• 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
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Also, women were the primary "bread winners" in more natural states, as in, they were the ones providing the majority of the sustenance, so you're wrong there too.

Men were handling the vast majority of hunting, which would have provided the highest quality food available at the time.

However, that is ultimately besides the point, as "providing" doubles as a form of sexual display behavior, and always has. It serves the purpose of allowing women to determine the most sexually desirable males available.

As such, even in primitive societies, heterosexual relationships still tend to exhibit males in dominant sexual roles just as they do almost everywhere else, as the most proactive, aggressive, and resourceful males are being routinely favored by women for the purposes of procreation. The difference might not be as pronounced as it is in other societies, but the trend is still present.

Basically the only societies where women can be said to serve dominant sexual roles a majority of the time are matrilineal cultures where men have been all but expelled from the household entirely, meaning that women largely go it alone.

So yes, it is absolutely an issue of women having little self-respect, in many cases. Womens' self-esteem is still extremely low in America, on the whole, and this is borne out by study after study after study.

You are going to have to provide some evidence showing any kind of correlation whatsoever between female homemakers and low self-esteem.

In other societies that are further along than we are, or in our own with women who are more self-possessed, I see an endless mix and match of dynamics. And it might surprise you to know that I myself am actually not an egalitarian. How that breaks down for me is not convenient to typify -- some aspects are superficially "traditional," and others are blatantly not so. But I don't prefer pure egalitarianism. I think this is common to personalities like mine; extremely proficient in some areas, but lopsided.

And what we see almost universally from societies which try to "mix up" the traditional dynamic is that it simply does not work. Basically all it results in are marriages and long term relationships in general failing en masse, with wide spread disintegration of the family unit following close on its heels (Sweden, for instance, actually has the highest divorce rate on the planet).

The vast majority of women simply do not respect subordinate men, and men simply do not tend to prefer domineering women. It's not how they're really wired.

More often than not, you wind up with a situation reminiscent of the movie "American Beauty," with the wife losing respect for her husband and looking to score a more "respectable" mate higher up the ladder, and the husband growing more and more resentful and detached as his own status diminishes.

What you promote is a dynamic which can never be "consensual" when applied to 50% of the population en masse, because it requires the woman to lack independent sustainability in the most basic survival sense, whereas the man is completely capable in this regard. An individual couple can make this decision themselves, based on trust and knowing their personal dynamic, but to apply it society-wide is an inevitable recipe for abuse, which we have seen from the unfortunate "glory days" you pine for.

When applied to a society, it is not a partnership in any sense. It is women as servants.

First off, when the heck did I suggest "imposing" anything on anyone?

Secondly, what do you think I mean by "dominant" here?

What I'm talking about is something biologically innate, not deliberate. More often than not, men simply tend to assume somewhat "dominant" roles in heterosexual relationships by default.

Why? Because they naturally tend to be a lot more assertive and interpersonally aggressive than women, and most women actually tend to prefer their men that way. As such, they tend not to resist this development when it arises in a relationship.

It seems to just be kind of the way the sexes are wired. :shrug:

There are exceptions to this rule of course, and this isn't to say that women don't tip the balance of power back in their favor in other, more subtle, ways. However, the fact that men generally do tend to be more assertive in relationships while women are more passive is more or less undeniable.

I also never said that women couldn't work or seek out fulfillment outside of the home.

Don't get me wrong. I think it is preferable that a woman try to stay closer to the home if she has children to care for, and leave most of the "bread winning" to her husband or significant other. However, there are plenty of ways to work around that these days.

A lot of women can quite easily work from home (like Chris does, for instance), or simply work part time. As a matter of fact, numerous studies have shown that most mothers don't even want to work full time with young children at home anyway.
 
Last edited:
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Men were still handling the vast majority of hunting, which would have provided the highest quality food available at the time. However, that is ultimately besides the point, as "providing" doubles as a form of sexual display behavior, and always has. It serves the purpose of allowing women to determine the most dominant males available. As such, even in primitive societies, heterosexual relationships still tend to exhibit males in dominant sexual roles just as they do almost everywhere else. It might not be as pronounced as it is in other societies, but the trend is still present. Basically the only societies where women can be said to serve dominant sexual roles a majority of the time are matrilineal cultures where men have been all but expelled from the household entirely, meaning that women largely go it alone.

