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.
Yet the USA is the most technologically advanced country in the world and British universities always lead Europe.
Only if you cannot filter out powerful US and UK propaganda about how great they are.
What's US "advancement" in technology? Facebook, iphone and such? Common, anyone can "invent" these crap.
The most technologically advanced country is Germany, because it supplies heavy machinery and industrial robots to the rest of the world and their cars are not just beautifully designed but also full of features US car makers can only dream of.
Id say US is one of the Best to live as above average income, if you make it to the top 10% or even 20% you can have higher options of developing a rich-status lifestyle. Hoever the Average Jow receives far more benefits, stability, holidays and higher quality of life in many other western countries.
Top 20% would mean you are making something like $65-70K/y per person before tax. Considering that at the same time you have to work more hours than folks from Nordic countries, have the smallest paid vacation (2 weeks average), almost no social benefits, high property taxes (average $5K/y), poor school system, high violent crime (almost 5 times higher than in Germany), high cost medical care (average $7K/person/year) I can hardly see this as a path to the "rich-status lifestyle".
Only if you cannot filter out powerful US and UK propaganda about how great they are.
What's US "advancement" in technology? Facebook, iphone and such? Common, anyone can "invent" these crap.
The most technologically advanced country is Germany, because it supplies heavy machinery and industrial robots to the rest of the world and their cars are not just beautifully designed but also full of features US car makers can only dream of.
I've long suspected that Russians ( men) have secret crush on Germans))))
Not Americans, not "Nordic countries" - those they can't care less about; but DA GERMANS)))))
Just because there was a change of government and the USSR was formed doesn't mean that years of social construction just disappeared. Don't get lost in words, imagery, and slogans and forget to see the more important thing: the people themselves. The people that lived in the USSR had formed their ideas about things like gender roles long before the USSR even existed as a state and I'm fairly certain more than enough of them would have passed those ideas to their children born during Soviet times, whether in the form of actual ideas or merely through copying the behaviors of their parents and other men and women.
They couldn't do it any longer (even if some would have liked to proceed with beliefs their forefathers were sticking to) because the system ( not only official propaganda, but economic aspect of it) wouldn't let them to.
Besides, the overwhelming majority of teachers in the Soviet Union ( math and science including) were women. You don't think that they'd give preference to boys, giving them more attention than girls, do you?
P.S. Neuling mentioned here that he is more in line with Islamic laws in this respect - "where child care is the exclusive right (not only duty) of women," - that indeed was very much Russian mentality back in Soviet times, an unspoken rule, without any Islamic laws.
Children were pretty much regarded not only as woman's duty, but her right as well; they were practically unquestionably awarded to mothers after divorce and not too many men were willing to work as school teachers, because it was still an area of "dealing with children," which again was regarded as "women's domain."
The Child-Mother bond is forced upon the Mother because the child comes out of the Mother's body while the Dad-Child bond develops slowly over time. Me and my Mum had a good bond but now we hardly speak (where's the bond, its gone..) and there's many other examples of this.
People like to spout out crap all the time and make massive generalisations about everything from Homosexuality (Neuling) to parental bonds.
Also all this stronger bond this and stronger bond that is nonsense, because each parent develop different types of bonds with the their children. For example the Dad may be the tough love kind of parent while the Mother may be the spoil you rotten kind of parent - both have bonds with their children that are equally strong but are shown in different ways.
Neuling: Sexuality and gender are two different matters, the only justified reason to call a gay man a Women is when they have gender identity problems which is something completely different to sexuality which is fluid. By saying gay Men are Women you are implying that Men have to act a certain way which is backwards thinking.
I would not say it is forced upon the woman, because most mothers love becoming and being mothers. Except for a few cases it's not like they give birth and ask themselves why on earth that had to happen to them.
I did not call a gay man a woman, I said gay men are more like women, if I remember correctly.
And yes, I do indeed expect certain behaviors and properties from each sex, like it or not. I am definitely against the "progressive" notion that men and women are the same except for their private parts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alester237
My bad. I've come to realize pretty quickly there are quite a lot of conservatives on this forum and your comment that gay men are not real men...yea, it's pretty hard to imagine any progressive saying that. You mention the sexuality as a scale thing, which is nice, but to make a comment like you did would lead me to believe that you don't really understand it, you are using words differently, or you just worded that sentence poorly. If someone says "man" or "male", they are almost definitely talking about sex or gender, never sexual orientation - so being gay has no relevance to whether one is a man or not. Also, the idea of a "real man" is not progressive, it carries connotations of inferiority and superiority; progressives value equality, not hierarchy like this. You say you are progressive, but it sounds almost like you've been watching Fox news too much and have taken on the linguistic framework of a conservative or something...at least on this issue anyway.
