What city in California has the hottest prettiest girls? (attorney, home)

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim

If there is one thing that healthy marriages are not based upon it is "equality of the sexes". Equality as a fundamental value (note: a belief in equality can be harmless on the sidelines) is always a recipe for frustration and disappointment. Because life just isn't like that.

If you tell me that you have a happy marriage because of your belief in equality of the sexes, what you mean is that you have a happy marriage despite your belief in equality of the sexes.

You crawl up out of the dark ages? You sound lke a refugee from my parents' generation. Most of them ended up divorced. In fact most of the couples I've known with successful marriages have been pretty equal. Most of the dysfunctional ones I've known generally involved a dominant spouse. That's just how it is nowadays.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim

Of course healthy marriages are based primarily upon mutual love, respect, and compatibility - not upon female prettiness, and not upon the good male instincts that a pretty woman might inspire. Sexual attraction of any kind is always, at best, just a beginning. Still, that beginning is important, and sets the tone for whatever follows.

If there is one thing that healthy marriages are not based upon it is "equality of the sexes". Equality as a fundamental value (note: a belief in equality can be harmless on the sidelines) is always a recipe for frustration and disappointment. Because life just isn't like that.

If you tell me that you have a happy marriage because of your belief in equality of the sexes, what you mean is that you have a happy marriage despite your belief in equality of the sexes.

You certainly do have a habit of telling other people what they "really" mean, don't you? No, that's not what I mean. Nor is your definition of equality what I mean. I refer to equality through balancing of strengths.

I could overpower my late wife physically (with considerable struggle, though ... she was an excellent wrestler! ) ... but I do believe she had every bit as much endurance for a day's work that I did, and seemed to be able to keep that going more days in a row than I might be willing, even if capable. I was a better hockey player than she'd ever be. But she could out garden me to a shameful degree.

My present wife can beat the pants off me (literally) at cribbage and certain other card games -- even though I can out fox-her with logical argument on most issues (which she absolutely hates about me).

Thus I do not consider myself stronger nor smarter than my wives. What would be the fun in that for an old coyote?

[alexxiz]

Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim

Of course healthy marriages are based primarily upon mutual love, respect, and compatibility - not upon female prettiness, and not upon the good male instincts that a pretty woman might inspire. Sexual attraction of any kind is always, at best, just a beginning. Still, that beginning is important, and sets the tone for whatever follows.

If there is one thing that healthy marriages are not based upon it is "equality of the sexes". Equality as a fundamental value (note: a belief in equality can be harmless on the sidelines) is always a recipe for frustration and disappointment. Because life just isn't like that.

If you tell me that you have a happy marriage because of your belief in equality of the sexes, what you mean is that you have a happy marriage despite your belief in equality of the sexes.

I say .45 Glock is a pretty good equalizer, whether the other side likes the idea of equality or not, isn't it?

[jaijai]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

You certainly do have a habit of telling other people what they "really" mean, don't you? No, that's not what I mean. Nor is your definition of equality what I mean. I refer to equality through balancing of strengths.

I could overpower my late wife physically (with considerable struggle, though ... she was an excellent wrestler! ) ... but I do believe she had every bit as much endurance for a day's work that I did, and seemed to be able to keep that going more days in a row than I might be willing, even if capable. I was a better hockey player than she'd ever be. But she could out garden me to a shameful degree.

My present wife can beat the pants off me (literally) at cribbage and certain other card games -- even though I can out fox-her with logical argument on most issues (which she absolutely hates about me).

Thus I do not consider myself stronger nor smarter than my wives. What would be the fun in that for an old coyote?

Wow, people still play cribbage?!
That's one of the few things my mom and i actually enjoyed doing together when i was young.
Of course women are strong ... some would say, in almost all ways, stronger then men.
I bet your wife can't stand your strength in logic.
It's rather impressive.
If certain people (clears throat) were humble enough to recognize that, they wouldn't be wasting their energy fighting you.
That reminds me of something that i was thinking the other night re; this forum.
I've spent my entire life around people who are more intelligent, more aware, more experienced, more skillful and more wise than i.
That's how i've learned and evolved and grown.
And i've spent enough time around people who aren't.
I much prefer the former.
Being able to recognize / admit and appreciate one's "betters" (not essentially better but "better" in the sense of more intelligent, more expansive awareness, more experienced, more clear, etc.) is a wise and skillful thing.
There are people on this forum who could actually learn something from others if they weren't so narrow minded, so full of hubris and so attached to asserting their silly little points of view and needing always to be in the "right".

[alexxiz]

Someone who's a good, obedient house slave makes a good husband, I think.
I agree with Western Pilgrim, these unions shouldn't be equal...