You are going to have to provide some evidence showing any kind of correlation whatsoever between female homemakers and low self-esteem.

And what we see almost universally from societies which try to "mix up" the traditional dynamic is that it simply does not work. Basically all it results in are marriages and long term relationships in general failing en masse, with wide spread disintegration of the family unit following close on its heels (Sweden/, for instance, actually has the highest divorce rate on the planet). The vast majority of women simply do not respect subordinate men, and men simply do not tend to prefer domineering women. It's not how they're really wired. More often than not, you wind up with a situation reminiscent of the movie "American Beauty," with the wife losing respect for her husband and looking to score a more "respectable" mate higher up the ladder, and the husband growing more and more resentful and detached as his own status diminishes.

First off, when the heck did I suggest "imposing" anything on anyone? Secondly, what do you think I mean by "dominant" here? What I'm talking about is something biologically innate, not deliberate. More often than not, men simply tend to assume somewhat "dominant" roles in heterosexual relationships by default. Why? Because they naturally tend to be a lot more assertive and interpersonally aggressive than women, and most women actually tend to prefer their men that way. As such, they tend not to resist this development when it arises in a relationship. It seems to be just kind of be the way the sexes are wired. :shrug: There are exceptions to this rule of course, and this isn't to say that women don't tip the balance of power back in their favor in other, more subtle, ways. However, the fact that men generally do tend to be more assertive in relationships while women are more passive is more or less undeniable. I also never said that women couldn't work or seek out fulfillment outside of the home. Don't get me wrong. I think it is preferable that a woman try to stay at home if she has children at home, and leave most of the "bread winning" to her husband or significant other. However, there are plenty of ways to work around that these days. A lot of women can quite easily work from home (like Chris does, for instance), or simply work part time. As a matter of fact, numerous studies have shown that most mothers don't even want to work full time with young children at home anyway.

Anything to deny reality. :lol: As kind of an aside, an overabundance of the types of meat most hunter-gathers would encounter is actually very bad for you, as Americans are learning with their over-consumption of it. So, no, women were providing the bulk of necessary and healthy foods in the appropriate amounts -- which is the majority of the diet. And in a pinch, they could hunt as well.

But anyway, I have provided you probably somewhere in the order of 50 sources over the months proving you wrong over and over, and I am not going to bother doing it again.

I have to prove to you women in America have self-image issues? Really? The society where labiaplasty and snake oil aging cream is big business? Again, I'm not bothering.

Sweden is an extremely deceptive example. Cohabitation without a license is now the norm, and the people getting formally married are the people like you. And they have extremely high divorce rates, yes. That is also true in America. Traditional families that push for things like virginal marriage, traditional arrangements, early childbearing, etc and with an enforced and prescribed unequal dynamic tend to fail in a day and age where women can look out their window and see people being, dare I say, free to live how they like.

You can't even wrap your head around what I'm saying, here. There are dozens of different dynamics in any given relationship. You do not have to have one person controlling the majority of them. You also do not have to have them perfectly split down the middle. You can arrange them any way you like, and there might not be any apparently dominant partner, or there might be. You can have someone be extremely dominant in some areas and submissive in others.

I think the fact that women are no longer interested in a domineering and sexist man as a life partner, and when they pick one it tends to be a failure, is proof enough that they don't actually prefer it. There is nothing saying women are inherently permissive. Just because women in sexist countries tend to be such does not make it natural.

You support a model in which women should be socially expected to have no survival resources of their own, or at least insufficient resources to be independent if they wish to be. That means you don't really support consent, because that is the kind of relationship where you should never be under any kind of pressure. It requires a great degree of trust to give up your ability to escape a relationship without being homeless for some period. And that is how you think it's "supposed" to be.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

OK. It's late and I'm ready for bed. So maybe this is completely off track here but is it possible that men no longer feel like competing for women? Or today feel like they have to work harder to get one? They feel like they are entitled to a woman? And one that will accept them as 'the head of the house?' Hmmmmmm.

(I am not presuming that it's a competitive thing....it's just a theory, lol)

No flames please. Not meaning offense.

I apologize for the late respond, but I just noticed the thread. I'm not married and not planning on it.... I would say, personally, that most of the women i've met are not worth respect. Then again I dont respect most of the men I've met either. Honestly, the women of today are much easier to get.... They have seem to have very little self-worth.

