U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-16-2008, 05:38 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,285,245 times
Reputation: 10915

Advertisements

You've never been treated with RESPECT for your gender.

I guess you don't want any doors opened for you...you can get them yourself, right?

And if a man was to beat on you, you'd deal with it yourself. You wouldn't want some other man to STAND UP for you, would you? Instead you'd just take your beating--so that you can say you dealt with it without help?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-16-2008, 05:53 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,285,245 times
Reputation: 10915
Alternatively, I'm willing to bet that you THINK you're equal to a man, but cry "discrimination" or "sexual harassment" at every turn, eh? If you have a 150-pound desk to move, you do it all by yourself? Or do you want someone to HELP you?

See, this is why women don't last long in MY line of work--they can't HANDLE it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2008, 05:55 PM
 
Location: NYC area
3,486 posts, read 4,940,661 times
Reputation: 3848
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
Yes. They should. You are the one implying that they are slaves. I'm suggesting they display a certain amount of gratitude in compensation to having their needs met.
Everyone should display gratitude under appropriate circumstances. And yes -- depriving a person of choice in how to pursue her happiness (a choice that's available to a man) and make her entirely dependent on someone else's benevolence makes her a slave.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
RURAL folks are a lot better in this regard.
There are plenty of farmers among my recent ancestors, so I know what their lives were like -- and they were real farmers, in real farming communities, in pre-WWII Europe. It would interest you to know that in traditional agrarian communities, women work alongside their men -- they plough the fields, grind the flour, tend to the animals and sell goods in the market. And in the off season, in the winter, men too cooked, tended to the home, and looked after the children. In a true, traditional rural lifestyle, a family cannot afford to have a stay-at-home wife; while leaving the husband idle during the winter is simply wasteful. Strict gender roles were a bourgeois development -- that's why traditional agrarian communities were more egalitarian than cities, at least in the West. The structure of the American economy is such that there are virtually no "rural areas" here in a traditional sociological sense. They are more like remote suburbs, some of whose residents desperately cling to antiquated urban values.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
Women who KNOW how to sew, KNOW how to cook.
Ready-made clothing is so cheap these days, that sewing no longer makes sense. Factoring in the value of the time lost on something so time-consuming, sewing is actually more expensive than buying clothes, and can only be undertaken as a hobby. As for cooking -- in my experience, urban women (and men) cook much better than people in the sticks (no offense). And when a man knows how to cook, it's really sexy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
And men who know how to take care of their women! If you can't support your family on your income, you're not much of a man--or you're setting your sights WAY too high!
One income is good, but two is better. Some spouses take care of each other quite well to the extent that they earn enough together to hire someone else to clean their bathrooms, cook their meals, and repair their furnaces. Unless you have a moral or religious objection to something like that, it's the best all around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
Just because you rely on someone else financially does not mean you cannot be the gateway to something that they NEED from you.
Sure, history is full of examples where slaves successfully curried favor from their masters by means of emotional and/or sexual bonds. But, they were still slaves -- because there is a big difference between needing something from someone and depending on someone entirely for your very survival.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2008, 06:04 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,285,245 times
Reputation: 10915
The man needs something from the woman as well...and he relies on her for it. For example, in my current situation, my girlfriend handles the money and the budget. I hand it ALL over to her, and SHE makes the decisions.

If we go anywhere together, SHE drives the car I bought for her. Not me. She has plenty of power, I recognize that she has intelligent input. Again, that's NOT a slave.

However, I see no value in time. YOUR time, MY time, HIS time...anyone's time.

It just is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2008, 06:19 PM
 
Location: NYC area
3,486 posts, read 4,940,661 times
Reputation: 3848
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
You've never been treated with RESPECT for your gender.
I don't know who you are talking to at this point, but for what it's worth -- I prefer people's respect for me to be based on my personal qualities, rather than on my anatomy. By the same token, I will not lend someone any respect beyond common civility just because they have a penis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
I guess you don't want any doors opened for you...you can get them yourself, right?
New York City is a very weird place. Here, both men and women open doors for each other. Building doors, that is. In these parts, it is considered extremely discourteous not to, regardless of the gender of the parties involved. Thus, men hold doors for women, men hold doors for other men, women hold doors for women, and women hold doors for men. Of course, if someone happens to throw the door in my face, I am physically able to open it. I can also handle car doors, oddly enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
And if a man was to beat on you, you'd deal with it yourself. You wouldn't want some other man to STAND UP for you, would you? Instead you'd just take your beating--so that you can say you dealt with it without help?
I would want the law to stand up for me -- just like I would want it to stand up for a man who was beaten up. And I certainly would not want any man to commit a felony on my behalf.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
Alternatively, I'm willing to bet that you THINK you're equal to a man, but cry "discrimination" or "sexual harassment" at every turn, eh? If you have a 150-pound desk to move, you do it all by yourself? Or do you want someone to HELP you?
You are confusing physical equality with legal equality. Surely, you are not suggesting that one's access to the legal system or the right to vote, for example, be based on the ability to move a 150-pound desk? Should the 150-pound desk moving test be administered as a college entrance exam to people who want to become brain surgeons? I may not be physically equal to someone who can move a 150-pound desk, but I am liguistically superior to someone who speaks only one language, for example. If you need to translate a text from Mandarin Chinese, do you do it all by yourself, or do you want someone to HELP you? And, just because you can move a 150-pound desk, that doesn't mean you know the law nearly as well as I do -- or understand physics nearly as well as Professor Hawking. Stephen Hawking, the world's greatest physicist at the present time, cannot move a 150-pound desk either. In fact, he probably can't even move a matchbox. Are you suggesting that he isn't qualified for his job as a theoretical physicist? Your comment isn't only insulting to women -- it's also insulting to men, inasmuch as it reduces men to mere brawn. I hope you can see that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
See, this is why women don't last long in MY line of work--they can't HANDLE it.
Well, luckily, we have a diversified enough economy that there are plenty of jobs out there that are intellectual in nature and do not necessitate moving 150-pound desks. Whew.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2008, 06:25 PM
 
