

None of these are either conservative or liberal realities.
 
Project much?



Just to make sure I have your a priori arguments right, are you suggesting that people should be excused from doing the right thing (assuming that having and taking care of a family is the right thing - which I agree is not true universally but for the sake of argument) if doing that right thing is difficult?

Just to make sure I have your argument right here, are you suggesting that "for the sake of argument" we all agree that something is true (ie that having and taking care of a family is the right thing to do) even though we know it is not true?
 
In large part, yes. The blame for these problems can be laid at the feet of the changes in attitude and fundamental structure brought about in our society over course of the last half century by such Left Wing socio-political developments as the Cultural / Sexual "Revolution."

Where the broken state of the modern family or the toxic nature of our present youth culture is concerned, the blame can be placed absolutely no where else.

I agree with tecoyah's initial response to this. I think that your perspective is grounded in wanting things to stay the same. As a woman, I see the advances in equality for woman as a tremendous benefit not only to women but to society as a whole. I think the family has actually benefited from the changes to it's structure. You resist change and I welcome it so you see its destruction I see it's evolution. One mans trash.
 
I agree with tecoyah's initial response to this. I think that your perspective is grounded in wanting things to stay the same. As a woman, I see the advances in equality for woman as a tremendous benefit not only to women but to society as a whole. I think the family has actually benefited from the changes to it's structure. You resist change and I welcome it so you see its destruction I see it's evolution. One mans trash.

The problem with that argument is the changes you support are destructive, and have been shown to be destructive, which is pretty much exactly what this thread is about. Destroying men to raise women up is not change you should support, as it doesn't actually lead to a better environment for all people.
 
The problem with that argument is the changes you support are destructive, and have been shown to be destructive, which is pretty much exactly what this thread is about. Destroying men to raise women up is not change you should support, as it doesn't actually lead to a better environment for all people.

That's your perspective because you are coming from the same place as Gathos. I think the gun slinging babe ****ing hero you guys get sold is a crock and I that men in our culture have had limitations place on them and responsibilities placed squarely on their shoulders that place unfair limits ( or at the least placed obstacle) in the way of their evolution as humans.

How exactly do you think men are being destroyed by lifting women up? What do you mean by women being lifted up? Being raised to a level of greater equality is not being lift up.
 
I agree with tecoyah's initial response to this. I think that your perspective is grounded in wanting things to stay the same. As a woman, I see the advances in equality for woman as a tremendous benefit not only to women but to society as a whole. I think the family has actually benefited from the changes to it's structure. You resist change and I welcome it so you see its destruction I see it's evolution. One mans trash.

Women aren't being treated equally. They're being coddled and pitied.
 
That's your perspective because you are coming from the same place as Gathos. I think the gun slinging babe ****ing hero you guys get sold is a crock and I that men in our culture have had limitations place on them and responsibilities placed squarely on their shoulders that place unfair limits ( or at the least placed obstacle) in the way of their evolution as humans.

How exactly do you think men are being destroyed by lifting women up? What do you mean by women being lifted up? Being raised to a level of greater equality is not being lift up.

Equality movements from where I sit are commonly lead by coercion, ignorance, and a false premise that people are the same, as if there no differences between things, and you can just treat everything and everyone exactly the same. This idiotic notion was in fact pushed by feminist themselves when they pushed for equal rights, but it is entirely baseless and ignorant of the world, of human nature, and ****, just life in general. The notion they put forward was that there was no differences between the sexes, but as should be obvious that is such an obviously baseless claim that everyone should have been mocking it, but no, they were women so of course all the men listened to what what was clearly nonsense that warranted nothing but ridicule in truth.

Lets be clear though, equal rights has very little to do with the movement at this point, and in truth, beyond all the bull**** there was a reason it was called feminism, and it wasn't because it stood for equal rights. There is plenty that is going on today in law, and in culture that places women above men, and much of it, if not all of it, was pushed by the feminist movement. That however is not the point, and never was my point in this thread. My point is that ignoring human nature, as women have done with this blind pursuit towards a goal will only ever lead to disaster, and if you read the book in question, you would find that is exactly what has happened. Sure laws has played a part, but much of it deals with ignoring the reality of the world and the nature of the sexes, and as expected I'm sure, has led to disaster.
 