The last date I went out on I held the door open for her and she complained about it. I was always taught that holding a door open for a woman was a sign of respect, not dis-respect.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

The thing is, the way most guys who think this carry it out, I don't believe that crap, because that's not what I actually see them doing. What I see them doing -- and I will borrow ChrisL's very apt metaphor -- is basically looking for a mommy to pick up their socks, only this one won't tell them what to do, or even make much fuss about what she would like to do.

Well then you aren't hanging out with men. You are hanging out with boys.

And even in rare cases where the claims about "the neck" aren't simply disingenuous, it is still insulting to try to tell all women how they should be and how their relationships should be. If that works for you, fine. But you don't get to tell me or any other woman what works for us.

You are a writer. Do you really need someone to explain the meaning of the word "generally" to you?
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

I wonder sometimes if men aren't a little confused about their place or roles nowadays. Maybe, the feminist movement provided a vehicle and some muscle to propel women forward and expand their choices but perhaps, because men have made no organized effort to restructure their role they are a little confused at what exactly is expected of them today.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Well then you aren't hanging out with men. You are hanging out with boys.

You are a writer. Do you really need someone to explain the meaning of the word "generally" to you?

I don't hang out with those kind of guys. I merely run into them from time to time, because it can't be helped. So, it appears a lot of them must be boys.

No, but I certainly do need someone to explain me why you and he then advocate it as the way women ought to be, and blame them for the supposed downfall of society when they aren't.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Well geez, for someone who is so young and still practically a newlywed, you sure seem to an AWFUL lot about women and what they want. You must have been QUITE the stud when you were available on the dating scene since you know us women SO well. Lol! What makes you think your personal experience count anywhere except in your own mind?

Is this the part where I point out the emotional content of your response vice the reason in it, and you get all bent out of shape at me accusing you of reacting emotionally, and then I point out that you are demonstrating part of my point?

:shrug: however, I'll agree, I haven't been married that long - about 6 years now in all. Fortunately, they do polling on this sort of thing, and so when I point out that - generally - women prefer to be led by a man vice (for example) a woman boss, I am - generally - correct. The stats are probably out there for the other items as well - would you like to place, say, a year's platinum membership on the line that men ask women to marry them more than women ask men? We could wager a sig line on whether or not men initiate sex more than women do? whattya say?

Also, how many times, when you wife says "you pick" and you pick Chinese, does she say, "well, I'm not really in the mood for Chinese tonight."? Hmmmmm? :lol:

:D Usually it's Outback. Or Chik-fil-A.

My, my you should write a book Mr. I Know What Women Want. :mrgreen:

:roll: responding with sarcasm doesn't actually make you look well-thought-out, Chris. It just makes you look unable to respond with anything else.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

I wonder sometimes if men aren't a little confused about their place or roles nowadays. Maybe, the feminist movement provided a vehicle and some muscle to propel women forward and expand their choices but perhaps, because men have made no organized effort to restructure their role they are a little confused at what exactly is expected of them today.

I think this absolutely true, and I think feminism needs to take a strong part in pushing for that conversation to actually happen. Movements are always messy. We should strive to clean up after them as best we can.

It is confusing, in a time where older women remember severe sexism and still exist in young mens' families, and yet the women they interact with are much more empowered. More than just a confusion about their role, it also creates a certain degree of guilt in some men.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Perhaps it's the norm because it's the norm.
RtE: And not because it SHOULD be the norm, in any biological or otherwise sense.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

I don't hang out with those kind of guys. I merely run into them from time to time, because it can't be helped. So, it appears a lot of them must be boys.

That would go into the other thread on the economics of sex. If males aren't required to turn into men... well, often, they won't.

No, but I certainly do need someone to explain me why you and he then advocate it as the way women ought to be, and blame them for the supposed downfall of society when they aren't.

Project much? I haven't said "ought" in this thread. "This Is The Way Women Ought To Be" is a universalistic statement I wouldn't make or support. "Downfall of society"? No - both males and females have played a role in the breakup of the family and the degradation of our culture - and I tend to blame men (or, as we agree, often boys) more than women.

