It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Conspiracy against Manhood.
page: 10share:
reply to post by orangetom1999
The decision of whether or not a woman goes to work should be a joint decision. I don’t know what a man thinks as I am not a man. However, I can tell you that often men want their SO to get a job so they can afford the toys that men like. I came by this observation from my own experiences around men. In a situation where both must work to survive, the choice is often easier for the female but not less emotional. I know many women who would rather be home raising and home schooling their children than working. They have to work to help make ends meet.
Although non-traditional, I do know families where the woman works and the man stays home to raise the children. Once again, this was a joint decision. Society says that the male should be the sole or better provider, not the individual.
The risks are taken by both. The traditional roles are extremely difficult to overcome. Men still have choices. These choices should be discussed between the couple before they get married or move in together. A man who feels outrage over the societal position he has been placed in is not communicating adequately with his partner or has a very selfish one. Any male who will not stand up for his rights soon learns that he has none.
It’s not a matter of female vs. male angst. It’s a matter of both standing up for their rights and working together.
How are they not about the male? If the male was not in their life, they wouldn’t be making these decisions. The decision to augment the male’s earning power is about the male.
This is the risk vs. trust that I mentioned earlier. The possibility wouldn’t have been raised if it never happened. My sister put her husband through dental school. I attended their 25th anniversary party a few years ago. He’s now retired from his dental practice, they have two adult sons and are raising 3 elementary school-aged children. It doesn’t always work out this well for some.
Why would a man work to put his wife through college? Oh wait, would it be so that she “can have higher earning potential..the payoff comes later.” We should all strive for delayed gratification to appreciate it. What man wants to come home after eight or more hours of work to spend his few hours before a well-earned rest taking care of the house work and the children? Yes, many do, but many don’t.
I see many women going back to work after their children are in school. These are usually wives of blue collar working men. These women are waitresses, secretaries, nurses, and a number of other lower paying career fields. Who is the risk for if not for the man? The job I gave up was $26.00 an hour as opposed to the average $8.00 to $10.00 an hour that I could have made as a office worker.
If you mean marketability in terms of her being able to get another spouse, I agree. If you mean her marketability in the work force, I disagree. Here again we have risk vs. trust.
I would never be in a relationship with a man whom I could not trust. I am nearly 55 years old, over weight, wrinkled, and in questionable health. If I was worried about my marketability to the opposite sex, I would work out, get a face lift and be less a part of my marriage. I don’t need a man to survive. I chose a particular man to share my life with. If he were to leave me or die, I would not be in any hurry to get another.
When we decided that my husband would go to school to his A & P license, I took the responsibility and RISK to earn the living while he attended school. For six months, I worked for a man picking up garbage on a rural route. Jobs in that area were scarce. Had it not been for my VA disability, we wouldn’t have made it. At his encouragement, we both took part-time jobs and I used my VA benefits to attend school and eventually got my A & P license.
Here again, how are her risks less than his? It seems you are targeting the vain selfish fluff that thinks only of herself. The sad thing is that there are just as many vain selfish men out there. I have no time for either.
When the guys at work found that I had bought my husband a 50” plasma TV with surround sound, they jokingly asked if I could be their wife for a while. This male drive for consumerism is one of the reasons I see men wanting their wives to work. I’ve seen a man scream at his three year old for getting fingerprints on his precious electronics. Apparently he doesn’t realize that it is difficult to have nice things when you have small children. What is more important, the toy or the child?
Man’s perception of his role in life is based on his own life experience. It is the same with women. The key is honest communication between men and women. While I was still under going chemotherapy for breast cancer, my ex began pushing me to go back to work. He wanted some toy, and being the person I was back then, I complied. I finished chemo, and radiation while working in an office position. He felt that since I was able to work, I should also take back the household chores that he had taken on while I was undergoing cancer treatment. Needless to say, he is the ex. Funny thing though, all our friends took his side when I left since he had been sooooooooo good to me by staying by my side when I had cancer.
Originally posted by orangetom1999
reply to post by darkelf
Women have to weigh the risk of having someone else raise their child to the financial risk when deciding to work or stay home.
Wait a minute here. Men don't weigh the risk of having someone else raise their child or children. This system we are under ..this choice is often defaulted away from a man..he has no choice in this.
As to financial risk when deciding to work or stay home...do males traditioinally get this "choice??" "deciding??"
Notice who is often presented with the choices/options here. When the choices or options are removed ...and RISKS take place..there is a sense of outrage.. unfairness.,...more options are not available..but men have found themselves in this position by default...from the starting line. It is only offensive when applied to women without a safety net. The angst is only female angst...or womens angst. Male angst doest count or can be defaulted so as not to be noticed or paid any attention to. Male angst is hardly heard ..hardly worth mentioning. We know this clearly because there are hardly any male "victimization" programs abounding.
The decision of whether or not a woman goes to work should be a joint decision. I don’t know what a man thinks as I am not a man. However, I can tell you that often men want their SO to get a job so they can afford the toys that men like. I came by this observation from my own experiences around men. In a situation where both must work to survive, the choice is often easier for the female but not less emotional. I know many women who would rather be home raising and home schooling their children than working. They have to work to help make ends meet.
Although non-traditional, I do know families where the woman works and the man stays home to raise the children. Once again, this was a joint decision. Society says that the male should be the sole or better provider, not the individual.
The risks are taken by both. The traditional roles are extremely difficult to overcome. Men still have choices. These choices should be discussed between the couple before they get married or move in together. A man who feels outrage over the societal position he has been placed in is not communicating adequately with his partner or has a very selfish one. Any male who will not stand up for his rights soon learns that he has none.
It’s not a matter of female vs. male angst. It’s a matter of both standing up for their rights and working together.
They take a risk by staying home to raise their own children. They take a risk when working to put their husbands through school. They take a risk by putting off childbirth to pursue a career. They even take a risk by getting married.
Notice here DarkElf...most of these risks are for and about herself!!?? Notice this...they are not about the male...in thier lives.
How are they not about the male? If the male was not in their life, they wouldn’t be making these decisions. The decision to augment the male’s earning power is about the male.
Most of the time a woman working to put a man through school is so that he can have higher earning potential..the payoff comes later. Is this the same as a man putting a woman thorugh school? The outrage as mentioned ..in many posts is that the man earns more and then leaves the woman..more insecurity...about her.
This is the risk vs. trust that I mentioned earlier. The possibility wouldn’t have been raised if it never happened. My sister put her husband through dental school. I attended their 25th anniversary party a few years ago. He’s now retired from his dental practice, they have two adult sons and are raising 3 elementary school-aged children. It doesn’t always work out this well for some.
Notice in this same vein..how many men are working to expendability and disposability to put not only their women in college or school but also thier children. Often with long hours of overtime worked..against failing health...physical well being...over and over and over.
Why would a man work to put his wife through college? Oh wait, would it be so that she “can have higher earning potential..the payoff comes later.” We should all strive for delayed gratification to appreciate it. What man wants to come home after eight or more hours of work to spend his few hours before a well-earned rest taking care of the house work and the children? Yes, many do, but many don’t.
I may be wrong here but most of the RISKS I know are men working to put thier children through college and long hours and overtime doing so..years and years and years..loan after loan after loan. Probably alot of this is because of the blue collar area whence I work. I do not see many as women doing this. I know of one who has done so...a single woman. I am sure that single women do this for their children and in this they would be very much like the male.
I see many women going back to work after their children are in school. These are usually wives of blue collar working men. These women are waitresses, secretaries, nurses, and a number of other lower paying career fields. Who is the risk for if not for the man? The job I gave up was $26.00 an hour as opposed to the average $8.00 to $10.00 an hour that I could have made as a office worker.
The point again here is for whom, what , and how the RISKS are taken. The circumstances.
Is it about the family per se..or are the postings mostly about her..her risks. IF she takes risks for the family..she is just like any male in this...this would be equality.
But when I see or detect that it is about "her" and her marketability..I get very let down.
If you mean marketability in terms of her being able to get another spouse, I agree. If you mean her marketability in the work force, I disagree. Here again we have risk vs. trust.
What would a woman think of a man who worries about his marketability in taking RISKS...when she expects more from him??? Do you think that a man should not be aware that many women have this in mind...or should a man stay ignorant of this so as to be defaulted through...often with more RISK, disposability and expendability?? Where, when, and how often does this play through.....for frivilous reasons??? Not real value today.???
I would never be in a relationship with a man whom I could not trust. I am nearly 55 years old, over weight, wrinkled, and in questionable health. If I was worried about my marketability to the opposite sex, I would work out, get a face lift and be less a part of my marriage. I don’t need a man to survive. I chose a particular man to share my life with. If he were to leave me or die, I would not be in any hurry to get another.
