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.
I don't know ANY women who is lazy and selfish. Every woman I work with whether they are married or not, have kids or don't, are extremely active in all kinds of volunteering work, running a household and keeping down a busy health professional career.
Maybe in your circle they sit on the butts watching Days of our Lives and drinking coffee while their husband slaves at two jobs to make ends meet, but that doesn't happen in my world.
whatever that really not a smart statement and not what we are talking about!
I apologize for my tendency to write long, looong posts. I know I am verbose, but I hope that doesn't cancel out the substance of my posts. I write long because I don't want to be misunderstood, and because I've had too many unfortunate experiences on this forum of people reading into my posts, so I must of necessity include disclaimers. As for changing my opinion -- try me. I don't like being wrong any more than the next person, but I do want to understand what your basis is for claiming that this thread is full of posts calling upon women not to cook, clean or do laundry on principle.
Well, we are here to talk, aren't we? So let's talk. As long as we keep it civil, I don't see why we can't explore our differences and maybe find common ground.
All I'm saying is that it's weird for me to read posts of women who proudly proclaim that they don't cook and don't want to learn how to...it's weird for me to see that somehow it shouldn't be part of a woman's routine to keep a house clean and (again, to go back to your "woman giving but shuns receiving sentence) it should go both ways, but for some reason my statements of how it should be a collective effort go unnoticed (by you as well).
Also, the idea of wanting to please a man is getting criticized here. What's wrong with doing something for your husband that he would enjoy and yes, doing it ONLY for him, for his enjoyment? Is it really that wrong? I mean we want to please our partners sexually and emotionally, we want to stimulate them mentally, and we talk about it on this forum all the time, but somehow the idea of pleasing them domestically is foreign and gets laughed at. It seems like women are trying to run away as far as possible from what the lifestyle they lived for thousands of years. And of course, since I'm not a housewife material because I dislike staying home, I like to work...therefore I benefited from feminism greatly, but sometimes it's just goes too far in my opinion.
If you read replies to me, calling some of my opinion "sad", "scary"...what do you call that???
But it becomes an issue in marriages, often because men and women have different ideas of what a clean house is. IMO, women spend too much time cleaning and worrying about house work. Women want men to help and the guys are tired and don't see the need to do more work. There are women who can't sleep if there are dishes in the sink. Men without OCD do not do this. In the whole scheme of things, there are lots more important things to keep us awake at night.
Yes, I agree with your point. There should be a common understanding what is considered comfortably neat by both spouses.
I know I did, and I do have some feminism ideas in me as well, but sometimes we truly take it overboard.
I agree that sometimes feminists do go overboard. There are wackaloons in all walks of life. I just chafe when people equate "feminist" and "manhater." The words are not interchangeable, anymore than "Christian" and "bible-thumper," or "Muslim" and "al-Qaeda terrorist," or "Republican" and "neocon."
I'll let you off with a warning, MM, but you'll have to put in some community service time that includes cake. Next time it's a ticket and a fine.
I agree that sometimes feminists do go overboard. There are wackaloons in all walks of life. I just chafe when people equate "feminist" and "manhater." The words are not interchangeable, anymore than "Christian" and "bible-thumper," or "Muslim" and "al-Qaeda terrorist," or "Republican" and "neocon."
I'll let you off with a warning, MM, but you'll have to put in some community service time that includes cake. Next time it's a ticket and a fine.
I'm sure even next time, I'll charm my way out of ticket (not the first, not the last time).
Can we please stop using "feminist" as a put-down?
I am educated working professional woman - and I really dislike the word "feminist." It is a 70's term that bring to mind pictures of burning bras and the dingbat cast of "9 to 5" - so many negative connotations.
Those who demand equality only for themselves tend to come off a bit self-righteous. Like Black Panthers and Neo-Nazis. Somehow "feminist" smacks of superiority.