If you want to have a conversation about "ought", I'd generally stick to "generally". What works for most doesn't work for all. Its just what works for most, because it most mirrors the mean of human experience. My relationship with my wife is different in that than (for example) my parents' relationship - the house I grew up in had a mother as the biggest personality. Which also isn't one-sided; I'm obviously not privy to the moments where it's just them two, but from what I understand, when it's just her and dad, the dynamics are different.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

I wonder sometimes if men aren't a little confused about their place or roles nowadays. Maybe, the feminist movement provided a vehicle and some muscle to propel women forward and expand their choices but perhaps, because men have made no organized effort to restructure their role they are a little confused at what exactly is expected of them today.

Well for much of the population, the answer is "not much", and so they meet expectations.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

.............


I think this absolutely true, and I think feminism needs to take a strong part in pushing for that conversation to actually happen.
As a movement, yes I agree. We can't really ask for fairness and then not practice it.

Movements are always messy. We should strive to clean up after them as best we can.
Also agree. It's unavoidable though as there is no way to control or predict all the outcomes of any movement. Imagine if people allowed themselves to be who they themselves are and ignored gender roles. Both men and women. That would be ideal...

Off topic a little but I think there were a few unfavorable outcomes of the feminist movement and a very relevant oversight that gets to me is that I would have liked to have seen women push for a broader appreciation for the traditionally female role of wife and mother rather then than "we can do what men to do" approach. It implies that to be relevant and respected we need to what the men are doing. It kind of validates the notion that the traditional roles of men more valuable or require more competence.

It is confusing, in a time where older women remember severe sexism and still exist in young mens' families, and yet the women they interact with are much more empowered.
Yes but I would argue that keeping an eye on that past to help assure it does not creep back in does have its place. But we all have an obligation to keep up with the outcome of any movement we have been a part of and continue to fine tune it as it evolves.

More than just a confusion about their role, it also creates a certain degree of guilt in some men.
I've seen you mention this before but haven't really seen this as an impact myself. You mean like white guilt but gender guilt?
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Anything to deny reality. :lol: As kind of an aside, an overabundance of the types of meat most hunter-gathers would encounter is actually very bad for you, as Americans are learning with their over-consumption of it.

That's only true if you're sitting around on your butt all day doing nothing else. Protein and fat rich meat is a Godsend for physically active hunter gatherers who would be living hand to mouth otherwise.

As a matter of fact, due to their protein rich diet, hunter-gatherers often tended to enjoy health and grow to physical sizes that wouldn't be commonly seen again in post-Agricultural societies until the 20th Century.

But anyway, I have provided you probably somewhere in the order of 50 sources over the months proving you wrong over and over, and I am not going to bother doing it again.

Anything to deny reality! :lol:

I have to prove to you women in America have self-image issues? Really? The society where labiaplasty and snake oil aging cream is big business? Again, I'm not bothering.

And men have anabolic steroids. What's your point, and what does this have to do with the instinctual power dynamics at play in most heterosexual relationships?

Sweden is an extremely deceptive example. Cohabitation without a license is now the norm, and the people getting formally married are the people like you. And they have extremely high divorce rates, yes. That is also true in America. Traditional families that push for things like virginal marriage, traditional arrangements, early childbearing, etc and with an enforced and prescribed unequal dynamic tend to fail in a day and age where women can look out their window and see people being, dare I say, free to live how they like.

A) American social customs actually tend to be quite Liberal, all told, so this doesn't really mean much.

B) Somewhere around 70% of cohabitating couples that have children together in Sweden eventually marry, so their divorce rate is still atrocious.

C) Cohabitation without marriage is just as bad as divorce, if not worse. As a matter of fact, it only makes couples more likely to split up over extended time scales because there's nothing substantial holding them together in the first place.

The simple fact of the matter is that the dynamics you suggest simply do not work. They destroy families, making things infinitely harder upon women and children in the process, and rely upon a wildly wasteful and inefficient welfare state to make up the difference.

I'm sorry, but exchanging a husband for a government agency turned "sugar daddy" (at tax payer expense, no less) really isn't any great achievement. :shrug:

You can't even wrap your head around what I'm saying, here. There are dozens of different dynamics in any given relationship. You do not have to have one person controlling the majority of them. You also do not have to have them perfectly split down the middle. You can arrange them any way you like, and there might not be any apparently dominant partner, or there might be. You can have someone be extremely dominant in some areas and submissive in others.