When we decided that my husband would go to school to his A & P license, I took the responsibility and RISK to earn the living while he attended school. For six months, I worked for a man picking up garbage on a rural route. Jobs in that area were scarce. Had it not been for my VA disability, we wouldn’t have made it. At his encouragement, we both took part-time jobs and I used my VA benefits to attend school and eventually got my A & P license.
Should light be put on this concept so that men are awakened ..or should we worry about "Her" and her RISKS..marketability.
Here again, how are her risks less than his? It seems you are targeting the vain selfish fluff that thinks only of herself. The sad thing is that there are just as many vain selfish men out there. I have no time for either.
I agree ..in your individual case...you both weighed the risks together. No problems with this. This is what marriage partners should do...weigh the risks.
I say also that the caliber of women and men both out here is not as well tempered as is yours and your husbands. Especially in a consumer oriented social structure. To me ..my way of thinking ..many men out here have defaulted thier manhood to consumption levels..not real value.
When the guys at work found that I had bought my husband a 50” plasma TV with surround sound, they jokingly asked if I could be their wife for a while. This male drive for consumerism is one of the reasons I see men wanting their wives to work. I’ve seen a man scream at his three year old for getting fingerprints on his precious electronics. Apparently he doesn’t realize that it is difficult to have nice things when you have small children. What is more important, the toy or the child?
And this is a man's fault for imperception about many things...including manhood.
Man’s perception of his role in life is based on his own life experience. It is the same with women. The key is honest communication between men and women. While I was still under going chemotherapy for breast cancer, my ex began pushing me to go back to work. He wanted some toy, and being the person I was back then, I complied. I finished chemo, and radiation while working in an office position. He felt that since I was able to work, I should also take back the household chores that he had taken on while I was undergoing cancer treatment. Needless to say, he is the ex. Funny thing though, all our friends took his side when I left since he had been sooooooooo good to me by staying by my side when I had cancer.
continued from above
Point is, there are a lot of good men and women out there who take risk with their partner in mind. It is society and those individuals in charge who continually try to drive a wedge between us. When we focus on the generalities rather than the individual, we fail ourselves and each other.
Point is, there are a lot of good men and women out there who take risk with their partner in mind. It is society and those individuals in charge who continually try to drive a wedge between us. When we focus on the generalities rather than the individual, we fail ourselves and each other.
It is individual thing and experience varies diametrically. I've had very bad experience with my ex girlfriend and so did you with your Husband.
We forgot about the main point raised here, is feminist movement damaging family and society or do you disagree with that?
Do you think like I do that sudden "Woman freedom"was exploited by various parties in court and within a family and turned it against the Men, good or bad regardless?
BTW, you sound like a great Lady. Where have you been all my life
We forgot about the main point raised here, is feminist movement damaging family and society or do you disagree with that?
Do you think like I do that sudden "Woman freedom"was exploited by various parties in court and within a family and turned it against the Men, good or bad regardless?
BTW, you sound like a great Lady. Where have you been all my life
reply to post by Apolon
That was ex-husband. My current husband is a much better specimen of the male species. You are correct though, in that experiences vary. That is why I love ATS.
We haven’t forgotten the main point, ot and I are simply investigating some of the deeper reasons why we feel that there is a conspiracy against manhood. The feminist movement has done tremendous damage to the family as well as the male/female gender role. Although they claim that gender roles should be non-existent, their push is to emasculate and imprison the male without his awareness. Their cry for equality is a ruse. They want females to be dominant and males to be submissive.
I think that many judges acted out of fear of the feminist agenda by treating all men as deadbeat lowlifes, rather than basing their decisions on the individual merits of each case. Not only is this an injustice to men, it is condescending to women.
Thank you. I’ve been out making many terrible mistakes, or as I like to say, gathering experience.
Originally posted by Apolon
It is individual thing and experience varies diametrically. I've had very bad experience with my ex girlfriend and so did you with your Husband.
That was ex-husband. My current husband is a much better specimen of the male species. You are correct though, in that experiences vary. That is why I love ATS.
We forgot about the main point raised here, is feminist movement damaging family and society or do you disagree with that?
We haven’t forgotten the main point, ot and I are simply investigating some of the deeper reasons why we feel that there is a conspiracy against manhood. The feminist movement has done tremendous damage to the family as well as the male/female gender role. Although they claim that gender roles should be non-existent, their push is to emasculate and imprison the male without his awareness. Their cry for equality is a ruse. They want females to be dominant and males to be submissive.
Do you think like I do that sudden "Woman freedom"was exploited by various parties in court and within a family and turned it against the Men, good or bad regardless?
I think that many judges acted out of fear of the feminist agenda by treating all men as deadbeat lowlifes, rather than basing their decisions on the individual merits of each case. Not only is this an injustice to men, it is condescending to women.
BTW, you sound like a great Lady. Where have you been all my life
Thank you. I’ve been out making many terrible mistakes, or as I like to say, gathering experience.
DarkElf,
Im afraid I am going to be a bit delayed here in reply over the next few days as my AC unit went out and I just pruchased another one today. I am waiting for todays femminist woman to install it for me while I drink beer and worry about my "victimization" and whether I will get a lie detector or DNA test out of this.
LOL LOL..I am in jest of course..though my large window unit went out and I did indeed just purchase another one. I do , however, need to do some modifications to the window before installing it.
It is not really hot here as of yet but I figure I'd best get one now rather than in the really hot months when I reckon the shelves will be low on stock.
Indeed it should be a joint decision. How about if the woman works and the man stays home and how often is this decision made?? Is equality happeing here??
You know ,I do somewhat notice something happening out here...more than in years past. I believe I notice a trend in women staying home more with thier children ..particularly in the earlier formative years. Have you noticed this?? I think it is a good thing for the children. Because of the children that more women seem to be delaying going back to work. Have you noticed this or am I imagining things here.
Wait a minute here again!!!!!?? Toys that men like??? There is something wrong with a many buying guy toys..or guy stuff?? I hear this mantra alot from different women. There seems to be some kind of implication that a man should not buy stuff he wants unless she approves it. It must meet some kind of criterion controlled and regulated by her.
Now if he purchases goodies without taking care of the family obligations first ..I dont go along with that. Family obligations come first...bills...payments ...etc etc. But if he is taking the RISK for this after taking care of the regular obligations first..what is the problem??
IN otherwords his boat payment does not come before the house payment...insurances, electric bill, food...et al.
You know the guy I was mentioning earlier with the van...he declared to us that he wanted a shotgun but the woman with whom he is living doesnt want him to have one. I cant believe he made such a statement around us at work. We all looked at each other with incredulity.
Now mind you once again..he should be taking care of his other obligations first. Before even thinking about getting a shotgun or other goodies.
Then he is ignorant enough to tell us that while he cannot afford gas for this van he bought primarily for this woman...but he bought her a new $600 to $700 plasma television. You know ..perhapsed this guy shouldnt own a shotgun with thinking like this. Perhapsed he really needs her running his program for him. This is the same girl who wanted to get to Pennsylvania soon.
If I want a goodie..I am going to get it ..but first certain other obligations need to be met...you dont put the cart before the horse like I was describing.
You know DarkElf..I was almost stupid enough to purchase one of those new fangled flat televisions ..a few months ago...when I suddenly realized I dont watch that much television. I told myself...."SNAP OUT OF IT!!"
I reckon I just heard so many people talking about it I didnt actually think it through with sufficiency. Such an item is now on my not worth the trouble list.
You know DarkElf..I may be speaking out of context here but I am not exactly sure what "toys" many males buy today as I have found that much of this gadgetry in magazines like GQ or Maxim is stuff in which I have no interest.
The woman I am seeing tells me that I buy big ticket items. For me that means like my Mopeds ..mostly for cheap transportation to and fro work. My wire feed welding machine...it has paid for itself with one or two good uses. I Know this because I know what a professional welder costs. My compound miter saw...used in installing my new windows...and other jobs afterwords. My ham radio setup...this one took alot of postponed gratification as it was purchased piece by piece over the years.
My guns and reloading tools...piece by piece once again...
I think that to many women there is no difference in any of this type stuff..they are all guy stuff and toys to them.
But nonetheless..Much of my stuff has payoffs later down the road in usage..not always immediate. And nonetheless..I purchased them after careful consideration as to RISKS and after taking care of other obligations first. No one bought them for me or "flashdanced " me through these purchases.
I cannot actually speak for other guys and thier "toys" here as I am not sure what guys are purchasing here. I see alot of guys .younger guys today really decked out ..with electronic gadgetry. I think it is a bit odd..but as long as they are taking care of thier other obligations first ..none of my buisness. It does seem a bit femminine in some of them. They have gadgets like some women have jewelry.
