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.
Well, since it is 2017 now (67 years later), it's not surprising. After all, in the 1950's people didn't expect to live as those in 1890 did. Doesn't take a genius to see things change.
I think the poster you responded to just wanted attention and an opportunity to martyr themselves online. See previous post on this thread.
Well, since it is 2017 now (67 years later), it's not surprising. After all, in the 1950's people didn't expect to live as those in 1890 did. Doesn't take a genius to see things change.
Yes things change but things are not better because women think they need to be independent. A woman should want a husband who can take care of her and be a strong leader. If they choose to have her work, fine but it shouldnt be because she has to or they will be homeless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrzDefector
I think the poster you responded to just wanted attention and an opportunity to martyr themselves online. See previous post on this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harpaint
No actually i wasnt. I was making a point that someone would point out its not the 1950s and i was proven correctly.
"Yes things change but things are not better because women think they need to be independent. A woman should want a husband who can take care of her and be a strong leader. If they choose to have her work, fine but it shouldnt be because she has to or they will be homeless."
No, a woman shouldn't have to want anything based on someone else's "should". If she wants to be independent, or capable of being independent, that's fine. If she wants to be able to take care of herself, that's fine too. If she wants to be a strong leader, great. She can decide for herself what she should do.
This goes both ways. As a man with a high paying job and coming from a family that 99% of people would consider as rich, I wasn't going to marry someone who just wanted me for my money. I didn't want to support someone who couldn't carry her own weight.
I didn't marry my wife for money, as she doesn't come from a family that has any. But my wife has a decent paying job, has been a loyal wife, and is a great mother to our kids. She takes care of the house, cooks, and probably does about 75% of the parenting.
So like I said, it works both ways. Most men want a women who can bring something to the table too, not just looks. I wanted a good provider too... just not strictly in a financial sense.
Its quite common in Asian and middle eastern culture. People from similar backgrounds enforce these superficial thought process in the mindset of their kids growing up in west. It is considered acceptable.....
While I see where she is coming from I completely disagree. Just makes women look shallow and like gold diggers and really bad advice. Thoughts?
Maybe Mindygallows married some dude that played in a band, had no education and ditched her with no financial support to raise 3 kids.
If you have a daughter that isn't very bright and so won't be able to chart a solid career for themselves then I don't find it to be the worst advice ever.
Let's remember that all of that advice comes from vastly different sets of experience and as is the case with everything there is no single right answer.
Dear Abby was famous for saying it was just as easy to fall in love with a rich man as a poor man. She seemed oblivious to the fact that the saying originated as a prostitute's advice to her daughter.
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.