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.
No it doesn't. We are all MEN....there are men and there are fe men - or fe males...What's the big deal? What is sexism anyway? I don't think it ever existed...Human nature and the trait of human need for dominance occurs in all sexes...Do you think that a man would dare to oppress or insult a highly intelligent and assertive female? Not likely...Those who seek dominance don't care what sex you are - The size up men AND woman and calculate who is weak enough to oppress or dominate...It's just like so called racism...those that will oppress another human being don't care what color you are. Don't tolerate disrespect...respect is the empowerment of another- If someone attempts to dis-empower you..Stand up and put a stop to it...Forget about parroting slogans and rhetoric mentioning sexism or racism...stand tall.
No we are not hence the different genders.
Yes I think a guy would dare to oppress or insult a highly intelligent and assertive gal and it's most likely to happen in my experiences/observations as guys tend to label such gals as stuck up, *****, ****, dyke, feminazi, skank, or going after her looks. That labeling reaction gives an inkling to sexism because due to her having a vagina she's not regarded as intelligent or assertive but insulted as her being assertive = her being uppity/mouthy/PMSing.
…If he wants to leave the marriage, a woman can just point her finger and tell her lawyer that a man committed child abuse, domestic abuse — and a lot of times it’s just taken as a given. If a woman wants a restraining order against a man in a marriage, men most often are taken to jail when, you know, the woman calls the police. However, studies actually show that violence in domestic relations is almost 50% from men and 50% from women. If a woman gets angry for any reason, she can simply accuse a man and men are just assumed guilty in our society.
I have friends in law enforcement and they don't just drag the man off any more, often they take both parties in on DV calls so I think this is out dated information.
Also having been through a divorce it's the party that makes more money that gets screwed, has to pay alimony and CS is based on how much time is spent with each parent. I know plenty of divorced couples that pay no CS because the split is 50-50. Not to mention you don't have to be married to end up paying CS, you get a woman preggers and even if not married you will end up paying CS if you don't live together.
Its kinda of like trying to explain to someone how a movement called "feminist movement" could never possibly benefit both genders, by its very definition.
Its very definition involves equality of the sexes. I believe I benefit as a man when women are my equal. Living in a discriminatory society ultimately hurts all of us, even those on the privileged end of the discrimination, IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by udolipixie
However I do agree that feminist couldn't possibly benefit both genders as in my opinion guys generallly abhor gals gaining equality and would rather gals be subservients/inferiors/lessers.
I think you'd be surprised how many men don't want that, actually. It's a pain in the ass to be in a relationship with someone who is subservient/inferior/lesser because it means you're always responsible for them. Too much like a parent/child relationship, IMO. I don't want that dynamic with a woman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larkspur123
I think it really depends on the vantage point. A healthy well adjusted father wants his daughters to have the same opportunities in the workplace that a male has. It benefits him by not having to support his daughter as an adult if he does not wish to. Years ago women who didn't marry were often forced to live at home because of disparities in pay.
Exactly. He also doesn't have to worry about his daughter being treated as a second-class citizen, or being stuck in an abusive relationship out of financial necessity, among many other things.
No it doesn't. We are all MEN....there are men and there are fe men - or fe males...What's the big deal? What is sexism anyway? I don't think it ever existed...Human nature and the trait of human need for dominance occurs in all sexes...Do you think that a man would dare to oppress or insult a highly intelligent and assertive female? Not likely...Those who seek dominance don't care what sex you are - The size up men AND woman and calculate who is weak enough to oppress or dominate...It's just like so called racism...those that will oppress another human being don't care what color you are. Don't tolerate disrespect...respect is the empowerment of another- If someone attempts to dis-empower you..Stand up and put a stop to it...Forget about parroting slogans and rhetoric mentioning sexism or racism...stand tall.
Actually, biologically speaking, we all started off as female.
I don't. Re-read my post. I was agreeing with you, as indicated by the first word of the post.
I know you were agreeing with me about the consumer culture and entitlements/delusions. The rest of your post suggested you thought dating was so complex because people have to follow BS rules and can't do what they want when they want hence my question. Cool on the clarification that you don't think BS rules and inability to do as one wants is why dating is so complex.
I know you were agreeing with me about the consumer culture and entitlements/delusions.
Actually if anything I agree with you less on that part, but that's another thread altogether. I was agreeing with what you said about gender roles (consistent with my other posts on this thread).
Quote:
Originally Posted by udolipixie
The rest of your post suggested you thought dating was so complex because people have to follow BS rules
Nope, I was saying dating is easier now (for me, anyway) with less-rigid gender roles and fewer BS rules, because people can be who they want and do what they want with whom they want, rather than only what they think the man or woman is "supposed" to do.