I also think that with many women their is some kind of belief/default ..that the moneys a guy would spend on his toys...is somehow cheating them...even though he is paying for this stuff...the correct setting is "at her discretion" but at his RISK. Not only the moneys ..but the time he spends with this stuff is also cheating her..as if it was competition...just like another woman.
LOL LOL..I also recall some young girl dumb enough to make a post some years ago..in the Relationship boards on BTS about guys and thier toys. The crux of the post was that these guys would rather play with their games and watch movies than pay attention to her. I couldnt help myself DarkElf because obviously her two brain cells here were running away from each other. I had to ask her what was her problem ...was she purchasing these goodies for these guys or just complaing about herself??
Now if she had purchased these goodies for these guys about which she was complaining perhapsed she had a beef...but if it was just about her ego ..no. I never did get a reply. Was this a default setting in motion...did she actually think no one would notice what was wrong with this picture??
I will not automatically buy into this position of many women about guys and their toys.
I agree..risks are taken by both ..but the value and motive behind the RISKS are very different when examined. Most men dont think much about certain RISKS and like many women ..they think it is their obligation and social duty to take certain risks without fully understanding the goal or even the nature of the RISKS. I can gaurantee you that more women understand the RISKS and faster than do most men.
However, the choices by social defaults are often much less for men than for women. And you are correct any male who will not stand up for his position learns soon that he has none...ie the guy wanting the shotgun but gets the van. I dont think this guy will ever know Peace in is life.
Really?? What is this type of male doing with his RISKS?? Is he spending his money on "toys" to the detriment of the family as do most American Males..according to the most vocal on this topic. Is he taking the moneys and then beating his woman while making her get him another beer?? Or is he out there taking RISKS for them with no safety net provided by his family. Otherwise is this view is not made clear and "explicit" it can easily become a default setting and normal that a man does this without any kind of safety net under him..while providing a safety net for the family..including "HER". Now I can take this further in the safety net role..and default by asking..what safety net does she provide for him...since this is about "HIM"...if she should happen to die first??
This type of decision often presupposes that the male is out there for HIM to begin with. What he does can be taken for granted/implicit because all males are supposed to be doing this. So if she goes to work it is to relieve him of a burden he should already be doing naturally..so it is all a given.. a default.
I have great difficulty with your position in that the decision to go to work and augment the males earning power is about the male. IT is to me as if saying that the decision for the male to take risks for the family is about him!! Her working is not about the family but about him ..because he does not make enough to give her "OPTIONS." Hence the default again.
Back to the option..ie..choice should be hers ..automatically by default.
This implys to me that she has no similar obligation or RISK here..nor no duty in this arena. The safety net is not a two way street..therefore the RISKS are also by default not a two way street.
When one begins to understand the concept of RISKS And a safety net..this changes ones view considerably. I have been working mostly on the concept of RISK ..but now also include the safety net ...concept sinced RISKS are taken to acquire the safety net...ie..security.
Continued...
Im afraid I am going to be a bit delayed here in reply over the next few days as my AC unit went out and I just pruchased another one today. I am waiting for todays femminist woman to install it for me while I drink beer and worry about my "victimization" and whether I will get a lie detector or DNA test out of this.
LOL LOL..I am in jest of course..though my large window unit went out and I did indeed just purchase another one. I do , however, need to do some modifications to the window before installing it.
It is not really hot here as of yet but I figure I'd best get one now rather than in the really hot months when I reckon the shelves will be low on stock.
The decision of whether or not a woman goes to work should be a joint decision
Indeed it should be a joint decision. How about if the woman works and the man stays home and how often is this decision made?? Is equality happeing here??
You know ,I do somewhat notice something happening out here...more than in years past. I believe I notice a trend in women staying home more with thier children ..particularly in the earlier formative years. Have you noticed this?? I think it is a good thing for the children. Because of the children that more women seem to be delaying going back to work. Have you noticed this or am I imagining things here.
I can tell you that often men want their SO to get a job so they can afford the toys that men like.
Wait a minute here again!!!!!?? Toys that men like??? There is something wrong with a many buying guy toys..or guy stuff?? I hear this mantra alot from different women. There seems to be some kind of implication that a man should not buy stuff he wants unless she approves it. It must meet some kind of criterion controlled and regulated by her.
Now if he purchases goodies without taking care of the family obligations first ..I dont go along with that. Family obligations come first...bills...payments ...etc etc. But if he is taking the RISK for this after taking care of the regular obligations first..what is the problem??
IN otherwords his boat payment does not come before the house payment...insurances, electric bill, food...et al.
You know the guy I was mentioning earlier with the van...he declared to us that he wanted a shotgun but the woman with whom he is living doesnt want him to have one. I cant believe he made such a statement around us at work. We all looked at each other with incredulity.
Now mind you once again..he should be taking care of his other obligations first. Before even thinking about getting a shotgun or other goodies.
Then he is ignorant enough to tell us that while he cannot afford gas for this van he bought primarily for this woman...but he bought her a new $600 to $700 plasma television. You know ..perhapsed this guy shouldnt own a shotgun with thinking like this. Perhapsed he really needs her running his program for him. This is the same girl who wanted to get to Pennsylvania soon.
If I want a goodie..I am going to get it ..but first certain other obligations need to be met...you dont put the cart before the horse like I was describing.
You know DarkElf..I was almost stupid enough to purchase one of those new fangled flat televisions ..a few months ago...when I suddenly realized I dont watch that much television. I told myself...."SNAP OUT OF IT!!"
I reckon I just heard so many people talking about it I didnt actually think it through with sufficiency. Such an item is now on my not worth the trouble list.
You know DarkElf..I may be speaking out of context here but I am not exactly sure what "toys" many males buy today as I have found that much of this gadgetry in magazines like GQ or Maxim is stuff in which I have no interest.
The woman I am seeing tells me that I buy big ticket items. For me that means like my Mopeds ..mostly for cheap transportation to and fro work. My wire feed welding machine...it has paid for itself with one or two good uses. I Know this because I know what a professional welder costs. My compound miter saw...used in installing my new windows...and other jobs afterwords. My ham radio setup...this one took alot of postponed gratification as it was purchased piece by piece over the years.
My guns and reloading tools...piece by piece once again...
I think that to many women there is no difference in any of this type stuff..they are all guy stuff and toys to them.
But nonetheless..Much of my stuff has payoffs later down the road in usage..not always immediate. And nonetheless..I purchased them after careful consideration as to RISKS and after taking care of other obligations first. No one bought them for me or "flashdanced " me through these purchases.
I cannot actually speak for other guys and thier "toys" here as I am not sure what guys are purchasing here. I see alot of guys .younger guys today really decked out ..with electronic gadgetry. I think it is a bit odd..but as long as they are taking care of thier other obligations first ..none of my buisness. It does seem a bit femminine in some of them. They have gadgets like some women have jewelry.
I also think that with many women their is some kind of belief/default ..that the moneys a guy would spend on his toys...is somehow cheating them...even though he is paying for this stuff...the correct setting is "at her discretion" but at his RISK. Not only the moneys ..but the time he spends with this stuff is also cheating her..as if it was competition...just like another woman.
LOL LOL..I also recall some young girl dumb enough to make a post some years ago..in the Relationship boards on BTS about guys and thier toys. The crux of the post was that these guys would rather play with their games and watch movies than pay attention to her. I couldnt help myself DarkElf because obviously her two brain cells here were running away from each other. I had to ask her what was her problem ...was she purchasing these goodies for these guys or just complaing about herself??
Now if she had purchased these goodies for these guys about which she was complaining perhapsed she had a beef...but if it was just about her ego ..no. I never did get a reply. Was this a default setting in motion...did she actually think no one would notice what was wrong with this picture??
I will not automatically buy into this position of many women about guys and their toys.
The risks are taken by both. The traditional roles are extremely difficult to overcome. Men still have choices. These choices should be discussed between the couple before they get married or move in together. A man who feels outrage over the societal position he has been placed in is not communicating adequately with his partner or has a very selfish one. Any male who will not stand up for his rights soon learns that he has none.
It’s not a matter of female vs. male angst. It’s a matter of both standing up for their rights and working together.
I agree..risks are taken by both ..but the value and motive behind the RISKS are very different when examined. Most men dont think much about certain RISKS and like many women ..they think it is their obligation and social duty to take certain risks without fully understanding the goal or even the nature of the RISKS. I can gaurantee you that more women understand the RISKS and faster than do most men.
However, the choices by social defaults are often much less for men than for women. And you are correct any male who will not stand up for his position learns soon that he has none...ie the guy wanting the shotgun but gets the van. I dont think this guy will ever know Peace in is life.
