How many men have no clue

a reply to: dawnstar

But, to be honest, maybe the reason you find that time with the kids has more value and I find having enough money to buy the family what they needed while growing up and enough to give myself at least enough independence financially without being a burden on my adult children is that maybe you had money, it was yours to decide to do what you wish.

Oh, how little you know!

I made less than $10K many of those years... I wrote checks to the power guy so he wouldn't pull the meter, then raced to the bank with borrowed money to keep the check from bouncing. I did without all kinds of things... even a vehicle at one time. Couldn't afford even a jalopy, no money to fix mine, and probably couldn't put gas in it anyway.

And you have the gall to tell me I had money? I would hazard to say you have had more money in the worst part of your life than I had in those years!

No, the reason I worried about my family more than money was that I chose to do so. I chose to pay attention to what was important in life, not what was incidental. You chose to follow money, and where did it land you?

Let me tell you something I learned about money long, long ago... I was once an up-and-coming young professional climbing that corporate ladder... and I was damn good at it! But then I realized that the more money I made, the more money I needed... there was never enough, never a point where I could say "I have all the money I want." It's an endless game of chase on a circular track where the finish line moves as fast as you do. You can never catch it, any more than you can catch the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. And just when you think everything is OK, that your income is secure, that's when the money leaves... and you're stuck without family values and without money either.

Something to think about: I have watched many of my family die and many of their friends die. Almost to a man, every one said "I wish I had spent more time with my family." Never have I heard "I wish I had made more money."

I abandoned the rat race for one simple reason: only rats win. I'm not a rat.

But you do you. Keep chasing that dollar. You'll catch it tomorrow... or the day after... or the day after that... or the day after that... someday. Maybe.

TheRedneck

a reply to: dawnstar

So you deny the welfare safety net? Do you deny that hundreds of thousands of women get pregnant on purpose so they can get welfare benefits? Are you in some kind of delusional state thinking women are honest or responsible? The percentage of women that fit that category is small. You are not one of them. If a woman chooses to have sex she should take the responsibility seriously. It appears you think that is laughable.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I made nothing many years for the a good part of my kid's childhood being that stay at home mother and housewife. I am gonna avoid the well, you had options, you could have done.....
But I am not going down that route.

a pampered slave is still just a slave. If you are asking someone to do labor for you, which taking full responsibility for the care of your home and children you helped bring into the world is and thinking that the only option the person should have is to accept whatever reward you deem she deserves.. then she is closer to the description of a slave than a partner?

You made 10000 dollars a year that you had the initial control over. What you did with it is a secondary issue. I commend you on your integrity in the decisions you made. But bear in mind that not every one has that much integrity and it is just as easy, if not easier back then for the father to disappear than the mother.

But it doesnt surprise me that so many men have found themselves now feeling like the slave.
Dependency=servitude. As men were fostering this financial dependency onto women, women were finding better ways to make men more dependent on them or finding a new master..(welfare).. the masters were suckered into enslaving themselves l.

a reply to: dawnstar

If you are asking someone to do labor for you, which taking full responsibility for the care of your home and children you helped bring into the world is and thinking that the only option the person should have is to accept whatever reward you deem she deserves.. then she is closer to the description of a slave than a partner?

No.

Someone was doing labor for us, which was taking primary responsibility for the care of our home and children we helped bring into the world. You completely bypassed the point that the home was our home, the children were our children, and the labor was shared between us. While she was taking acre of the children and home, I was out busting my butt to try to make what little I could to keep food on the table.

Just where do you get off thinking that a woman, by virtue of being a woman, has some special dispensation that says she should be paid labor wages for helping herself? My wife and I share the labor that is inherent in everyone's life. I have to say it... no way I can not say it... just who do you think you are, Your Majesty? You ain't no Queen; you do not get to lie around and expect others to do for you or pay you to do the things you do for you.

That attitude is exactly why you had so much trouble. Who pays you to shower? Change clothes? Eat? No one does, and no one ever will. Follow that attitude and you'll starve to death.

Sounds to me like you want all men to be servants to women. I thought I had picked up on that earlier, and my responses reflected that; then I thought maybe I was wrong, had misinterpreted your intent and my responses reflected that; but now I see you do think you, by virtue of your gender, are privileged. You're not. What you have to offer in that respect, in many less developed countries, costs less than a cup of coffee.

But bear in mind that not every one has that much integrity and it is just as easy, if not easier back then for the father to disappear than the mother.

If someone has no integrity, they are no one. I do not stoop to the lowest levels humanity has to offer; I expect others to rise to the levels they need to be.

Dependency=servitude.

No.

Where I live, dependency to some extent = SURVIVAL.

Forced dependency = servitude. No one forces a woman to get pregnant; no one forces a woman to have sex (with a very, very tiny exception for rape, which is strictly illegal). The woman decides to have sex just as much as the man... as a matter of fact, it has been said that any time you see a couple sitting together on a date eating, only one of them knows if that date will lead to sex... and it's not the man.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Look, people can do whatever they want. Couples can live however they want. If it worked for you, if it worked for your wife, more power to ya. But all that crap you just posted was a bunch of unjustified venom and I have been trying so hard to be nice.

a reply to: JAGStorm
Jag,
In your opinion what makes killing another human being immoral (I assume you do find killing a human to be immoral)?

