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 09-29-2009, 07:59 AM
 
Location: I think my user name clarifies that.
8,293 posts, read 22,457,074 times
Reputation: 3868

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cgadams View Post
This is almost laughable. I won't indulge into why, because you already know that this list you thought up is sexist bigotry.

#1???? How many generation X and Y women do you know who live to cook, clean, and bend over for their husbands? Not too many of those left out there bud. Women are liberated from men now, and certainly don't need to be married to one to achieve happiness or fulfillment in life.

I'm right there with all of you who think marriage is null. It isn't something that I see as being part of my life. I have been cohabiting for 2 years now. Me and my boyfriend don't even share bank accounts. No need to. Whats his is his, whats mine is mine. If our relationship falls apart, we take what is ours and we part ways. Much more simpler than what my parents went through when they got divorced.

thinking about having kids, NOT thinking about marriage.
Talk to me in 10 years, AFTER the train-wreck.


I can promise you - just by what you wrote in that post - that you and your boyfriend WILL go through a HORRIBLE break-up. And it's because you're both too self-centered to invest yourselves fully in each other. I can only hope that there are no children involved, because it's going to devastate them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-29-2009, 08:23 AM
 
3,566 posts, read 4,490,175 times
Reputation: 1846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
So I have a theory.

Men and women were never meant to live together longer than 5 or 6 years at a time.

Ancient men and women usually lived seperate lives, away from one another, for long periods of time. You may pick a mate for life, but we actually weren't meant to stay together. Usually the man would stick closer to home until the child reached an age of 6 or 7, which helps to explain the "7 year itch" that many people feel today.

Women are the same way, they don't want us around forever. Every woman I know is usually feed up with their husbands after 5 or 6 years.

Here is an interesting article,

Men And Women Weren't Meant To Live Together :: Loved Up :: Here Is The City Life :: The Online Lifestyle Portal For London - Books, Music, Films, Charity, Shopping, Cinema, Kids, Holidays, Food & Drink


Despite appearances to the contrary (fostered by anthropocentric nursery stories), a distinct role for male parents does not exist in nature. Fatherhood was invented by humans during the agricultural revolution about six thousand years ago. Symbolized by the new god-king, it incorporated the mother's originally superior role in primate families—the control or ownership of children. The male deity could even make his own offspring without female help. This inflated political figure was designed to compensate for the male's modest role in procreation, once the facts of life were known. Patriarchy was born out of an envious attack on mothers.

Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies

Parenting for primates - Google Books

Also,

While human fathers obviously have more to do with their children than other primate fathers, that is because we are such a social species. We aren't supposed to be there all the time. A father was meant to be more of a friend than a parent. We are there to play, to protect, and to provide. We aren't meant to care for children, its simply not part of our natural nature.

I'm sure you have some examples of great caring fathers, who stayed at home while the mom worked, but again, this is not the natural way of things. This is a choice, that two people made.

So, your telling me that you don't have to be a father because primate father's didn't work that way? However, because I'm a mom it is the "natural" way of doing things?

Marraige and parenting are two different things.

Marraige was AND still is about property. You don't see this until the divorce. The state doesn't care about love. It just divides the property. Love is a recent invention. You really don't have to go back to far in history to find that people did not (usually) marry out of love. They found love, they hoped for love, but it was not a precurser.

People are not "in love" the entire time they are married. They fall in and out of love all the time and then back in and then back out. That would be the whole work thing that people have made beaucoup bucks writing self help books for.

Too, throughout history you will find groups of people who never married but lived together. Either way, there are people who really want to be married and due to their beliefs they make it work for them for years and years. Yay, for them!! Me? I don't see the use of it, therefore, I'm all good.

Parenting? Whole 'nother ball game. Now, I read the part where you have a kid and all that you do. So, in the next few lines, I am not speaking to you specifically, just in general. It is one of the reasons that I do not date now and I am not remarried.

The assumption is that my natural place is the "parenting" and the cooking and the cleaning and all of that jazz. So, while I am doing all of this it frees the other up to ........play video games. Pbbbtttt. Because it isn't natural? Paternally instinct that to the judge.

You don't want a wife, you want a maid and a mother. And when you get tired of the maid or mother figure then your free to find another maid or mother. I think that's great. But, playing Peter Pan is not the same as playing father.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 11:48 AM
 
Location: 125 Years Too Late...
10,336 posts, read 9,975,609 times
Reputation: 9086
It's all about an individual's personality and emotion. Yes, marriage is a legal contract. But whether you stay with a mate for a year, five years, ten, or fifty is completely dependent on the individuals involved (or death; there's always that too). Some gravitate toward long-term dedication and loyalty, some do not.