How are they not about the male? If the male was not in their life, they wouldn’t be making these decisions. The decision to augment the male’s earning power is about the male.
Really?? What is this type of male doing with his RISKS?? Is he spending his money on "toys" to the detriment of the family as do most American Males..according to the most vocal on this topic. Is he taking the moneys and then beating his woman while making her get him another beer?? Or is he out there taking RISKS for them with no safety net provided by his family. Otherwise is this view is not made clear and "explicit" it can easily become a default setting and normal that a man does this without any kind of safety net under him..while providing a safety net for the family..including "HER". Now I can take this further in the safety net role..and default by asking..what safety net does she provide for him...since this is about "HIM"...if she should happen to die first??
This type of decision often presupposes that the male is out there for HIM to begin with. What he does can be taken for granted/implicit because all males are supposed to be doing this. So if she goes to work it is to relieve him of a burden he should already be doing naturally..so it is all a given.. a default.
I have great difficulty with your position in that the decision to go to work and augment the males earning power is about the male. IT is to me as if saying that the decision for the male to take risks for the family is about him!! Her working is not about the family but about him ..because he does not make enough to give her "OPTIONS." Hence the default again.
Back to the option..ie..choice should be hers ..automatically by default.
This implys to me that she has no similar obligation or RISK here..nor no duty in this arena. The safety net is not a two way street..therefore the RISKS are also by default not a two way street.
When one begins to understand the concept of RISKS And a safety net..this changes ones view considerably. I have been working mostly on the concept of RISK ..but now also include the safety net ...concept sinced RISKS are taken to acquire the safety net...ie..security.
Continued...
continued...
I hear this position alot DarkElf. I can take this conversely too. How many women work 8 or more hours and come home to helping a man with his traditional chores around the home...repairs...and the risks that go with them.
What I hear is that men are not helping women with the housework. I dont hear about women helping the men with thier traditional difficultys around the home. Is todays Enlightened woman of substance arguing for the right to help a man with his traditional tasks, jobs and such around the home..often without a safety net under him here too...or is this only about HER??
I know alot of men who help thier women with traditional womens roles and also do thier roles with no safety net here....in addition to working 8 or more hours a day. Their roles are easily made implicit here ..not explicit in todays take for granted defaults to play through ...with the male as unseen and unheard. As you stated ..if the male does not stand up for himself...he has no voice. That is of what the OP and others often refer...no voice. Who wants to hear it in a world of defaults??
Safety net?? for the man?? This would presuppose that it is a man primary duty again..at great RISK to bring about a safety net in times of Equality happening. IT would also presuppose that there are no continuing obligations needing to be covered as a result of familyhood ...no continuing obligations would also lower the mans RISK out there among the wildlife. Is this the condition we find when the children are old enough to be in school...lowered obligations or more and increased oblgations?? This also presupposes that this is for the man ..not the "FAMILY."
This hints strongly at male expendability and disposability...no safety net for him.
DarkElf..how do you think most women intend it when they make a post like the one to which your quote above refers?? I base my understanding of this on the Cinderella Complex.
I agree..the key is honest communications. I will admit that most men are not good communicators. Also with many women when a man voices his concerns..about RISK and the nature of the SAFETY NET...many women are not intrested. They would rather be able to count on a man here..ie..default through ..than consider the risks. Many women today do not want to hear about a man's vulnurabilitys. Hence I often hear the famous..phrase..'Whatever!!" Translate ...that to mean ..you are dismissed.
I consider this to be a mans fault for putting up with such nonsense and lacking communications skills to get across his points. In this a man cedes his leadership position and also his manhood.
Gotta go ..lots to do this evening.
Thanks,
Orangetom
[edit on 17-5-2008 by orangetom1999]
What man wants to come home after eight or more hours of work to spend his few hours before a well-earned rest taking care of the house work and the children? Yes, many do, but many don’t.
I hear this position alot DarkElf. I can take this conversely too. How many women work 8 or more hours and come home to helping a man with his traditional chores around the home...repairs...and the risks that go with them.
What I hear is that men are not helping women with the housework. I dont hear about women helping the men with thier traditional difficultys around the home. Is todays Enlightened woman of substance arguing for the right to help a man with his traditional tasks, jobs and such around the home..often without a safety net under him here too...or is this only about HER??
I know alot of men who help thier women with traditional womens roles and also do thier roles with no safety net here....in addition to working 8 or more hours a day. Their roles are easily made implicit here ..not explicit in todays take for granted defaults to play through ...with the male as unseen and unheard. As you stated ..if the male does not stand up for himself...he has no voice. That is of what the OP and others often refer...no voice. Who wants to hear it in a world of defaults??
I see many women going back to work after their children are in school. These are usually wives of blue collar working men. These women are waitresses, secretaries, nurses, and a number of other lower paying career fields. Who is the risk for if not for the man?
Safety net?? for the man?? This would presuppose that it is a man primary duty again..at great RISK to bring about a safety net in times of Equality happening. IT would also presuppose that there are no continuing obligations needing to be covered as a result of familyhood ...no continuing obligations would also lower the mans RISK out there among the wildlife. Is this the condition we find when the children are old enough to be in school...lowered obligations or more and increased oblgations?? This also presupposes that this is for the man ..not the "FAMILY."
This hints strongly at male expendability and disposability...no safety net for him.
If you mean marketability in terms of her being able to get another spouse, I agree.
DarkElf..how do you think most women intend it when they make a post like the one to which your quote above refers?? I base my understanding of this on the Cinderella Complex.
I agree..the key is honest communications. I will admit that most men are not good communicators. Also with many women when a man voices his concerns..about RISK and the nature of the SAFETY NET...many women are not intrested. They would rather be able to count on a man here..ie..default through ..than consider the risks. Many women today do not want to hear about a man's vulnurabilitys. Hence I often hear the famous..phrase..'Whatever!!" Translate ...that to mean ..you are dismissed.
I consider this to be a mans fault for putting up with such nonsense and lacking communications skills to get across his points. In this a man cedes his leadership position and also his manhood.
Gotta go ..lots to do this evening.
Thanks,
Orangetom
[edit on 17-5-2008 by orangetom1999]
I began re reading this thread from page 1 for various details and ran across this on page 2. It is a quote from Marigold on helping with chores
around the home. I found it intresting in support of my position in the post above this one.
Here is what many of you guys miss out on in this concept which is often allowed to pass or play through by default. You guys are so femminized that you let this dreck play thorugh undebated and unchallanged. You cannot seem to think it through.
Notice here that Marigold is not arguing for the right or privelege of helping him with his household chores. Especially those which involve great discomforture, harsh conditions, or RISK. Do you see this in her statement?? Her statement is about HER!! This is textbook and many males cower under this kind of attack or default setting.
Now, a position can be argued here that her settings are about the family and division of labor..yes they are. Nonetheless she is still not arguing for helping him with his traditional chores involving great discomforture, harsh conditions, or RISK...even though these jobs help the family too.
Notice also how a female can make such a statement which is so obviously bogus once you know the pattern...because she thinks it will not be challanged. She knows with in certain reason that a man will in fact be speechless at this concept when presented in a certain light. and he will stumble at discovering the light or position I am demonstrating here.
Watch carefully in the future for this kind of statement to be repeated over ...this kind of default where you are supposed to be speechless and allow it to play through unchallanged..unquestioned.
I am not saying that it is wrong to help your mate with chores..not at all. I am saying that this is often not a two way street. IT looks good on paper. It is just not happening. Do not be intimidated by this concept. It is often not honest when you think it through. It is often defaulted by this kind of subtilty passing for intelligence and sophistication.
This is exactly how subtilty is used in defeating tostesterone...easily...and with little effort. It is RISK MANAGEMENT.
Think!!!!
Thanks,
Orangetom
[edit on 21-5-2008 by orangetom1999]
I think the feminization of men...( is it so bad that hubby helps with dishes now...?) is a result of our changing lifestyles. As much as I may like my brute to pick me up over his shoulder and protect me from evil intentions the truth is he is needed to help wash the dishes, take care of the children and plan the dinner party because I'm at work.
Why does "feminine" has this negative connotation?
Here is what many of you guys miss out on in this concept which is often allowed to pass or play through by default. You guys are so femminized that you let this dreck play thorugh undebated and unchallanged. You cannot seem to think it through.
Notice here that Marigold is not arguing for the right or privelege of helping him with his household chores. Especially those which involve great discomforture, harsh conditions, or RISK. Do you see this in her statement?? Her statement is about HER!! This is textbook and many males cower under this kind of attack or default setting.