[WesternPilgrim]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

You certainly do have a habit of telling other people what they "really" mean, don't you? No, that's not what I mean. Nor is your definition of equality what I mean. I refer to equality through balancing of strengths.

OK, thanks for clearing that up.

But on the flip side, that would imply that two people with "unbalanced strengths" cannot be happily married. And that just isn't so. In fact, I would argue that any couple who sees a "balance of strengths" as essential to their relationship is going to be deeply disappointed.

You're right that we're talking past each other a bit. I don't mean equality as in a balancing of strengths, or inequality as in one spouse being stronger than the other. I mean that men and women, though equal in value and dignity, are - or ought to be - ontologically unequal in their purposes and priorities. Inequality of strengths is a given, and I don't think it's helpful in a marriage to keep track of this too closely. But that's probably a discussion for another forum.

Sacramento has the prettiest girls.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by jaijai

Wow, people still play cribbage?!
That's one of the few things my mom and i actually enjoyed doing together when i was young.
Of course women are strong ... some would say, in almost all ways, stronger then men.
I bet your wife can't stand your strength in logic.
It's rather impressive.
If certain people (clears throat) were humble enough to recognize that, they wouldn't be wasting their energy fighting you.
That reminds me of something that i was thinking the other night re; this forum.
I've spent my entire life around people who are more intelligent, more aware, more experienced, more skillful and more wise than i.
That's how i've learned and evolved and grown.
And i've spent enough time around people who aren't.
I much prefer the former.
Being able to recognize / admit and appreciate one's "betters" (not essentially better but "better" in the sense of more intelligent, more expansive awareness, more experienced, more clear, etc.) is a wise and skillful thing.
There are people on this forum who could actually learn something from others if they weren't so narrow minded, so full of hubris and so attached to asserting their silly little points of view and needing always to be in the "right".

Aw shucks ... * kicks dust * ... dang, took the wind outta me there.
Anyway, if you want a good game of cribbage, come on over and meet the wife. It's a game that Deaf and hearing can play without interpreters, no problem. I just explained to her what I was writing. She laughed and reports that one of her grandmas won a regional state cribbage championship. And that grandma taught my wife to play.

And speaking of her grandmas and strong women -- I would just about propose to marry them if I was single! These are some fun and rugged gals! Both still living large -- one in her mid-80's (the cribbage champ) still mowing her lawn and shoveling her snow -- and the other about early 90's just recently cut back to working part-time at a nursing home. Both outlived their husbands by a long shot

[WesternPilgrim]

I should address the "weaker sex" complaint. Are women truly the weaker sex? Do they need the "protection" of men? Because their purposes and priorities are different from men, it follows that in general, they have different strengths and weaknesses. Yes, I'm generalizing - there are individuals of both sexes who are exceptions to the rule. But in general women are more easily led by their emotions, more easily led into dangerous situations, and they benefit from men in their lives who can take a more objective and de-personalized view of things. Men still lead, and women still follow, though women need not follow blindly or un-intelligently.

[jaijai]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Aw shucks ... * kicks dust * ... dang, took the wind outta me there.
Anyway, if you want a good game of cribbage, come on over and meet the wife. It's a game that Deaf and hearing can play without interpreters, no problem. I just explained to her what I was writing. She laughed and reports that one of her grandmas won a regional state cribbage championship. And that grandma taught my wife to play.

And speaking of her grandmas and strong women -- I would just about propose to marry them if I was single! These are some fun and rugged gals! Both still living large -- one in her mid-80's (the cribbage champ) still mowing her lawn and shoveling her snow -- and the other about early 90's just recently cut back to working part-time at a nursing home. Both outlived their husbands by a long shot

Hmmmm, i'm wondering what happened to my moms cribbage board.
She's passed on years ago and i don't know where it went but it belonged to her mother so it's quite old.
I'll have to ask my brother.
"come on over" huh? Got a yacht waiting for me in the S.C. harbor?

[jaijai]

Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim

I should address the "weaker sex" complaint. Are women truly the weaker sex? Do they need the "protection" of men? Because their purposes and priorities are different from men, it follows that in general, they have different strengths and weaknesses. Yes, I'm generalizing - there are individuals of both sexes who are exceptions to the rule. But in general women are more easily led by their emotions, more easily led into dangerous situations, and they benefit from men in their lives who can take a more objective and de-personalized view of things. Men still lead, and women still follow, though women need not follow blindly or un-intelligently.

Appreciating the physical protection that a man can offer (and i certainly do btw ... no "feminist" here despite my mother's attempt!) does not mean that men lead.
It just means that men are, generally speaking, physically stronger and more geared to fight.