Its very definition involves equality of the sexes. I believe I benefit as a man when women are my equal. Living in a discriminatory society ultimately hurts all of us, even those on the privileged end of the discrimination, IMO.
I think you'd be surprised how many men don't want that, actually. It's a pain in the ass to be in a relationship with someone who is subservient/inferior/lesser because it means you're always responsible for them. Too much like a parent/child relationship, IMO. I don't want that dynamic with a woman.
Exactly. He also doesn't have to worry about his daughter being treated as a second-class citizen, or being stuck in an abusive relationship out of financial necessity, among many other things.
Agreed. And really what loving brother, father etc. would want their female relatives to be in a position of being a second class citizen, or see her stuck in an abusive relationship out of financial necessity?
I think you'd be surprised how many men don't want that, actually. It's a pain in the ass to be in a relationship with someone who is subservient/inferior/lesser because it means you're always responsible for them. Too much like a parent/child relationship, IMO. I don't want that dynamic with a woman.
A minisciule minority...going by the popularity of treating gals as subservient/inferior/lesser and memes like Good Girl Gina? Perhaps your perception of subservient/inferior/lesser is different from the many many guys that hold it as their view is an equally contributing partner they treat as lessers. There isn't any responsibility for her as she's responsible for herself if anything she's more responsible for him than he is for her fulfilling whatever demands he makes while having none to little herself.
Agreed. And really what loving brother, father etc. would want their female relatives to be in a position of being a second class citizen, or see her stuck in an abusive relationship out of financial necessity?
Possibly with the subservient/inferior/lesser mindset they're not thinking of their relatives but of the gals they want to have relationships with.
That's just honesty on men's part and rigged newsreporting by NY Times.
Last time they discussed the finding sample about the fact that men issue divorce in almost same proportion to women as long as the couple has no children. Then the divorce initiation on the husband's side plummets to about 15%.
NYT "journalism" explained it with the same old "super-mom" scheme: mother does everything alone so she ditches incompetent and inferior husband. I guess reporting the article claiming anything close to that with the genders reversed would get a lawsuit long ago. But this thing (male-bashing) is widespread in the media.
Women tend to form their opinion by the media. Media tells them that "not wanting marriage is empowerment" and they vote tat. Yet they do exactly opposite. Why on earth would they marry then. Guys do what they think is right.
Also, take note on how courts regularly show bias towards foreign-born citizens. In supposed "fear" that the children will be taken outside of the court's legislation (to a third world country), courts are very likely to award primary custody to fathers who divorce their foreign-born wives, much more than is the case when divorcing native-born U.S. american woman.
Journalism from WP, NYT, CNN and just about every mainstream media is in a huge denial and not only that, they know what they're doing quite well. The very article issued stories of women-only without any man giving his own story. It's like they accepted the fact that not a single man will say what they want to post so they don't even make "other side of the story".
But that's nothing new - huffingtonpost also issued "elaboration" how fathers simply decided to stop wanting to live with their children somewhere in the 60s and onwards, because courts apparently aren't biased. She forgot to note the same flaw just like NYT reporters - nobody even contests residential custody anymore because they know that there's a fully instrumentalized bias in legal system/courts and the outcome is well known, they contest child custody only when they have a strong case to discredit mother. And even then, it's been found that many mothers will issue false abuse allegations that will grant her "temporary custody" which will turn into permanent residential custody.
Husbands are awarded residential child custody in a 1/8 ratio overall, but it's generally only possible to win the legal dispute if you have a strong case to discredit the mother. Other than that, it's interesting to note that less than 1/25 cases of child custody will get overturned, mainly due to fact that the mother discredited herself in the process AFTER she got awarded custody, probably lasting for years.
There are regular reminders just how biased those courts are and how ridiculous the "official statistics" are, when even Janine Lindemulder won custody at a time, even though any sane person KNEW that she was unfit to parent. LINK
She had a custody of her child for YEARS and nobody would be able to contest it had she not even end up in prison. Even then, she still decided to fight over custody that she effectively didn't have, but she kept receiving "child support" for a child she wasn't living with.
Now, those are couples who have the money. Most folks don't even have the money to engage into court battles, much less to provide strong enough case for the court when court seems to be very permissive when it comes to mother's behavior.
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.
Perhaps your perception of subservient/inferior/lesser is different from the many many guys that hold it as their view is an equally contributing partner they treat as lessers. There isn't any responsibility for her as she's responsible for herself if anything she's more responsible for him than he is for her fulfilling whatever demands he makes while having none to little herself.