Now, a position can be argued here that her settings are about the family and division of labor..yes they are. Nonetheless she is still not arguing for helping him with his traditional chores involving great discomforture, harsh conditions, or RISK...even though these jobs help the family too.
Notice also how a female can make such a statement which is so obviously bogus once you know the pattern...because she thinks it will not be challanged. She knows with in certain reason that a man will in fact be speechless at this concept when presented in a certain light. and he will stumble at discovering the light or position I am demonstrating here.
Watch carefully in the future for this kind of statement to be repeated over ...this kind of default where you are supposed to be speechless and allow it to play through unchallanged..unquestioned.
I am not saying that it is wrong to help your mate with chores..not at all. I am saying that this is often not a two way street. IT looks good on paper. It is just not happening. Do not be intimidated by this concept. It is often not honest when you think it through. It is often defaulted by this kind of subtilty passing for intelligence and sophistication.
This is exactly how subtilty is used in defeating tostesterone...easily...and with little effort. It is RISK MANAGEMENT.
Think!!!!
Thanks,
Orangetom
[edit on 21-5-2008 by orangetom1999]
O.T., you talk about a woman not helping with the traditional male chores but insisting on the man helping with the traditional female chores. I
have to ask: how often does the lawn need mowing or the washer need fixing? Mowing and taking out trash are once a week chores; whereas, dinner
needs to be cooked every night. Beds must be made every day as well as the dishes washed at least once a day. Kids must be bathed daily. School
lunches fixed daily. There is an endless list of chores that women are expected to do as "traditional" female chores and there's very little time
for rest and relaxation in a 24 hour day if all of them must be done. Unless you have a hill giant living in your house, repairs are minimal and
rarely required.
Exactly how much risk is involved in taking out the trash or mowing the lawn? I suppose one could catch botulism from emptying trash and not washing hands afterward or possibly cut ones foot from mowing without wearing proper footwear. Hammering things and plumbing repairs come with some risk (I've got the sore thumbs to prove it).
On the other hand, pushing a heavy vaccuum cleaner through a 2300 square foot house daily can really take a toll on your back. Anyone can be a primary caregiver of small children for a weekend; it's the lifetime that gets ya. It's the relentlessness of "womens work" that makes us cry out for a break.
Having done both traditional roles, I can attest that working only 8 hours and then coming home to a clean house, home-cooked meal, adoring children that I can affectionately pat on the head then get someone else to deal with all the tedious work of dealing with them is much easier than being that someone else who has to do whatever the other person doesn't want to do.
When I was married, my husband worked 8 hours a day on a ship in which he spent the majority of that 8 hours playing computer games on his office computer. I worked 12 hours a day in critical care where I was so busy that I seldom got time to pee in 12 hours. Then I came home where he'd been sitting for hours waiting for me to get home so I could could fix him some dinner. My older child watched the younger child those few hours (for which I paid her handsomely out of my personal earnings) until I got home and could relieve her of that responsibility. I had an infant child that woke up needing to be fed and changed and held at least twice a night. He couldn't get up with the baby because he had to go to work in the morning. Never mind that I had to get up and go to work in the morning too AND had to get up an hour early to cook his breakfast. I took care of the lawn, the home repairs, the bills being paid on time, the meal planning, budgeting, cooking, cleaning, car repairs, etc. ad nauseum. When he had the unmitigated temerity to complain that he was "stressed" I told him that he was really whinning to the wrong person. But he was "the man and had all this responsibility". Whaaa.
I think that most guys don't deserve a woman. Then again, I don't think most guys are MEN. There are an alarming number of females who don't deserve a man, either. In fact, there are few PEOPLE of substance anywhere to be found. Without mutuality and respect and genuine compassion for one another, the endless bickering over particular hardships faced by the sexes will continue unabated and unresolved. Each should hold the other in the highest esteem; willingly forfeiting small comforts for the others comfort if need be. When all the sacrifices are made by one and not the other, then resentment creeps in. Then tit-for-tat begins to be tallied on the score card and each will weigh their own contributions more heavily than their partner's. Before you know it, you're arguing over who gets possession of the bean bag chair or some such nonsense. The gender war is, imho, the silliest of all the "non-wars" (think war on poverty, war on illiteracy).
When you talk about risks, the large picture with all its intricacies needs to be factored. It's not just who does what task but how often are those tasks required, how much time overall is consumed in the tasks. I would much rather spend 90 minutes a week in the hot sun mowing the lawn than to spend 90 minutes a week planning color-coordinated, nutritious and inexpensive meals for a family with picky eating habits and fastidious dietary requirements then spending another 90 minutes a week fighting the crowds at the grocery store picking up those needed items so that I can then spend 90 EVERY DAY preparing them.
I could go on and on about this subject but we'd probably bore the poor lurkers to death. Let it suffice to say that, while I agree with you on most of your outlook regarding "default" settings, I disagree with some of what constitutes those alleged defaults. I'm struggling with your notion of "risks" because, while I understand what you mean, I don't think you're seeing the whole picture. Then again, I could be totally mistaken.
Exactly how much risk is involved in taking out the trash or mowing the lawn? I suppose one could catch botulism from emptying trash and not washing hands afterward or possibly cut ones foot from mowing without wearing proper footwear. Hammering things and plumbing repairs come with some risk (I've got the sore thumbs to prove it).
On the other hand, pushing a heavy vaccuum cleaner through a 2300 square foot house daily can really take a toll on your back. Anyone can be a primary caregiver of small children for a weekend; it's the lifetime that gets ya. It's the relentlessness of "womens work" that makes us cry out for a break.
Having done both traditional roles, I can attest that working only 8 hours and then coming home to a clean house, home-cooked meal, adoring children that I can affectionately pat on the head then get someone else to deal with all the tedious work of dealing with them is much easier than being that someone else who has to do whatever the other person doesn't want to do.
When I was married, my husband worked 8 hours a day on a ship in which he spent the majority of that 8 hours playing computer games on his office computer. I worked 12 hours a day in critical care where I was so busy that I seldom got time to pee in 12 hours. Then I came home where he'd been sitting for hours waiting for me to get home so I could could fix him some dinner. My older child watched the younger child those few hours (for which I paid her handsomely out of my personal earnings) until I got home and could relieve her of that responsibility. I had an infant child that woke up needing to be fed and changed and held at least twice a night. He couldn't get up with the baby because he had to go to work in the morning. Never mind that I had to get up and go to work in the morning too AND had to get up an hour early to cook his breakfast. I took care of the lawn, the home repairs, the bills being paid on time, the meal planning, budgeting, cooking, cleaning, car repairs, etc. ad nauseum. When he had the unmitigated temerity to complain that he was "stressed" I told him that he was really whinning to the wrong person. But he was "the man and had all this responsibility". Whaaa.
I think that most guys don't deserve a woman. Then again, I don't think most guys are MEN. There are an alarming number of females who don't deserve a man, either. In fact, there are few PEOPLE of substance anywhere to be found. Without mutuality and respect and genuine compassion for one another, the endless bickering over particular hardships faced by the sexes will continue unabated and unresolved. Each should hold the other in the highest esteem; willingly forfeiting small comforts for the others comfort if need be. When all the sacrifices are made by one and not the other, then resentment creeps in. Then tit-for-tat begins to be tallied on the score card and each will weigh their own contributions more heavily than their partner's. Before you know it, you're arguing over who gets possession of the bean bag chair or some such nonsense. The gender war is, imho, the silliest of all the "non-wars" (think war on poverty, war on illiteracy).
When you talk about risks, the large picture with all its intricacies needs to be factored. It's not just who does what task but how often are those tasks required, how much time overall is consumed in the tasks. I would much rather spend 90 minutes a week in the hot sun mowing the lawn than to spend 90 minutes a week planning color-coordinated, nutritious and inexpensive meals for a family with picky eating habits and fastidious dietary requirements then spending another 90 minutes a week fighting the crowds at the grocery store picking up those needed items so that I can then spend 90 EVERY DAY preparing them.
I could go on and on about this subject but we'd probably bore the poor lurkers to death. Let it suffice to say that, while I agree with you on most of your outlook regarding "default" settings, I disagree with some of what constitutes those alleged defaults. I'm struggling with your notion of "risks" because, while I understand what you mean, I don't think you're seeing the whole picture. Then again, I could be totally mistaken.
Rockefeller himself has been quoted as saying that "they" were behind the womens right movement, which it's goal was to destroy the American
family.
Be that as it may, it doesn't address the above mentioned issues. Are you suggesting that because the Rockefellers introduced a concept, that is
being implemented as a divisive tool, that the concept of women being as valuable as men has no merit? Do you recommend that women keep their
biscuits in the oven and their buns in bed? What would you advise as a viable alternative?
reply to post by whitewave
Hello Whitewave,
How good to see your post again. Let me begin with this.