Again, I was never talking about anything deliberate in the first place.

Men have an innate tendency to take a certain amount of control in a relationship, and women have an innate tendency to go after men who will display exactly those tendencies.

It really isn't the kind of thing most couples really even have to think about. It just kind of happens of its own accord.

I think the fact that women are no longer interested in a domineering and sexist man as a life partner

I haven't seen any evidence whatsoever to suggest that women's tastes in men have fundamentally changed. The only thing that has changed is their attitude towards commitment (or lack thereof).

The above statement is wishful thinking on your part.

and when they pick one it tends to be a failure, is proof enough that they don't actually prefer it. There is nothing saying women are inherently permissive. Just because women in sexist countries tend to be such does not make it natural.

If you say so, Smoke. Basically all evidence we have available says otherwise.

You support a model in which women should be socially expected to have no survival resources of their own, or at least insufficient resources to be independent if they wish to be. That means you don't really support consent, because that is the kind of relationship where you should never be under any kind of pressure. It requires a great degree of trust to give up your ability to escape a relationship without being homeless for some period. And that is how you think it's "supposed" to be.

Here you're simply making things up. Again, I never said anything about imposing my views on anyone.

I also didn't say anything about women not having the resources to be independent if they didn't want them.

Again, however; the simple fact of the matter is that screwing around with the fundamental structure of marriage generally doesn't seem to have positive impacts on the success of the union.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

That would go into the other thread on the economics of sex. If males aren't required to turn into men... well, often, they won't.

Project much? I haven't said "ought" in this thread. "This Is The Way Women Ought To Be" is a universalistic statement I wouldn't make or support. "Downfall of society"? No - both males and females have played a role in the breakup of the family and the degradation of our culture - and I tend to blame men (or, as we agree, often boys) more than women.

If you want to have a conversation about "ought", I'd generally stick to "generally". What works for most doesn't work for all. Its just what works for most, because it most mirrors the mean of human experience. My relationship with my wife is different in that than (for example) my parents' relationship - the house I grew up in had a mother as the biggest personality. Which also isn't one-sided; I'm obviously not privy to the moments where it's just them two, but from what I understand, when it's just her and dad, the dynamics are different.

Oh, I have no trouble at all meeting men. It's just that men tend not to be so hung up on making sure their woman is submissive to them.

Backpeddle much? Everything you post about "the family," whoever it is you're blaming that day, has women as ideally occupying a submissive role as a housekeeper and mother primarily or exclusively. Your thread today is based on the concept of women being "too cheap" -- i.e. not waiting until he puts a ring on it and puts her up in a house to enjoy her sexuality.

It is clear what you think womens' place is. And even if I allow you to backpeddle to "generally," you are still wrong. Women are not "generally" submissive and unable to support themselves. They are whatever they'd like to be.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Yes, there certainly has been a big shift in the way men are looked at, but its not new. It has been happening for the past 30+ years with no response from men. Men have been raised to simply suck it up and many still have the traditional view that they must protect women, even strangers. And because of this, it has been impossible for men to fight back against this societal shift. The ones that see it, can't do anything about it because there is easily a 100:1 ratio of men who will stand behind a woman even if she is wrong against any man that points it out to her. Instantly shutting down any dissent against the prevailing feminist mysandry. It all boils down to men putting women on a pedestal and women taking advantage of it.

It was not until I traveled outside the country that I started to understand what was going on. I think most American men are so brainwashed they can't see whats happening. They are so distracted with sports and video games that they just don't see it. And many American men have never spent time outside of the US. When I lived overseas there was a stark difference between foreign women and American women. Foreign women actually LIKE men. Now you might think to yourself that if women really hated men we would instantly recognize that. But I think American men are so use to being hated and disrespected by women that we have become accustomed to it. I noticed this instantly when I moved overseas. The women smiled, said hello, did not mind having a conversation, and did not have this sense of viciousness and shallowness about them. They seemed more carefree and in relationships, a lot more loving.

