• 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
If given the chance to re-marry would you marry (another) American woman?

Increasingly the answer is "no".

Men are increasingly disrespected by American women. They face extreme economic and social disadvantages in family law that makes it possible for a wife to divorce them and take most of what they have including their children for any reason or no reason. They are constantly told that they are worthless and stupid. Disrespect for men has become standard practice. Men are disrespected by their wives – they’re disrespected publicly, they’re disrespected privately, they’re disrespected and then told that they have no right to be upset about it because they aren’t worthy of respect in the first place.

Disrespect of men is a joke to Americans now.

The result has been that men are increasingly dropping out of society. They don't marry, they don't go to college because they see no reason to break their humps to get ready to provide for a family -- they aren't going to be having a family.

Lots has been written about this phenomena, most of it in the strain of "why is it that men are so childish now." But men are not dropping out because of arrested development. They are acting rationally in response to myriad laws, attitudes and hostility against them for the crime of happening to be male in the twenty-first century.

Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream - and Why It Matters: Helen Smith: 9781594036750: Amazon.com: Books


Men are subjected to so much pain and humiliation that they only earn 1.30 for every 1.00 a woman earns! That's an outrage. Clearly men should be making millions of times more, maybe even a bajillion million times more.
 
I would be genuinely surprised to find out that men are, on the whole, any more controlling than women are. There may be a difference in the manner of expressing it (women may tend to be more passive-aggressive), but I doubt there is a significant difference in the actual numbers.

I'm pretty sure that ALL statistics would disagree with your personal assessment. :lol: This is just Captain Obvious stuff. Men will use their "higher paying income" and their "brute physical strength" to their advantage, but if a woman uses her "feminine wiles" then she is bad, very bad.

Not to mention the obvious here as well, but have you been reading some of the posts? I really don't understand your "us against them" attitude, especially seeing as how YOU are a woman, allegedly. It's mind-boggling to say the least.
 
Last edited:
Not to mention the obvious here as well, but have you been reading some of the posts? I really don't understand your "us against them" attitude, especially seeing as how YOU are a woman, allegedly. It's mind-boggling to say the least.

Omg, :lol:
Yes, Chris, I've been lying all this time, and am actually a man. Jesus H Christ.

It is not mind-boggling (or at least it shouldn't be) to imagine that men and women both use whatever is at their disposal to get what they want in a relationship, which in people who have emotional or mental issues, seems to be rather common. I honestly haven't met men who are bossy and controlling of women- perhaps it's a difference between southern and northern women which explains it- southern women tend to be pretty straightforward and go for what they want-I'm really not sure. I grew up in a very traditional environment, in which men were usually the breadwinners, and women were wives and mothers. That being said, the women I grew up around are among the strongest women I've ever known. I don't know any of them who are subservient to their male counterparts. In fact, they tend to be a bit on the sassy and adventurous side.

Oh, and I'm not "against" anyone. I am contributing my own thoughts and observations to the thread, as I assume most of us do.
 
Omg, :lol:
Yes, Chris, I've been lying all this time, and am actually a man. Jesus H Christ.

It is not mind-boggling (or at least it shouldn't be) to imagine that men and women both use whatever is at their disposal to get what they want in a relationship, which in people who have emotional or mental issues, seems to be rather common. I honestly haven't met men who are bossy and controlling of women- perhaps it's a difference between southern and northern women which explains it- southern women tend to be pretty straightforward and go for what they want-I'm really not sure. I grew up in a very traditional environment, in which men were usually the breadwinners, and women were wives and mothers. That being said, the women I grew up around are among the strongest women I've ever known. I don't know any of them who are subservient to their male counterparts. In fact, they tend to be a bit on the sassy and adventurous side.

Well, I apologize lizzie, but geez you seem to always be on the side of the guys and seem to think that women are jerks. Sure, these people exist, both genders, but you make it sound as if ALL men are like the ones you know, and that is just not the case. Your own personal experiences aside, I think it is more likely to occur in more "traditional" types of households.

If a woman WANTS to stay home and raise kids and clean the house, that's one thing, but if she chooses to not do those things then that is fine too, and it doesn't make her any less of a woman because of her choices. We, as woman, don't have to feel pressured into those types of relationships if that is not what we want for ourselves.

Personally, I might have gone for a relationship like that when I was in my teens and 20s perhaps, but now not so much. I wouldn't want to be dependent upon another person for my money. I want to have my own money and my freedom, and I'm really not all that keen on having any more babies at 35 years old.
 
Well, I apologize lizzie, but geez you seem to always be on the side of the guys and seem to think that women are jerks. Sure, these people exist, both genders, but you make it sound as if ALL men are like the ones you know, and that is just not the case. Your own personal experiences aside, I think it is more likely to occur in more "traditional" types of households.