This depends on the size of the family and also the size of the yard. Familys with large high speed lane members generate alot of trash and it needs taking out several times a week. I am also not talking about just mowing the lawn but this equipment also needs taking care of and repairs. Who is going to take this RISK and expense??
Also when the children are olde enough they need to be expanding into these areas..including how to take care of this equipment in order to make it last and cut down on expenses. All the children..not just the males. Children should be taught how to have more than just two speeds....wide open and off.
Making beds...surely you jest here? Children when olde enough should also be taught how to make beds and pick up after themselves. From my personal standpoint ..I dont think much of parents who do not teach thier children these basic skills. Picking up after themselves and making beds..this is just the begining.
To me there is no reason a woman should be making beds for children after they are olde enough to do it themselves..including changing bedding.
There is something very wrong to me with parents and children both ..who dont know much more than how to work a telephone keypad and remote controller...ie..computer keyboard and mouse.
Familys go through alot of towels..ie..laundry..Children should also be taught these helping skills begining at young ages. Some facet of helping out here. Then going on to larger roles in this job as they become more capable.
There is absolutely no reason for a woman or a man to be doing alot of laundry chores when they have teens who can mostly watch movies and get on the computer...ie telephone skills. This is nuts.
I have told several women I dated that they are not doing thier children any favors by being in the kitchen till 9 or 10 at night while the kids watch tv and talk on the phone...computer...et al. This is nuts.
Children should also be learning to help prepare dinner for everyone.in some capacity ..if it is even helping to set the table. Then helping with the dishes and trash..etc. There is no reason for the man or woman to be doing this till late at night while the children once again talk on the phone and watch TV or movies. That is nuts. I know several single women who are doing all this for their teenage children till late at night. It is nuts..as if they feel inadequate if they dont cater to their every whim or instruction/expecatation if they dont do this for the kids. These adults need a serious brain enema. THey are not doinig these kids any favors here. These women are nuts. Their kids are literally running the show and these women into the ground.
Get rid of those stinking pagers, cell phones and other drivel and put them to work and taking care of some responsibility ..not options.
Wait a minute..you dont mind cutting grass..for 90 minutes.. are you nuts?? I hate cutting grass..and I have a riding lawn mower.
I am batting my eyes at you Whitewave..to rescue me from this drudgery...please...flashdance me through these chores.!!!!?? Blink Blink Blink!!!
As a matter of fact..I need to get it cut in the next couple of days. I dont want to be messing with it on the weekend. BLINK BLINK BLINK!!!
As to the vacuum cleaner ..every woman I know claims the vacuum cleaner is to heavy. They never had any of these new fangled light vacuum cleaners when I was coming up. They were metal.
Also no reason the kids cannot learn to do this over time.
While I dont like to hang out to much of my laundry ..I have had a couple of women and kids live with me in times past. I taught thier kids how to do much of this stuff rather than just pit stopping. It does take a bit of longsuffering as many kids are not long on the attention span. You must be very patient with many of them..women too. YOu must make it clear that there is no reason to accept second hand conduct while giving first hand conduct on your end. I do not think many women are accustomed to hearing this from a male.
Having women and kids living with me was also quite an education in how quickly home items and appliances can break down...also how quickly trash can pile up. Laundry too.
I have worked with children..both in fixing meals for them and helping them to learn how to do much of this stuff themselves. I have no problems changing diapers either. For some reason many women think this is such a horror to many males. Perhapsed it is...just not to me.
It is amazing to me how many single women have kids which are in some capacity running the show. I have had to break some of these kids from sticking stuff in the shopping cart..because they want it and mom lets them do it. This is nuts. I couldnt believe some women let their kids get away with this type of conduct. Not on my dollars they dont ..nor on my RISKS. I would ask them once in awhile what they wanted or needed...but it was not a given that they could just stick stuff they wanted in the shopping cart and expect others to automatically pay for it.
Proper parents teach thier kids how to survive against the day they will no longer be there to pick them up and wipe their bloody noses every time the fall. This Whitewave..is true love. Not conveniences and options...ie...goodies.
This also means teaching them the thinking and rationale behind this behavior...proper survival skills.
This is proper teaching and goals ..male and female. It i also properly loving their children.
NOw as to a male helping..I know men and women who have taught thier children how to do many of these things. Do you think that even relieved of much of this direct burden..the women will be taking up many of the traditional male chores with thier attendent risks/expenses?? How about once the children begin leaving the nest..do the women then take up more traditional male chores??
IM going to state it once again..are women arguing for the right to take up traditional male chores at any time or age...or are they wanting the male to take up more of HER traditional chores??
I agree with you in that many people male and female dont think this through...or deserve their mates.
This stuff just does not work well with me as a good point or definition...of RISKS because I have done much of this stuff women think is such drudgery. Also working 12 hour days too....Well..12 hour nights is more like it.
This type of argument or debate point is also what began to clue me into the concept in many women of slowly and subtily changing my value systems out with her's. Including the RISKS. Almost none of them were willing or desiring to do it the other way around. When it was time for me to do my thing...I was out there alone..no safety net. Still am.
By the way....
Yeah...I know about this..having worked on both submarines and aircraft carriers. Seen alot of this. Made me wonder if some of these people would make it in the civilian market. I've had numerous of these types work with me...some of them are some real lightweights. I cant stand that when the going gets tough..some cannot stand to get to far from the coffee pot, the microwave and the fridge. Today it is also far from their cell phones and text messaging.
Thanks for your post,
Orangetom
Hello Whitewave,
How good to see your post again. Let me begin with this.
I have to ask: how often does the lawn need mowing or the washer need fixing?
This depends on the size of the family and also the size of the yard. Familys with large high speed lane members generate alot of trash and it needs taking out several times a week. I am also not talking about just mowing the lawn but this equipment also needs taking care of and repairs. Who is going to take this RISK and expense??
Also when the children are olde enough they need to be expanding into these areas..including how to take care of this equipment in order to make it last and cut down on expenses. All the children..not just the males. Children should be taught how to have more than just two speeds....wide open and off.
Making beds...surely you jest here? Children when olde enough should also be taught how to make beds and pick up after themselves. From my personal standpoint ..I dont think much of parents who do not teach thier children these basic skills. Picking up after themselves and making beds..this is just the begining.
To me there is no reason a woman should be making beds for children after they are olde enough to do it themselves..including changing bedding.
There is something very wrong to me with parents and children both ..who dont know much more than how to work a telephone keypad and remote controller...ie..computer keyboard and mouse.
Familys go through alot of towels..ie..laundry..Children should also be taught these helping skills begining at young ages. Some facet of helping out here. Then going on to larger roles in this job as they become more capable.
There is absolutely no reason for a woman or a man to be doing alot of laundry chores when they have teens who can mostly watch movies and get on the computer...ie telephone skills. This is nuts.
I have told several women I dated that they are not doing thier children any favors by being in the kitchen till 9 or 10 at night while the kids watch tv and talk on the phone...computer...et al. This is nuts.
Children should also be learning to help prepare dinner for everyone.in some capacity ..if it is even helping to set the table. Then helping with the dishes and trash..etc. There is no reason for the man or woman to be doing this till late at night while the children once again talk on the phone and watch TV or movies. That is nuts. I know several single women who are doing all this for their teenage children till late at night. It is nuts..as if they feel inadequate if they dont cater to their every whim or instruction/expecatation if they dont do this for the kids. These adults need a serious brain enema. THey are not doinig these kids any favors here. These women are nuts. Their kids are literally running the show and these women into the ground.
Get rid of those stinking pagers, cell phones and other drivel and put them to work and taking care of some responsibility ..not options.
Wait a minute..you dont mind cutting grass..for 90 minutes.. are you nuts?? I hate cutting grass..and I have a riding lawn mower.
I am batting my eyes at you Whitewave..to rescue me from this drudgery...please...flashdance me through these chores.!!!!?? Blink Blink Blink!!!
As a matter of fact..I need to get it cut in the next couple of days. I dont want to be messing with it on the weekend. BLINK BLINK BLINK!!!
As to the vacuum cleaner ..every woman I know claims the vacuum cleaner is to heavy. They never had any of these new fangled light vacuum cleaners when I was coming up. They were metal.
Also no reason the kids cannot learn to do this over time.
While I dont like to hang out to much of my laundry ..I have had a couple of women and kids live with me in times past. I taught thier kids how to do much of this stuff rather than just pit stopping. It does take a bit of longsuffering as many kids are not long on the attention span. You must be very patient with many of them..women too. YOu must make it clear that there is no reason to accept second hand conduct while giving first hand conduct on your end. I do not think many women are accustomed to hearing this from a male.