That is why I married a foreign woman. I was astonished, that for the first time in my life, my love and respect was reciprocated. It was not until I dated my wife that I really saw it. All the American women I ever dated simply took, took, took and never gave back in kind. When it comes to romance with American women, they simply do not reciprocate. Buy them flowers, treat them to dinner, tell them how nice they look, and most simply eat it up and dont appreciate what men do for them. They use their option to pretty much dump a guy any time he stops giving and moves on to the next schmuck that is willing to give without anything in return. Until men start demanding more from women in relationships and dateing, they will simply keep taking advantage of it.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Well for much of the population, the answer is "not much", and so they meet expectations.

I just don't see this as the case. I think for instance, a 22 yr old guy is very much the same today as when I was a kid, in terms of having a clear goal in life and working towards it. I think they may be a little confused about what their role in a relationship with a female is or what is or is not considered adequately "male" but I don't think the womens movement robbed them of professional ambition. This implies that the only reason they ever had any in the first place was to get laid.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Off topic a little but I think there were a few unfavorable outcomes of the feminist movement and a very relevant oversight that gets to me is that I would have liked to have seen women push for a broader appreciation for the traditionally female role of wife and mother rather then than "we can do what men to do" approach. It implies that to be relevant and respected we need to what the men are doing. It kind of validates the notion that the traditional roles of men more valuable or require more competence.

While I don't disagree with you in theory, I think we are already seeing that in the third wave, and it has taken a very destructive tone.

In third wave feminism, the house mother has once again become the "best" form of femininity. It doesn't look like it at first because the language is so different, but it's the same thing. The third wave "earth mother" really has her entire identity consumed in "mother," and in other shows of worship of the female reproductive organs, going all the way up to some wacky stuff like vulva and period art.

We just can't seem to hit a balance with this one.

You may not be seeing this as much since you said are you are of an older generation than I am, but as a woman who is both young and childfree, let me tell you: third wave feminism wants nothing to do with me and thinks I am an inferior form of woman.

I've seen you mention this before but haven't really seen this as an impact myself. You mean like white guilt but gender guilt?

This is something I only see in men under 30 or so. Yeah, it's kind of like white guilt. It's like they confuse their physical ability to overpower most women to mean that any act they take -- especially sexual -- is an aggressive one.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

I just don't see this as the case. I think for instance, a 22 yr old guy is very much the same today as when I was a kid, in terms of having a clear goal in life and working towards it. I think they may be a little confused about what their role in a relationship with a female is or what is or is not considered adequately "male" but I don't think the womens movement robbed them of professional ambition. This implies that the only reason they ever had any in the first place was to get laid.

Where most men are concerned, this isn't terribly far from the truth. :lol:
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Oh, I have no trouble at all meeting men. It's just that men tend not to be so hung up on making sure their woman is submissive to them.

Again, I get the suspicion that you are not bothering to read what you are responding to, vice simply projecting a cartoonish, 2-dimensional meme onto your opposition. Neither Thomas or myself are saying that men should be out there making sure that women are submissive to them; both of us have claimed that - generally - women want[/i] men to lead. We aren't making a statement about men (outside generally of the commentary that men will often remain boys as long as they are able), we are making a statement about women.

Backpeddle much? Everything you post about "the family," whoever it is you're blaming that day, has women as ideally occupying a submissive role as a housekeeper and mother primarily or exclusively. Your thread today is based on the concept of women being "too cheap" -- i.e. not waiting until he puts a ring on it and puts her up in a house to enjoy her sexuality.

So. No. You don't bother to pay attention to what you are responding to. I have pretty much always gone with "generally", because most of these rules are, well, generalities. There are a few things I won't go with Generally because I believe in them as a moral code - saving sex for marriage, for example, the destructiveness of divorce for another. But when talking about which personality is dominant inside a relationship or which member in a household is the driving force in most decisions?

It is clear what you think womens' place is. And even if I allow you to backpeddle to "generally," you are still wrong. Women are not "generally" submissive and unable to support themselves. They are whatever they'd like to be.

That is incorrect - you can't have it all, as many prominent, well-credentialed women are starting to point out. Women, like men, have to make choices and to choose one thing is often to choose not another. Nor have I ever claimed that women are unable to support themselves. I will claim that women with children usually face difficulties supporting themselves, which is why so many of them replace a husband with the State, who fulfills all of the financial obligations, but never wants to have sex when they have a headache. :lol:


You are attempting to project onto us arguments we aren't making, and disputing those without evidence. You are smarter than strawmen, Smoke.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

While I don't disagree with you in theory, I think we are already seeing that in the third wave, and it has taken a very destructive tone.