No, I did not say that ALL men are like the ones I know. I said that out of the men I know, none of them try to tell their wives what to do. As I said, maybe it's a cultural difference between the part of the country that I am in, and the part that you are in. Women here tend to be a little on the assertive and bitchy side, and even if they are stay-at-home moms, they direct their own lives, and typically run the household finances as well.

I don't need to take sides to realize that this issue gets used in order to make women feel like victims. I don't personally buy into the victimhood mentality. I feel perfectly empowered in my own life, and if a man can't handle that, then he can't handle me. There is no victimhood in my mind, as it is within my own power to live as I wish. Anyone who cedes their own personal power does so of their own volition. Very rare are the instances where marriage is forced upon anyone, and in fact, the singular case I know of personally was a friend of mine who is an immigrant to this country, and after she came here, she divorced his ass.
 
No, I did not say that ALL men are like the ones I know. I said that out of the men I know, none of them try to tell their wives what to do. As I said, maybe it's a cultural difference between the part of the country that I am in, and the part that you are in. Women here tend to be a little on the assertive and bitchy side, and even if they are stay-at-home moms, they direct their own lives, and typically run the household finances as well.

I don't need to take sides to realize that this issue gets used in order to make women feel like victims. I don't personally buy into the victimhood mentality. I feel perfectly empowered in my own life, and if a man can't handle that, then he can't handle me. There is no victimhood in my mind, as it is within my own power to live as I wish. Anyone who cedes their own personal power does so of their own volition. Very rare are the instances where marriage is forced upon anyone, and in fact, the singular case I know of personally was a friend of mine who is an immigrant to this country, and after she came here, she divorced his ass.

I said that's how you make it sound, but anyway I think this is more related to personality types. I think the types of guys who would go for more traditional types of relationships would naturally tend to be more on the "controlling" side.

That might not be necessarily a "bad" thing depending on what a person wants in life I suppose. I don't know anything about the culture where you live, but I would imagine that more than one type of people exist there too. I think everyone (or at least most people) CAN be assertive and bitchy at times, but there is a difference between that and controlling IMO.
 
One condition that I have is that I verify nationality by checking a woman's passport prior to asking her out...
 
I'm pretty sure that ALL statistics would disagree with your personal assessment. :lol: This is just Captain Obvious stuff. Men will use their "higher paying income" and their "brute physical strength" to their advantage, but if a woman uses her "feminine wiles" then she is bad, very bad.

Not to mention the obvious here as well, but have you been reading some of the posts? I really don't understand your "us against them" attitude, especially seeing as how YOU are a woman, allegedly. It's mind-boggling to say the least.

I think the idea is more that men and women "control" relationships in different ways.

Men are more direct, straight forward, and prone to overt displays of power. Women, on the other hand, are subtle, passive-aggressive, and sometimes even manipulative in the power they exert.

As long as it's not taken to extremes, there really isn't any problem with this per se. I don't have any problem with a woman "holding her own" in a relationship so long as she's not a harpy about it and is in some sense feminine.

I just tend to not get on very well with women who favor a more masculine approach.

Personally, I might have gone for a relationship like that when I was in my teens and 20s perhaps, but now not so much. I wouldn't want to be dependent upon another person for my money. I want to have my own money and my freedom,

To be fair here, Chris, don't you work from home already, and weren't you working that job for at least a portion of the period of time when you were living with your ex, who worked outside of the house?

That's basically a modified version of the "traditional model" which allows a woman to earn her own money while still being able to "play mother" for her children right there.

In this regard, I think a lot of people tend to misunderstand what the "traditional model" actually is. (For persons other than Tigger, anyway) It's more of a general strategy than a set way of doing things.

My mother, for instance, chose to stay home. However, it's hardly like she was locked in the house beholden to my father, or spent all of her time eating bonbons, cooking, and cleaning.

Most of the time, she was teaching my siblings and I, planning field trips, or putting together curriculum for us to use. That basically was her "career" while we were growing up, and it was pretty much completely hers. Other than to provide an occasional lesson on some subject in which he was particularly knowledgeable at my mother's request, my father played little to no role in this whatsoever.

I'm really not all that keen on having any more babies at 35 years old.

I can certainly understand that.

Ironically though, having children into one's thirties and forties seems to rapidly be becoming the "new normal" in our society, at least for middle and upper class demographics. Many "career women" aren't even having their first children until at least 35 these days.

I don't know if that's a good idea, per se, but it is something we're seeing more and more.

I said that's how you make it sound, but anyway I think this is more related to personality types. I think the types of guys who would go for more traditional types of relationships would naturally tend to be more on the "controlling" side.

How "controlling" a person happens to be really kind of depends upon their personality.