Having women and kids living with me was also quite an education in how quickly home items and appliances can break down...also how quickly trash can pile up. Laundry too.
I have worked with children..both in fixing meals for them and helping them to learn how to do much of this stuff themselves. I have no problems changing diapers either. For some reason many women think this is such a horror to many males. Perhapsed it is...just not to me.
It is amazing to me how many single women have kids which are in some capacity running the show. I have had to break some of these kids from sticking stuff in the shopping cart..because they want it and mom lets them do it. This is nuts. I couldnt believe some women let their kids get away with this type of conduct. Not on my dollars they dont ..nor on my RISKS. I would ask them once in awhile what they wanted or needed...but it was not a given that they could just stick stuff they wanted in the shopping cart and expect others to automatically pay for it.
Proper parents teach thier kids how to survive against the day they will no longer be there to pick them up and wipe their bloody noses every time the fall. This Whitewave..is true love. Not conveniences and options...ie...goodies.
This also means teaching them the thinking and rationale behind this behavior...proper survival skills.
This is proper teaching and goals ..male and female. It i also properly loving their children.
NOw as to a male helping..I know men and women who have taught thier children how to do many of these things. Do you think that even relieved of much of this direct burden..the women will be taking up many of the traditional male chores with thier attendent risks/expenses?? How about once the children begin leaving the nest..do the women then take up more traditional male chores??
IM going to state it once again..are women arguing for the right to take up traditional male chores at any time or age...or are they wanting the male to take up more of HER traditional chores??
I agree with you in that many people male and female dont think this through...or deserve their mates.
This stuff just does not work well with me as a good point or definition...of RISKS because I have done much of this stuff women think is such drudgery. Also working 12 hour days too....Well..12 hour nights is more like it.
This type of argument or debate point is also what began to clue me into the concept in many women of slowly and subtily changing my value systems out with her's. Including the RISKS. Almost none of them were willing or desiring to do it the other way around. When it was time for me to do my thing...I was out there alone..no safety net. Still am.
By the way....
When I was married, my husband worked 8 hours a day on a ship in which he spent the majority of that 8 hours playing computer games on his office computer.
Yeah...I know about this..having worked on both submarines and aircraft carriers. Seen alot of this. Made me wonder if some of these people would make it in the civilian market. I've had numerous of these types work with me...some of them are some real lightweights. I cant stand that when the going gets tough..some cannot stand to get to far from the coffee pot, the microwave and the fridge. Today it is also far from their cell phones and text messaging.
Thanks for your post,
Orangetom
reply to post by Shazam The Unbowed
I did not read this entire post but I did get the jist of it and I wanted to reply as best I could. First, I do not think it is fair to pair all women together because you may feel emasculated by some women or the feminist movement. I, as a woman, want to move ahead in life, that is my right. I do not need my husband, if I had one, to approve if I wanted to sell my land, as I would have needed to years ago. And I can vote if I want to.
I am a woman. I am free. I can do as I please. I do not care what society thinks of me. I do not feel there is any conspiracy that you speak of. I feel you may be paranoid or feel your manly space has been invaded. BUT remember this MANLY space wasn't yours alone to begin with.
I do know women, a lot of them, are still discriminated against, from personal experience. I do not care what data you link me to, I know from personal experience it does exist and I also know, from personal experience, that if a man were doing my job, he would be paid more money for the same job! So, that being said. When writing, try to use more critical thinking and not so much group thinking. I know, free speech, free speech! LOL
Cheers!
I did not read this entire post but I did get the jist of it and I wanted to reply as best I could. First, I do not think it is fair to pair all women together because you may feel emasculated by some women or the feminist movement. I, as a woman, want to move ahead in life, that is my right. I do not need my husband, if I had one, to approve if I wanted to sell my land, as I would have needed to years ago. And I can vote if I want to.
I am a woman. I am free. I can do as I please. I do not care what society thinks of me. I do not feel there is any conspiracy that you speak of. I feel you may be paranoid or feel your manly space has been invaded. BUT remember this MANLY space wasn't yours alone to begin with.
I do know women, a lot of them, are still discriminated against, from personal experience. I do not care what data you link me to, I know from personal experience it does exist and I also know, from personal experience, that if a man were doing my job, he would be paid more money for the same job! So, that being said. When writing, try to use more critical thinking and not so much group thinking. I know, free speech, free speech! LOL
Cheers!
reply to post by princessjade
Here we go again...textbook mantra. No problem.
I feel the need to post a link I just made..a post in the BTS boards to PrincessJades previous post before her above post.
This is in order for some of you to understand the fingerprint often attempting to play through unchallanged and undebated.
Here is the link,
www.abovetopsecret.com...
You guys need to be aware and train yourself to spot these textbook fingerprints..you are going to run into them more and more in the years to come.
Thanks,
Orangetom
Here we go again...textbook mantra. No problem.
I feel the need to post a link I just made..a post in the BTS boards to PrincessJades previous post before her above post.
This is in order for some of you to understand the fingerprint often attempting to play through unchallanged and undebated.
Here is the link,
www.abovetopsecret.com...
You guys need to be aware and train yourself to spot these textbook fingerprints..you are going to run into them more and more in the years to come.
Thanks,
Orangetom
Your point, OrangeTom? I posted on another forum about women and rights and so forth? What's your point? Did you even read it? Or even understand it,
for that matter?
Cheers!
Cheers!
I agree completely that there is a consiracy against men in our society. I am also completely convinced that this is part of a wider plan to devalue
and derail the family structure.
Looking at the media this week I see that in Australia they are removing the word 'father' from a child's birth certificate (already done in many jurisdictions. all to appease lesbian couples conceiving through IVF) while in Britain the commons defeated a law to put an obligation on IVF clinics to make enquiries of single women and lesbian clients whether the child will have a father figure or male role model.
All this in spite of increasing evidence of the damage caused to children who grow up in a fatherless household?
This isn't about men v women either.
In my experience men who hold more traditional views have more inherent respect for women than namby-pamby sensitive types who say all the right things but treat women like so much trash.
Looking at the media this week I see that in Australia they are removing the word 'father' from a child's birth certificate (already done in many jurisdictions. all to appease lesbian couples conceiving through IVF) while in Britain the commons defeated a law to put an obligation on IVF clinics to make enquiries of single women and lesbian clients whether the child will have a father figure or male role model.
All this in spite of increasing evidence of the damage caused to children who grow up in a fatherless household?
This isn't about men v women either.
In my experience men who hold more traditional views have more inherent respect for women than namby-pamby sensitive types who say all the right things but treat women like so much trash.
reply to post by ElusiveGoddess
Wow!!! Very perceptive of you Elusive Goddess...very perceptive..well done. Well stated.
I agree with the overall premise. It is against the family unit.
As to Australia and England..I have posted that these nations are further down the road than here in the USA in the religious dogma of Male Expendability and Disposability. I did not know the details of what you are speaking concerning the birth certificates but it does not particularly surprise me...it will continue down other roads and rapidly.
THanks for your post.
PrincessJade,
This thread is about the Conspiracy against manhood. You are giving veracity to the concept I have posted of replacing a mans value system with the thinking and values of a woman. You are once again verifying the existance of this dictum..this dogma..this religion.
What you are not doing is debating the points presented here. Also if you want to do this..please post a link to the thread you reference..in similar manner to what I did a few posts above. Also debate the points ..one by one...not switch to female rights.
This thread is not about Male rights per se...it is about the Conspiracy Against Manhood.
It does not look good as a technique to substitute the thread with Female Rights...unless of course the males on this thread cannot think past their tostesterone values. In this manner you will be verify my point about replacing male value systems with female values. I have specifically made this point to the males here on this thread. You will also clearly demonstrate my point that many females think it will not be noticed...therefore they can play or default through...unquestioned or unchallanged.
I am curious here as to how many of the males posting on this thread will be able to identify the fingerprint.
Hope you can make note of this.
Thanks to all for thier posts,
Orangetom
Wow!!! Very perceptive of you Elusive Goddess...very perceptive..well done. Well stated.
I agree with the overall premise. It is against the family unit.
As to Australia and England..I have posted that these nations are further down the road than here in the USA in the religious dogma of Male Expendability and Disposability. I did not know the details of what you are speaking concerning the birth certificates but it does not particularly surprise me...it will continue down other roads and rapidly.
THanks for your post.
PrincessJade,
This thread is about the Conspiracy against manhood. You are giving veracity to the concept I have posted of replacing a mans value system with the thinking and values of a woman. You are once again verifying the existance of this dictum..this dogma..this religion.