In third wave feminism, the house mother has once again become the "best" form of femininity. It doesn't look like it at first because the language is so different, but it's the same thing. The third wave "earth mother" really has her entire identity consumed in "mother," and in other shows of worship of the female reproductive organs, going all the way up to some wacky stuff like vulva and period art.

We just can't seem to hit a balance with this one.

You may not be seeing this as much since you said are you are of an older generation than I am, but as a woman who is both young and childfree, let me tell you: third wave feminism wants nothing to do with me and thinks I am an inferior form of woman..

Are you referring to the "you can have it all" fantasy ?
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Where most men are concerned, this isn't terribly far from the truth. :lol:

Speak for yourself pervert :2razz:
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

I just don't see this as the case. I think for instance, a 22 yr old guy is very much the same today as when I was a kid, in terms of having a clear goal in life and working towards it.

I've provided financial coaching, career advice, and personal mentoring to, well, probably a couple of hundred 18-24 year old males over the last few years, and I struggle to come up with a definition by which I can describe "having a clear goal in life and working towards it" is a defining feature of the age group. :shrug: We're extending adolescence until what - 26 now? 26 year olds used to have multiple children and a career. Now they are in graduate school working on that thesis eventually while still using their parents' health insurance? That is going to have effects. We sent everyone to college and then we started extending college -your typical four year degree now happens in five years if it happens at all. That is going to have effects. Marriage and parenthood is a major spur for men to grow up. It's happening later and later and less and less. That is going to have effects.

I think they may be a little confused about what their role in a relationship with a female is or what is or is not considered adequately "male" but I don't think the womens movement robbed them of professional ambition. This implies that the only reason they ever had any in the first place was to get laid.

:shrug: that's not implausible at all. Women are attracted to alpha's, after all. Men therefore seek success not least because it increases their attractiveness to women, and their ability to turn that attraction into what they are seeking (sex). Give a guy sex without making him work for it, and he's like the butterfly you helped out of the cocoon. Happy now, and he'll never fly under his own power.
 
Since we are talking about women only, I thought I would try to incorporate male perspectives. When I lived in Europe, I remember talking to an acquaintance. He was a foreign exchange student in America and was talking about his experience. He said he was really shocked that American guys would go out to just try to have sex.

I think I asked what the girls were acting like in the situations. I just remember one of our friends was making a joke out of it and started acting like he was trying to have sex with me. He called me a slut at some point, and I picked up a menu and smacked him over the head.

Everybody started laughing really loud.

He then said that that illustrated his opinion that American females are more willing to tolerate the behavior.

I am not a male, so I can't say that I agree with him based on anything I have seen.

I met him while I was living in northern Germany. Germany's concept of sexism is different from America's. It is hard to explain, but one huge thing that stands out is that on American TV if you see a man changing diapers or cleaning its a joke and its funny, because he is going to **** up. It is a classic comedy situation. On modern German TV, it is not the same.



Interestingly, some of the women friends of mine that are most suited to being happy in a marriage, tend to be from Europe and Africa. Of the American conservative gf's I have, probably about 3/4 of them seem to be satisfied in their long term relationships, and of the liberal ones, I'd guess closer to half. For whatever reason, it's doesn't seem that men are so scorned in other parts of the world- even those in which women have equal rights and are independent-minded.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Speak for yourself pervert :2razz:

Again, only my experience directly supervising hundreds of these things, but from what I can see, he's generally correct. And the kinds of young men who join the Marine Corps are probably self-selecting to be least prevalent for this.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

But to answer the OP's question. The current environment is very hostile twords men. There is so much risk in marrying an American woman that its almost insane to get married. I tell every guy I can to stay very clear of marriage in the US. If a woman loves you, she will be content with living with you and will not force you to put your financial future at risk. I know to many men who were set for retirement just to go thru a nasty divorce and are working well into their retirement years because the wealth they lost in the divorce settlement decimated their retirement plans. To those guys who still believe in marriage, I will be there to tell you I told you so when it falls apart. More then 60% of marriages fail and more than 70% of those divorces are initiated by women.
 
Back
Top Bottom