To me, it wouldn't be the act of causing unconsciousness or the act of hurting them. While it wouldn't be moral to do so, they can recover from these acts.
The part, about one human killing another, that I find immoral/inhuman is the act of inflicting total loss of ability.
This is the absolute worse thing one human can do to another, to cause total disability.

What makes it 'ok' for women to cause total disability on another human being?
In 99% cases of abortion they made a choice. They, and their partner, were in total control and they made a choice.
That is when they have a choice (in 99% of cases).
Once mitosis begins a new human being is formed.
Like any human, during any stage of their life cycle, if you kill them you are removing all of their remaining ability.

This is why I disagree with arguments like:
"My body, my choice"- No. In 99% of case you already made the choice.
"It's not human"- Simple biology confirms this is a lie. It is a unique separate human being.
"It does't have feelings before X number of weeks"- This still does not give anyone a right to remove all the ability to do so.
"Don't push you religion on me"- This is not a religious argument. It is a biology and basic humanity argument.

Seriously Jag,
If you would not kill a 2 year old, a teen, or an elderly person, why do find it acceptable to kill an unborn human?
All of these are the same. They are all human beings, just in different stages of their life cycles.
It boggles the mind.
ETA: a reply to: dawnstar (after reading through the thread some)

a reply to: dawnstar

Unjustified?

You realize you posted that a woman taking care of her own baby, even of her own home, is being forced into some sort of slavery? Is that your definition of slavery? If so, you are badly, badly delusioned!

I have maintained all along one simple fact: it takes both a man and a woman to make a baby. Sure, the woman has sole possession for the first 9 months, and even after that is better equipped to care for the child. The father's role comes in later, but is just as vital to raising a healthy, happy, productive new life. That's just nature, and like it or not there's nothing you can do about that. Call it an injustice, call it unfair, none of that matters... it is nature and nature does not care one bit what you or anyone else thinks.

The baby is the result of two people, and two people both share responsibility for it. Your post indicated that the father is the only one required to do so and the mother is somehow being held in slavery against her will. That is elitist and completely ignores science and law. It has also been used many times through the years to drain money from a father while denying him the ability to even see his child that he helped produce, all because the woman felt she was somehow superior.

I for one do not consider elitists as "nice." Despicable is more like it. Deplorable even moreso.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Quadrivium

What makes it 'ok' for women to cause total disability on another human being?
In 99% cases of abortion they made a choice. They, and their partner, were in total control and they made a choice.
That is when they have a choice (in 99% of cases).
Once mitosis begins a new human being is formed.
Like any human, during any stage of their life cycle, if you kill them you are removing all of their remaining ability.

Please shove the lecture!
I almost died due to NOT having an abortion for babies that I actually wanted. I know I don't fit the narrative, and neither do so many women I know, and we are only 1% blah blah blah. Whatever.

Until it happens to your family you will not understand.

a reply to: JAGStorm

You should have just sucked it up and rubbed some 'Tussin on it.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: Quadrivium

What makes it 'ok' for women to cause total disability on another human being?
In 99% cases of abortion they made a choice. They, and their partner, were in total control and they made a choice.
That is when they have a choice (in 99% of cases).
Once mitosis begins a new human being is formed.
Like any human, during any stage of their life cycle, if you kill them you are removing all of their remaining ability.

Until it happens to your family you will not understand.

My family and I are more familiar with it than you know.

"What if she had said yes?"
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not lecturing, I was trying to understand the opposite of my POV. Hence the questions.

a reply to: JAGStorm

I don't know why this should be an issue, it is a personal thing for the woman to have to consider, and it's not a small decision. You could argue that contraceptives are evil as well, that's what the Church has been preaching for centuries. You could ask is promiscuity a good thing? well, contraceptives encourage it, that's what happens. These are all personal decisions for the individual nothing to do with the state. Government should stay out of it.

a reply to: anonentity
I agree with you, up to the point another human being is introduced.
After that point, it is the premeditated killing of another human being.

originally posted by: Quadrivium
After that point, it is the premeditated killing of another human being.

The law in pretty much every state says it isn't, saying otherwise is personal feelz.

originally posted by: Quadrivium
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit.

I read it just fine, you think it's premediated murder, the law says otherwise. One is the law and the other is feelz.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Abortion is certainly a medical procedure. I don't think anyone would debate that fact. It is a medical procedure to vacuum or rip apart a viable developing human out of the uterus of a FEMALE. Yes, we actually know what females are.

a reply to: Quadrivium

Is it premediated murder in Texas?

originally posted by: nugget1
a reply to: JAGStorm

I wonder if there are guys that knocked up a girl and never knew.

I wonder how many half-siblings from the 'free love' era unknowingly married each other.

My ex dated his and his dad had to come clean over the half sister. Fortunately, they were still young teens and not serious. They were in the same class in school. Dad had been trying to keep two families on the go secretly with one child in each. Strange days.