Try the geographical problem, I am in the Netherlands and she lives in the US.

I do not know that the rules are stacked against men. Maybe it is men who are the dumb asses who cause marriages to fail (even if women are partly to blame often too and in some cases they are to be blamed entirely for the collapse of a marriage).
Thats the problem though, it does not matter who's fault it is, there are no fault divorces in the US. And the way we treat women in the US, they have the power in any relationship. It starts early on in high school. Men do the VAST majority of the initiating when it comes to dating, relationships and sex, women do the choosing. Women give men the false sense of being in charge in order to stroke their ego's while the entire time, THEY are the ones controlling everything. This may be something that is forign to you because you are not an American. I don't know how much expirience you have living in American society. I have lived in many different countries, and American women are certainly a completely different animal then every where else I have been.
If men see their marriage as their personal kingdom then in time most women will walk away from that marriage, even if they are hanging in too long at times. Men need to learn that a marriage is a partnership. You do not cheat on your partner. You do not treat your partner as someone who is not equal to you. You do not disrespect your partner by not spending quality time with her.
Women need to learn that marriage is a partnership. Maybe American men 60-70 years ago had some power over their wife in a marriage, but today, the roles are completely reversed. Today, women have the power. Again, this may be due to your lack of cultural knowledge of how relationships work in the US.

You are rights, mostly it is women who initiate the divorce, but I will guess that the reason for said divorce is usually the behavior of her husband (they cheat, they beat their wifes, they treat their homes as a hotel with their wives as their personal slaves). And men do get into problems when they divorce, maybe that will teach them to have pre-nups. A lot of women skipped going to a good school because their husbands all but demanded she stayed home, knocked up if at all possible and not get a good education. Men on the other hand often do have careers, their wives did not have that same opportunity and thus the man is usually in a much better financial state, that will mean that he will have to support the mother of his children as much as possible. A lot of men also liked their wives at home, the women did not have a career and now are having to play catchup in the careers department. And a lot of the times the women will almost solely take care of the children in their marriage and that will have to come at a price for the men.

Way to go along with the media brainwashing. The media wants us all to believe that everything is a mans fault, and that men are all bumbling fools. Women are exquisite roses who are sensible, smart and sexy no matter how she looks. Yea.... And lets not give men any credit for anything. Especially.. pretty much inventing, creating and protecting the world we find ourselves in today. Without it, women would not have ever been able to be "equal" to begin with.



No, not blind. Men are finally being the butt of jokes after centuries of women being the butt of male jokes. Women are giving back as much as they get. I truly believe that women are still much more often the butt of male jokes compared to men being the butt of jokes by women. Women given is good as they get is called emancipation and if male ego's cannot handle that, well, tough luck I would say..

In a world of stupendous PC, why are women, children, gays, blacks, mexicans... ect ect.. all protected, but men are not? Does not sound remotely like a society that truely believes in equal rights.
 
No way, when I'm that age, I want to retire and relax and have life be all about me. I'll live out my teenage years again. :2razz: Probably not, though, because I'll be too tired.

I am done too... once I heard that cell phones can kill off reproductive sperm I started carrying the phone deep in my front pants pocket...
 
Thats the problem though, it does not matter who's fault it is, there are no fault divorces in the US. And the way we treat women in the US, they have the power in any relationship. It starts early on in high school. Men do the VAST majority of the initiating when it comes to dating, relationships and sex, women do the choosing. Women give men the false sense of being in charge in order to stroke their ego's while the entire time, THEY are the ones controlling everything. This may be something that is forign to you because you are not an American. I don't know how much expirience you have living in American society. I have lived in many different countries, and American women are certainly a completely different animal then every where else I have been.

That is a very weird way of looking at the dissolution of weddings (aka divorces). While the legal arbitration might be "no fault" but in most divorces there are grounds and reasons for that marriage to break up.

And women have the power? Yes, they have the power to give up their intimacy and who they want to fall in love with but that is purely down to men wanting sex and women wanting relationships more often than just sex. Men do the vast majority of initiating because they want to get their leg over, before they did that they too had the choice as to who they want to target, so don't cry me a river on that subject please because both make choices and act upon those choices. Sadly most men think with their loins and women with their brains. And the whole male to female mating dance is the same all over the western industrialized world.