The problem I have with the OP is that it is generalizing and typecasting. I do not agree that there is any 'natural law' that specifies any number of years. There are too many variables and too many personality types. A statistical average is not a natural law.

If and when I enter into another relationship, I will not even let it get started unless the other person has the same ultimate goal of a lifetime of dedication, love, friendship, and commitment. For me personally, anything other than that would have no point, and would not even be worth the wasted months of courtship.

However, the nice thing about living in a free country is that you have the choice. If you want to be an emotionally unattached, temporary stud, that's okay. I don't really see a point to that, but that's just me; I'd buy a Realdoll. It's cheaper in the long run and it doesn't snore. On the other hand, if you really want to attempt a happy relationship for a lifetime, that's fine as well. We can only hope that those who are compatible with each approach will attract others who feel the same. To do otherwise will only lead to misery (I know, I've been there).

There are also those who are at a point in life where they really don't want any sort of relationship at all--that would be me. I'd be happier with a pet goldfish. Or perhaps a chihuahua.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
If there are people in the USA who believe in a form of parenthood in which monogamy is not implied, I have no problem with that. As far as I'm concerned, everyone has a right to procreate with any willing partner, and raise the child in any wholesome environment, and whether they marry or stay married is their own business. Marriage is an option, and monogamy is an option. Marriage is a form of pageantry that is widely practiced, but not essential to the family structure of people who prefer to arrange their affairs differently.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 02:17 PM
 
1,310 posts, read 2,640,118 times
Reputation: 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
If there are people in the USA who believe in a form of parenthood in which monogamy is not implied, I have no problem with that. As far as I'm concerned, everyone has a right to procreate with any willing partner, and raise the child in any wholesome environment, and whether they marry or stay married is their own business. Marriage is an option, and monogamy is an option. Marriage is a form of pageantry that is widely practiced, but not essential to the family structure of people who prefer to arrange their affairs differently.
Marriage IS the backbone of a civilized society , and anything that comes against it only further degrades a Nation. NO ONE has the right or is entitled to procreate with ANY willing partner --- thats what Marriage is for . A childs sucessful development is based on ONE mother and ONE father raising their Child together in a wholesome environment based on solid commitment and love ... and not starting off with the Exit Door partially open and well lubed so it swings easily. The fact that Marriage doesnt always work out today does not nullify the Marriage ideology/benefits with it still being the best situation for child development and Adult growth . Marriage is an option because not everyone has to marry --- but that does not entitle One to mock marriage by Shackin' Up and playing house so if they get bored they can slip out the back . People who arrange their affairs by Cohabitation have self centered motives and are of low moral character...and certainly a bad example on children who are automatically roped into this immoral venue.

Based on your approx. age of 70, you were certainly raised differently by your Parents at a time without moral confusion...so my question is : When and why did you choose to abandon your Parents sound teaching based on Morality and Ethics for whatever the changing Culture comes up with as pop-philosophy ? You told me in a previous thread that you believe in absolute Morals ; so why suppress your Moral Conscience on this issue ? Please explain. Thanks.

Last edited by RVlover; 09-29-2009 at 02:21 PM.. Reason: add
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 02:21 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
RV, when are you going to get it through your head that other people are not obliged to live by what you were taught at Sunday School?

My moral conscience is expressed clearly and concisely and unsuppressed in my post that you just quoted. I consider that morality to be absolute enough for me to live by it, although I do not labor, as you do, under the vain idea that I have been personally blessed with knowledge and understanding of what is absolute. You really need to work on your own serious vanity issues.

Unlike you, my post does not demand that the entire universe conduct itself according to my own conceptions of social and personal behavior. My morality is to cut people a little slack, allowing for the fact that they might be different from me.

If God wanted everybody to be the same, why did He make us all so different?

Last edited by jtur88; 09-29-2009 at 02:32 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 02:28 PM
 
1,310 posts, read 2,640,118 times
Reputation: 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
RV, when are you going to get it through your head that other people are not obliged to live by what you were taught?
Correct. Im not the Standard ; theres Someone beyond Mankind that is. How come you dont feel obliged to live according to the hard work and sound moral teaching your Parents gave you , and, what is the benefit to you by subscribing to a 'whatever' popular Culture when you said you believe in absolute morals ? Thank you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 02:55 PM
 
Location: Cook County
5,288 posts, read 6,195,559 times
Reputation: 3060
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
RV, when are you going to get it through your head that other people are not obliged to live by what you were taught at Sunday School?