Location: NYC area
3,486 posts, read 4,940,661 times
Reputation: 3848
TKamar: how you and your girlfriend handle things is your business. But just because it works for you, that's no reason to impose it on anyone else. Other couples have very different arrangements, and are happy with them. Arguing that everyone else should conform to your lifestyle is certainly very suspicious -- you may surmise that I "cry discrimination" and secretly dream of an unattainable career in moving heavy furniture, but it is your desire to see all women stay at home and depend on their men that suggests a need for validation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2008, 08:21 PM
 
Location: Montana
1,219 posts, read 2,757,459 times
Reputation: 671
The point of this thread is the original question. In different words my opinion is that it is possible for most people to make a living, even in hard times. I know there are cases where people are unable to work, due to physical limitations or illness, but I really think that there are more people that could work, but choose to not either because they don't know how, or because they don't want to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2008, 07:49 AM
 
Location: Dutchess County NY
43 posts, read 76,369 times
Reputation: 67
Default Today

The reason people do not want to work is that we have been told since the 1960s that we are ENTITLED to a college education, welfare, free education, medical care, having as many children as you want. It is not your fault for not having the things..it is because the MAN has been holding you down. At that time, it was nonsense but now I wonder.

I worked in my industry for over 20 years and at the age of 47 lost my job because the president of the company and the senior execs would get more money from merging my company with another than from their salaries. Over 200 people lost their jobs from both companies......and now the rest are gone after a second merger. My saqvings was gone and along with it my daughter's chance of an education. I know work 2 jobs and my wife also works full time to make ends meet. My daughter works for minimum wage just to have a job after her company went bankrupt because they could not compete with foreign workers.

The owners of my company and my daughter's have both gotten phenominally rich from our labor, threw us away like garbage and got richer by doing so. We have been responsible bur find ourselves struggling because of the greed of a few. At what point, should they be responsible and provide for those that put them where they are?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2008, 09:18 AM
 
2,141 posts, read 7,039,556 times
Reputation: 1248
Quote:
Originally Posted by WHITEWOLF508 View Post
The reason people do not want to work is that we have been told since the 1960s that we are ENTITLED to a college education, welfare, free education, medical care, having as many children as you want. It is not your fault for not having the things..it is because the MAN has been holding you down. At that time, it was nonsense but now I wonder.

I worked in my industry for over 20 years and at the age of 47 lost my job because the president of the company and the senior execs would get more money from merging my company with another than from their salaries. Over 200 people lost their jobs from both companies......and now the rest are gone after a second merger. My saqvings was gone and along with it my daughter's chance of an education. I know work 2 jobs and my wife also works full time to make ends meet. My daughter works for minimum wage just to have a job after her company went bankrupt because they could not compete with foreign workers.

The owners of my company and my daughter's have both gotten phenominally rich from our labor, threw us away like garbage and got richer by doing so. We have been responsible bur find ourselves struggling because of the greed of a few. At what point, should they be responsible and provide for those that put them where they are?
Sorry for the difficult times your family is going through. Your post is insightful and unfortunately, many Americans are or have experienced this. This is the downside to capitalism. Capitalism provides the ability for members of society to potentially acquire great wealth. However, it's nearly impossible to do that without sacrificing others. I have been in the corporate world now for over 20 years and have seen this scenario countless times. Many people will say that the government needs to provide American businesses with more attractive tax cuts, incentives to hire Americans, to keep jobs here, etc. But sadly, I don't think that any amount of hand outs and attractive tax advantages will cure this problem. Those on the top will always want more. And there is no way that the American worker can lower their standard of living to equal those in India, China, etc. In the perfect scenario, business owners, shareholders, CEO's, etc. would realize that they have to settle for a certain amount of wealth and not strive for more and more at the expense of the working class. The government should not be responsible for continuously coming up with incentives and bait to keep jobs here. Companies should have mission statements that include the desire to keep jobs here and they should earnestly try to keep good employees that they hire, in their jobs. Companies will say that they need to downsize, merge, etc. to remain profitable. But I wonder how many of the people at the top of those corporations are making concessions in lieu of sacrificing jobs of their fellow Americans? Much of what we've seen in corporate America is based on greed. It's just the way it is and I don't see a solution. I am not bashing the wealthy nor do I have disdain for those who have worked to acquire great success. They have taken advantage of capitalism and have done it well. I do wish that they would have more compassion and be more committed to the US worker.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2008, 09:34 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,340 posts, read 10,909,247 times
Reputation: 12290
It has been an alarming and steady trend in our country to drift ( or be pushed away) from individualism. Actually FDR is the original tree that has put up the current offshoots by enacting "Social Security". The name says it all. When the government became involved in our personal financial dealings it was only a matter of time before things spiraled out of control. Now the program is just another tax to fund something for nothing welfare. People who have never paid a dime into the "program" can draw benefits from it while we who work foot the bill. The government WANTS this dependency. Sad and scary ...but true, and there are a lot of people out there falling for it hook line and sinker.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top