The whole problem is that female emancipation started slower in the US IMHO, in the Netherlands most people live in smaller and bigger towns and the process of emancipation of women and the re-education of men worked a lot quicker. This also has to do with the fact that some countries have truly separated the church/religious oppressive views from their government. And again, that too in part has to do with the vast landmass of the USA and the more rural living. In the Netherlands the catholic church too had it's claws into the province where I live some 40 years back but that has changed during that time.

Women need to learn that marriage is a partnership. Maybe American men 60-70 years ago had some power over their wife in a marriage, but today, the roles are completely reversed. Today, women have the power. Again, this may be due to your lack of cultural knowledge of how relationships work in the US.

No, women know that marriage is a partnership. The thing is that most men think their part of that partnership is working outside of the house and then coming home and doing not a lot more after that, except of course demanding intimacy on a regular basis. All other things like house cleaning, child rearing, cooking etc. is down to the wife as well as putting out if said man wants to have sex. Today women have more power than before because they have emancipated but that is how it should be. In the end usually it is still men who rule the roost or try to push their way through in many relationships if women do not fight their ground. Men see power in the relationship is a right, women have to fight for that right.

And don't come with "in the US it is all different" because some things might be different but it is not like I am comparing the US with Pakistan or Indonesia. I am comparing the US with Europe and even though some things are different because of the size of the US, I think it has more to do with men grieving their loss of "power" because they now have to negotiate with their wives and most men are not that great at that.

Now I know the US is not like an episode of the Dr. Phil show but he does not write those books and does his shows purely for entertainment and money. Women need more than just sex in a while and money, they need a partner who engages in a whole host of things with them, from child rearing to running the house hold but also spiritually and intellectually engaging their partners.

Way to go along with the media brainwashing. The media wants us all to believe that everything is a mans fault, and that men are all bumbling fools. Women are exquisite roses who are sensible, smart and sexy no matter how she looks. Yea.... And lets not give men any credit for anything. Especially.. pretty much inventing, creating and protecting the world we find ourselves in today. Without it, women would not have ever been able to be "equal" to begin with.

It is not an issue of media brainwashing but with reality. Men often are the reasons behind the end of their marriage. Usually the women also has her fair share in the divorce but they do not divorce their husbands because they love being divorced. Usually they choose it because they are very unhappy with their married life, they have been cheated on or because they see no future in their marriage. Men are not bumbling fools but often have a real problem with emotions, that can be voicing them or understanding the emotional issues their wives have. It is not always the problem that men do not do enough, the problem is they do not see problems in the marriage or are doing things that are endangering said marriage.

And you are proclaiming the wonderful things men did in inventing, creating and protecting? :lamo

Men have also been the people who have invented, used and destroyed most things under the sun.

Men invented the most things in the past because they kept women down, they denied them work, education or working at their own growth. Men still can invent all to their hearts content even when married because their wives are keeping the fort running when their husbands are working at their inventions 18 hours a day/7 days a week/52 weeks in a year because their wives cook, clean, care and educate their children. She does not have the luxury of working in a shed with little or no thought about feeding her children, caring for her children etc. etc. etc.

If women could be as selfish and unthinking as men may they would invent a lot more things. Women usually do not have that luxury because they cannot ignore their other responsibilities.

The same goes for fighting, men might go out to fight like in the second world war (a war started by men of course) but they could only do that because of women. Women who took over their jobs in the factories which kept providing the tools of war, they took over the factory jobs so that the society they lived in could keep moving forward, they worked on the land and took sole parenting role while the men were out fighting the war.

In a world of stupendous PC, why are women, children, gays, blacks, mexicans... ect ect.. all protected, but men are not? Does not sound remotely like a society that truely believes in equal rights.

This should have nothing to do with PC, but sadly due the fact that women, children, gays, blacks, latinos etc. are still in an inferior position to white men, they need some protection by the law so that those white men do not push their way through to the detriment of said women, children, gays, blacks, latino's etc.
 
Back
Top Bottom