My moral conscience is expressed clearly and concisely and unsuppressed in my post that you just quoted. I consider that morality to be absolute enough for me to live by it, although I do not labor, as you do, under the vain idea that I have been personally blessed with knowledge and understanding of what is absolute. You really need to work on your own serious vanity issues.

Unlike you, my post does not demand that the entire universe conduct itself according to my own conceptions of social and personal behavior. My morality is to cut people a little slack, allowing for the fact that they might be different from me.

If God wanted everybody to be the same, why did He make us all so different?
I disagree with you in the sports forum constantly, but I think you are usually pretty on in this forum

I really hate one-size fits all type of thinking. I am getting married next year and reading some of the responses scare me, but then I remember, I can only be myself, and I believe what we are doing is right. I am going to give everything I have to my future wife and I know I can expect the same from her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 03:26 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 20,307,565 times
Reputation: 8606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
So, your telling me that you don't have to be a father because primate father's didn't work that way? However, because I'm a mom it is the "natural" way of doing things?

Marraige and parenting are two different things.

Marraige was AND still is about property. You don't see this until the divorce. The state doesn't care about love. It just divides the property. Love is a recent invention. You really don't have to go back to far in history to find that people did not (usually) marry out of love. They found love, they hoped for love, but it was not a precurser.

People are not "in love" the entire time they are married. They fall in and out of love all the time and then back in and then back out. That would be the whole work thing that people have made beaucoup bucks writing self help books for.

Too, throughout history you will find groups of people who never married but lived together. Either way, there are people who really want to be married and due to their beliefs they make it work for them for years and years. Yay, for them!! Me? I don't see the use of it, therefore, I'm all good.

Parenting? Whole 'nother ball game. Now, I read the part where you have a kid and all that you do. So, in the next few lines, I am not speaking to you specifically, just in general. It is one of the reasons that I do not date now and I am not remarried.

The assumption is that my natural place is the "parenting" and the cooking and the cleaning and all of that jazz. So, while I am doing all of this it frees the other up to ........play video games. Pbbbtttt. Because it isn't natural? Paternally instinct that to the judge.

You don't want a wife, you want a maid and a mother. And when you get tired of the maid or mother figure then your free to find another maid or mother. I think that's great. But, playing Peter Pan is not the same as playing father.
The reason I brought up children, is because some people are using children as the argument to get married.

I for one, think that should be left out of it. Personally, I love my son, I will always be there for him, but I also make sure he does things on his own. He knows how to make himself a sandwich, how to get a drink, and how to clean up after himself. He is 5, and if I have my way, he'll grow up independant. My job as a parent, is to make sure he has everything he needs to survive. Beyond that, he and I are freinds. I influence him like all of our freinds influence us.

I'm all for womens lib BTW, I have two sisters. If women don't want to have kids, thats their business.

I simply point out that the natural way of things is for couples who have a child, but are not procreating anymore, for them to split ways around age 6 of the child. Thats based on primate parents, and humans who aren't as "civilized" as we are.

My point is that civilization tries to make us do things that we aren't. Its based on religious morals, that shouldn't have been adopted in the first place. Civilizations existed long before the way we are today, and in many ways, they were better than ours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2009, 03:27 PM
 
1,310 posts, read 2,640,118 times
Reputation: 581
'If God wanted everybody to be the same, why did He make us all so different?'

REPLY: Im pleased to see you finally believe in God. Thats a good thing. As to why he made us all so different .... he didnt ! He made us ALL the same... with a moral conscience so we could know what is right from wrong and hopefully not suppress it so we could live as we like independent of him and his established protective moral mandates. 'Cutting people slack' for immoral choices is also known as The Tolerance Philosophy of today...but more accurately, its actually apathy and not because you really care for the person --- real love confronts when another is doing wrong and appealing to apathy says 'I dont really care what you do' . This is exactly how America got to be in the sewer it is today ... because nice folks could care less. Lastly, I didnt go to Sunday School as a kid...i was an agnostic growing up then became a self proclaimed atheist as an early adult ... but after tiring from playing the charade game that there is no God so virtually everything was permissable for me to do according to the dictates of my Will, I gradually chose to exit the superficiality of wrongful living in favor of getting to know the personal Creator of the Universe who fashioned us in his image and who loves us immensely.
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