My father and I are a lot alike in this regard, actually. We're both very opinionated in terms of how things should be done under ideal or theoretical circumstances, and both rather "dominant" in terms of personality. However, we're far more easy going and laissez-faire when it comes to practical application than our initial attitudes might suggest.

My father simply didn't care enough to try and "dictate" what anyone in the house did in absolute terms, much less enforce it day in and day out.

He's was muuuuch too lazy for that. :lol:

Omg, :lol:
Yes, Chris, I've been lying all this time, and am actually a man. Jesus H Christ.

It is not mind-boggling (or at least it shouldn't be) to imagine that men and women both use whatever is at their disposal to get what they want in a relationship, which in people who have emotional or mental issues, seems to be rather common. I honestly haven't met men who are bossy and controlling of women- perhaps it's a difference between southern and northern women which explains it- southern women tend to be pretty straightforward and go for what they want-I'm really not sure. I grew up in a very traditional environment, in which men were usually the breadwinners, and women were wives and mothers. That being said, the women I grew up around are among the strongest women I've ever known. I don't know any of them who are subservient to their male counterparts. In fact, they tend to be a bit on the sassy and adventurous side.

Oh, and I'm not "against" anyone. I am contributing my own thoughts and observations to the thread, as I assume most of us do.

This is growing to be less true over time, but I do think that Southern culture tends to be generally more "traditional" than most of the rest of the country. This reality does manifest itself in our approach to relationships in a lot of cases as well.

While our women are a lot more classically "feminine" than those from other regions, it would be a mistake to view them as being push overs because of this.

As many a broken hearted country song can attest, they can be downright evil when they want to be. :lol:
 
Last edited:
One condition that I have is that I verify nationality by checking a woman's passport prior to asking her out...
Why is this important?
 
While our women are a lot more classically "feminine" than those from other regions, it would be a mistake to view them as being push overs because of this.
As many a broken hearted country song can attest, they can be downright evil when they want to be. :lol:

The bolded is exactly the point I have been trying to make. Traditional does not mean abused nor dominated or controlled. It means that a woman willingly takes on the role of wife and mother, and runs the household. My mom, and most of my aunts, plus my grandmothers did that. Not a single one of them is a woman I would consider weak. In fact, between my parents, I would consider my mother to be the stronger of the two, as far as outward appearances go. She has always been a very straightforward woman, who has done exactly what she wanted to do. Her devotion to my father and to her children was the guiding force in her life, but she never was subservient. She just loved my father to the degree that they were essentially an inseparable pair, and the feeling was mutual on my father's part. There was no power struggle. There was love and devotion to each other, and for each of them, one of their purposes in life, was to make the other happy.
 
Rational (female version), intelligent, femininely sexy, virile, and compassionate.

If these aspects are met....I will spend the time to figure out the rest.
 
I think the idea is more that men and women "control" relationships in different ways.

Men are more direct, straight forward, and prone to overt displays of power. Women, on the other hand, are subtle, passive-aggressive, and sometimes even manipulative in the power they exert.

As long as it's not taken to extremes, there really isn't any problem with this per se. I don't have any problem with a woman "holding her own" in a relationship so long as she's not a harpy about it and is in some sense feminine.

And some people don't feel the need to have "control" in a relationship at all and just like to let things progress and happen naturally without any predispositions as to how things are "supposed" to be.

I just tend to not get on very well with women who favor a more masculine approach.

What would THAT be?


To be fair here, Chris, don't you work from home already, and weren't you working that job for at least a portion of the period of time when you were living with your ex, who worked outside of the house?

That's basically a modified version of the "traditional model" which allows a woman to earn her own money while still being able to "play mother" for her children right there.

In this regard, I think a lot of people tend to misunderstand what the "traditional model" actually is. (For persons other than Tigger, anyway) It's more of a general strategy than a set way of doing things.

My mother, for instance, chose to stay home. However, it's hardly like she was locked in the house beholden to my father, or spent all of her time eating bonbons, cooking, and cleaning.

Most of the time, she was teaching my siblings and I, planning field trips, or putting together curriculum for us to use. That basically was her "career" while we were growing up, and it was pretty much completely hers. Other than to provide an occasional lesson on some subject in which he was particularly knowledgeable at my mother's request, my father played little to no role in this whatsoever.

I worked outside the house as well. I've done some waitressing, and also my transcription job used to be in an office building in Rhode Island. Then, they were bought out by this larger company for a poopload of money, so not really, there were plenty of times when I was outside of the house working too.


I can certainly understand that.

Ironically though, having children into one's thirties and forties seems to rapidly be becoming the "new normal" in our society, at least in middle and upper class demographics. Many "career women" aren't even having their first children until at least 35 these days.

I don't know if that's a good idea, per se, but it is something we're seeing more and more.