Also, to address the OP's topic directly, the reason Scandanavia is admired is that it's a place where people can work to live, not live to work. What enables them to live like that, as has been pointed out, is stuff like their welfare system, gender equality, and more equally distributed resources, unlike the US where the freakishly rich own way more than they should be allowed to.
I am more liberal than conservative, to put it that way. For instance I am in favor of same-sex marriage, I am an atheist and strict vegetarian.
I am no native speaker, maybe I would have said it differently if I were a native speaker. I don't live in the US, I have never watched Fox news in my life.
Sex, gender and sexual orientation are linked in my view. There is no point in talking about sexual orientation of a person if one doesn't know their sex.
By real man I am not necessarily implying inferiority of others, in some cases it might even be an advantage not to be a real man.
As I said, whether someone is a real man or not, is not a matter of someone's private parts. You can have a 20" c*ck, but be a total p*ssy
For instance I have a problem with those metrosexuals, I don't think of them as real men, and in this case I indeed do mean it in a negative way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miserere
Just some thought...
The idea of Europe does not dwelvea on some moronic barbarian screaming out of some forest while totally nude and dirty 1200 years ago....no,,,,,
Those barbarians were washed and made into christians, they were forced to wash their inner parts and transformed their god into Catholic deities.
Sure, there are some biological and hormonal differences, I won't deny that. But equally, it's also cultural, what people expect us to be. Similarly, the woman is expected to be maybe a bit different in Norway than in Bulgaria. Scandinavia was and still is very sparsely inhabited, and we needed the input of everyone. The men were out at war or hunting, so it was up to the women to work the farm and the older children to look out for the younger ones. The housewife ideal lived only for 20 years, from the 50's to the 70's. After that, women are taught again to be strong, independent individuals, and not some serfs of their husbands. Despite 60% of all university students are female, eventually many still put their family first, or even better, combine their parenthood and career.
And it's not about being a bad girl. I like feminine women, but I also want them to be independent and equal partners. If I'm the better cook, fine, if the female is better in changing car tyres, fine. And I hope neither's self-esteem is crushed by doing "men's work" or "woman's work", but it's stronger than that. What I loathe is that a woman can't do this or a man can't do that, because of some mouldy gender stereotypes. How petty is that?
Where have I said that women have to be serfs of their husbands? Like others have already mentioned, the emancipation of women happened pretty early in the Soviet union. Some fought wars disguised as men.
We are not equally good at many things, that is a simple fact. I do have a driver's license and from my experience behind the wheel I can confidently say that us women are worse drivers than men in general. There you have a very basic example and I am not ashamed to admit it.
However I agree that it may have to do something with culture and social behavior. I have found the majority of men in northern Europe to be shy and not very outspoken and I can see how a movement like feminism could become so popupar - there is no resistance to it. And no, I'm not comparing them just to the Italians or Greeks, but to everyone.
I've long suspected that Russians ( men) have secret crush on Germans))))
Not Americans, not "Nordic countries" - those they can't care less about; but DA GERMANS)))))
Crash or not, historically Russia and Germany have had very strong ties. And these days again Germany is number one investor in Russia economy.
We also share similar vision on social structures and benefits - unlike US where they artificially create social classes and elitism by limiting people access to higher education and specific jobs, both Russia and Germany have excellent free or nearly free educational systems and healthcare.
I did not call a gay man a woman, I said gay men are more like women, if I remember correctly.
For instance I have a problem with those metrosexuals, I don't think of them as real men, and in this case I indeed do mean it in a negative way.
Some gay men are more like women in their behaviour, others are not, and blend in because they are not obviously gay. I do it every day. Nobody could guess my sexuality, because I look like every other man walking on the streets.
Metrosexual men - well, whatever. Men who take care of their appearance are nice.
Metrosexual men - well, whatever. Men who take care of their appearance are nice.
Nah. Men should smell of sweat and gunpowder. And of course alcohol. And look like cave men. Of course adidas-sweatpants and a leather jacket is ok.
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.
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.