What you are not doing is debating the points presented here. Also if you want to do this..please post a link to the thread you reference..in similar manner to what I did a few posts above. Also debate the points ..one by one...not switch to female rights.
This thread is not about Male rights per se...it is about the Conspiracy Against Manhood.
It does not look good as a technique to substitute the thread with Female Rights...unless of course the males on this thread cannot think past their tostesterone values. In this manner you will be verify my point about replacing male value systems with female values. I have specifically made this point to the males here on this thread. You will also clearly demonstrate my point that many females think it will not be noticed...therefore they can play or default through...unquestioned or unchallanged.
I am curious here as to how many of the males posting on this thread will be able to identify the fingerprint.
Hope you can make note of this.
Thanks to all for thier posts,
Orangetom
OrangeTom,
I have been a lurker for quite some time and I have come to realize that the bashing or just plain rudeness is getting out of hand. Your comments to princess are quite rude. I think you could have handled it a little bit better. So what if she got off topic, she wasn't the only person to do so. No one is perfect.
Your grammar and spelling stink. No one is perfect, your grammar and spelling are proof!
Try being a little more kind even though she is a woman?
I have been a lurker for quite some time and I have come to realize that the bashing or just plain rudeness is getting out of hand. Your comments to princess are quite rude. I think you could have handled it a little bit better. So what if she got off topic, she wasn't the only person to do so. No one is perfect.
Your grammar and spelling stink. No one is perfect, your grammar and spelling are proof!
Try being a little more kind even though she is a woman?
Originally posted by madonnarules
OrangeTom,
I have been a lurker for quite some time and I have come to realize that the bashing or just plain rudeness is getting out of hand. Your comments to princess are quite rude. I think you could have handled it a little bit better. So what if she got off topic, she wasn't the only person to do so. No one is perfect.
Your grammar and spelling stink. No one is perfect, your grammar and spelling are proof!
Try being a little more kind even though she is a woman?
Im sorry Madonnarules,
I am losing the point you are trying to make here. My understanding is that I explained to PrincessJade that what she is attempting to do ..Hijacking this thread to womens rights...is precisely what I mentioned in previous posts on this thread and doing this is Rude?? If she wants to do so ..go ahead..I merely point out that it is a common technique and done so boldly now days that it should be allowed to play through unchallanged..unquestioned. Bringing up this point and view is rude??
This technique is that to which I refer in previous posts as a default setting.
Pointing this out is rude??
Disagreement is rude?? Pointing out this disagreement is rude??
I also pointed out that if she is wont to do this technique..switch over to womens rights..please post the link. Doing this is rude??
Disagreement is now rudeness???
Grammer and spelling are not the point on ATS/BTS/PTS. It is however core technique to many out here in attempting to make their points ..or get the concept off on a tangent. To distract..to default through.
Please elaborate more extensively on this so that I and the other readers on this thread can understand with more comprehension.
Thanks,
Orangetom
I do not think there is a conspiracy to destroy manliness, personally.
I think there is a quite overt campaign to deny bearers of the Y chromosome that cant handle their business by providing for themselves and their children, and refraining from exploiting women some special privilege and status simply by virtue of that Y chromosome alone.
If "manliness" is defined as the God given right to have the final say regardless of ones merit as an intellect, and the right to have a personal servant bound to him by law that is expected to cook, clean, bear children and perform various sexual acts on demand, AND the right to exclude women from the job market in order to maintain some sort of financial stranglehold on women and/or use battery legally to force them to accept these terms, then yes, there is a conspiracy against manliness.
Since there are plenty of men who manage to marry, have families, and jobs, and be happy without having to have some method of forcing women to consent, I would have to say that men that are truly manly cannot be and have not been stripped of anything.
The idea that families were these "Leave it to Beaver"-esque utopias prior to the 1960's, (or the 1920's when woman gained the right to vote in the US) is just not founded in fact. Television sitcoms do not provide an accurate depiction of what was actually occurring in the world. Long before the "womens movement" there were men who abandoned their families, or beat them, or failed to provide for them by working, the difference was that the women in those times had little choice but to put up with it.
It would seem to me that there was the same percentage of lousy men in the world in the past as there is today, and the same percentage of lousy women as well. (Because women are not exempt from bad behaviour) And conversely it seems to me there are a pretty fair number of great men and women in the world today as well.
Many of the people that make these claims about the womens movement also tend to be politically conservative. In business, according to conservative economic theory, competition and free markets are touted as making the economy stronger. Using that same principle, the fact that women and men are in a more competitive position should make the men that do well MORE manly, not less.
Of course in any competition, there are going to be participants who lose, and these participants will not be happy. And they will complain that a "protectionist" policy for their special interest group is favorable.
I think there is a quite overt campaign to deny bearers of the Y chromosome that cant handle their business by providing for themselves and their children, and refraining from exploiting women some special privilege and status simply by virtue of that Y chromosome alone.
If "manliness" is defined as the God given right to have the final say regardless of ones merit as an intellect, and the right to have a personal servant bound to him by law that is expected to cook, clean, bear children and perform various sexual acts on demand, AND the right to exclude women from the job market in order to maintain some sort of financial stranglehold on women and/or use battery legally to force them to accept these terms, then yes, there is a conspiracy against manliness.
Since there are plenty of men who manage to marry, have families, and jobs, and be happy without having to have some method of forcing women to consent, I would have to say that men that are truly manly cannot be and have not been stripped of anything.
The idea that families were these "Leave it to Beaver"-esque utopias prior to the 1960's, (or the 1920's when woman gained the right to vote in the US) is just not founded in fact. Television sitcoms do not provide an accurate depiction of what was actually occurring in the world. Long before the "womens movement" there were men who abandoned their families, or beat them, or failed to provide for them by working, the difference was that the women in those times had little choice but to put up with it.
It would seem to me that there was the same percentage of lousy men in the world in the past as there is today, and the same percentage of lousy women as well. (Because women are not exempt from bad behaviour) And conversely it seems to me there are a pretty fair number of great men and women in the world today as well.
Many of the people that make these claims about the womens movement also tend to be politically conservative. In business, according to conservative economic theory, competition and free markets are touted as making the economy stronger. Using that same principle, the fact that women and men are in a more competitive position should make the men that do well MORE manly, not less.
Of course in any competition, there are going to be participants who lose, and these participants will not be happy. And they will complain that a "protectionist" policy for their special interest group is favorable.
reply to post by orangetom1999
OrangeTom,
My point being:
I pointed out something off topic: Your grammar and spelling. Princess pointed out something off topic: Women's rights. So what? Calling people out is rude and you didn't take it well. Most people do not. That's my point. Be nice!
OrangeTom,
My point being:
I pointed out something off topic: Your grammar and spelling. Princess pointed out something off topic: Women's rights. So what? Calling people out is rude and you didn't take it well. Most people do not. That's my point. Be nice!
new topics
-
The hunter has become the hunted
Politicians & People: 2 hours ago -
Trump's idea to make Canada the 51st US state: 'Potential is massive'
Mainstream News: 3 hours ago -
Well this is Awkward .....
Mainstream News: 7 hours ago -
Kurakhove officially falls. Russia takes control of major logistics hub city in the southeast.
World War Three: 9 hours ago
top topics
-
Well this is Awkward .....
Mainstream News: 7 hours ago, 17 flags -
The hunter has become the hunted
Politicians & People: 2 hours ago, 16 flags -
Trump's idea to make Canada the 51st US state: 'Potential is massive'
Mainstream News: 3 hours ago, 12 flags -
Liberal Madness and the Constitution of the United States
US Political Madness: 15 hours ago, 10 flags -
Kurakhove officially falls. Russia takes control of major logistics hub city in the southeast.
World War Three: 9 hours ago, 9 flags
active topics
-
Trump's idea to make Canada the 51st US state: 'Potential is massive'
Mainstream News • 29 • : bigginpc -
Meta Llama local AI system is scary good
Science & Technology • 33 • : ArMaP -
Plane Crash Today --Azerbaijanian E190 passenger jet
Mainstream News • 48 • : GENERAL EYES -
New York Governor signs Climate Law that Fines Fossil Fuel Companies
US Political Madness • 29 • : NeedInfo -
Well this is Awkward .....
Mainstream News • 26 • : NeedInfo -
The hunter has become the hunted
Politicians & People • 11 • : hangedman13 -
Liberal Madness and the Constitution of the United States
US Political Madness • 13 • : charlest2 -
This is why ALL illegals who live in the US must go
Social Issues and Civil Unrest • 33 • : GENERAL EYES -
Elon Musk futurist?
Dreams & Predictions • 20 • : GENERAL EYES -
London Christmas Market BANS Word ‘Christmas’
Social Issues and Civil Unrest • 56 • : Connector