:shock: Yeah, I don't think so. :lol:

How "controlling" a person happens to be really kind of depends upon their personality.

My father and I are a lot alike in this regard, actually. We're both very opinionated in terms of how things should be done under ideal or theoretical circumstances, and both rather "dominant" in terms of personality, but we're far more easy going and laissez-faire when it comes to practical application.

My father simply didn't care enough to try and "dictate" what anyone in the house did in absolute terms, much less enforce it day in and day out.

He's was muuuuch too lazy for that. :lol:

Well, I think it's only natural that people are going to have strong feelings about certain issues. That does not equate into being controlling though.
 
And some people don't feel the need to have "control" in a relationship at all and just like to let things progress and happen naturally without any predispositions as to how things are "supposed" to be.

Which is basically what I've been saying all along. A couple with a good relationship shouldn't even have to worry about these kinds of things.

It should just sort of fall into place.

That being said, however, it would be naïve to assume that "power" and "control" are never being exerted in a relationship in at least some sense. Most of the time it simply happens to be consensual and more or less benign, so it's not really an issue.

I worked outside the house as well. I've done some waitressing, and also my transcription job used to be in an office building in Rhode Island. Then, they were bought out by this larger company for a poopload of money, so not really, there were plenty of times when I was outside of the house working too.

Sure. I was simply saying that it is possible to do things in such a way that the woman is able to be a fully available mother for her children and retain some degree of financial independence.

It doesn't have to be an "either / or" kind of situation.

:shock: Yeah, I don't think so. :lol:

It's up to you, obviously. :lol:

I was just saying that it is something that's become a lot more common in recent decades.

Well, I think it's only natural that people are going to have strong feelings about certain issues. That does not equate into being controlling though.

Of course.
 
Last edited:
The bolded is exactly the point I have been trying to make. Traditional does not mean abused nor dominated or controlled. It means that a woman willingly takes on the role of wife and mother, and runs the household. My mom, and most of my aunts, plus my grandmothers did that. Not a single one of them is a woman I would consider weak. In fact, between my parents, I would consider my mother to be the stronger of the two, as far as outward appearances go. She has always been a very straightforward woman, who has done exactly what she wanted to do. Her devotion to my father and to her children was the guiding force in her life, but she never was subservient. She just loved my father to the degree that they were essentially an inseparable pair, and the feeling was mutual on my father's part. There was no power struggle. There was love and devotion to each other, and for each of them, one of their purposes in life, was to make the other happy.

That's all I ever wanted in a relationship. My folks were high school sweethearts and while they have had their issues, they're still married despite everything.

I often wished I hadn't rushed into marriage. ..but my children came from that. Them I value over everything. I got married with the intention of dying with that person. I was emotionally destroyed when that happened. Just...destroyed.

Divorce isn't something my family is accustomed to. My younger sister has been married several times and myself just once.

It's hard to open yourself up to that kind of devastation again. To invest yourself 110% and give all you've got when things go horribly wrong.

I'm envious of people who have that kind of relationship you mention.
 
It's hard to open yourself up to that kind of devastation again. To invest yourself 110% and give all you've got when things go horribly wrong.

I'm envious of people who have that kind of relationship you mention.

I am envious of it too. It is not easy to come by.
 
Which is basically what I've been saying all along. A couple with a good relationship shouldn't even have to worry about these kinds of things.

It should just sort of fall into place.

That being said, however, it would be naïve to assume that "power" and "control" are never being exerted in a relationship in at least some sense. Most of the time it simply happens to be consensual and more or less benign, so it's not really an issue.

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

Sure. I was simply saying that it is possible to do things in such a way that the woman is able to be a fully available mother for her children and retain some degree of financial independence.

It doesn't have to be an "either / or" kind of situation.

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.

It's up to you, obviously. :lol:

I was just saying that it is something that's become a lot more common in recent decades.

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.
 
I'm just confused as to why the standards require looking at a passport?

Dude, it was a joke. I thought that it was so over the top that it was obvious. LOL

Check a person's passport? Who even carries a passport?

I know we just met, but if you would go home and produce your passport so I can verify your nationality that would be great because I am thinking about asking you out on a date. :lol:
 
Then we shall have a duel of pants, to determine who is smartyiest.

You can have the smarty pants... I just want my parents to love me.
 
I don't know Gathomas, I have the feeling that you believe women have their "place" in society.



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.



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.

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.
 
Dude, it was a joke. I thought that it was so over the top that it was obvious. LOL

Check a person's passport? Who even carries a passport?

I know we just met, but if you would go home and produce your passport so I can verify your nationality that would be great because I am thinking about asking you out on a date. :lol:
I wondered.

Wouldn't put it past some, however.
 
Back
Top Bottom