I prefer equalist or humanist - implying similar rights and responsiblities. Equality is earned by positive action and won by positive interaction.
How about say some women... Just like I am not going to say all men are selfish and lazy.
I only have a problem with labeling chores as a "men" chore or a "woman" type of chore. It makes no sense to me whatsoever.
What is wrong with a woman who doesn't like to clean? Is she less of a woman? What if she hates to cook? Are we supposed to be okay with everything that is thrown at us? That if we don't cook or clean "we are selfish"? It's like we are supposed to be able to fit somewhere in this crazy standards / expectations society has set upon us. What the hell?
One should live life the way they want to. If you like to be in front of a stove 3 or 4 times a day, so be it! If I prefer my significant other to do it, so be it! Are you a horrible people for wanting to be a housewife? No! It is what makes you happy. Am I less of a human being for not seeing those activities as pleasurable and fulfilling? No!
Do whatever makes you happy. I am a career woman and I like to pay half the bills. I will clean and do laundry here and there...when it needs to be done. The man should not expect me to be his maid...just as I don't expect him to clean after me. He needs to do his share too. I know how to paint, fix things, change tires. It is perfectly fine for him to cook dinner, clean the toilet and do the laundry when it needs to be done. I don't expect him to do all the so-called "men things" just as he doesn't expect me to do the "wife/women things". You do what needs to be done, whatever it may be.
It is what works for me and what makes me happy.
This thread is making me lightheaded lol. I better stop reading it.
All I'm saying is that it's weird for me to read posts of women who proudly proclaim that they don't cook and don't want to learn how to...
I think pride is something that you've read into it. Those women were saying that they don't cook and their husbands love them. The point being that cooking, like the rest of housework, isn't the sine qua non of a happy marriage, at least not for all men universally.
Quote:
it's weird for me to see that somehow it shouldn't be part of a woman's routine to keep a house clean and (again, to go back to your "woman giving but shuns receiving sentence) it should go both ways, but for some reason my statements of how it should be a collective effort go unnoticed (by you as well).
Perhaps, but at a certain point, it felt like you were talking out of both sides of your mouth -- that it should be a collective effort, but it's part of a woman's routine. The reference to Biblical times understandably struck a nerve with some posters for reasons that were already explored.
Quote:
Also, the idea of wanting to please a man is getting criticized here. What's wrong with doing something for your husband that he would enjoy and yes, doing it ONLY for him, for his enjoyment? Is it really that wrong? I mean we want to please our partners sexually and emotionally, we want to stimulate them mentally, and we talk about it on this forum all the time, but somehow the idea of pleasing them domestically is foreign and gets laughed at. It seems like women are trying to run away as far as possible from what the lifestyle they lived for thousands of years. And of course, since I'm not a housewife material because I dislike staying home, I like to work...therefore I benefited from feminism greatly, but sometimes it's just goes too far in my opinion.
Again -- what was being criticized here is the idea that women should live for ironing. That's blunt, I know, and that's not your exact words, but if I start analyzing your words, I'll end up with a long, loooong post, and you don't like that. Nobody likes a lazy slob. It's not a question of housewifery, since a lazy slob is disgusting regardless of the lazy slob's chromosomes.
It's also not a good idea in this particular instance to refer to "the lifestyle ... lived for thousands of years". By your own admission, you pick and choose which habits of antiquity you want to keep and which you choose to discard, so the age of a particular custom is irrelevant. Many things were practiced for thousands of years that we no longer embrace, and for good reason.
Quote:
If you read replies to me, calling some of my opinion "sad", "scary"...what do you call that???
I think it's not fair to get personal (and that's from someone who sometimes can't resist), but it's still not tantamount to saying that women shouldn't cook, clean or do laundry.
I am educated working professional woman - and I really dislike the word "feminist." It is a 70's term that bring to mind pictures of burning bras and the dingbat cast of "9 to 5" - so many negative connotations.
Those who demand equality only for themselves tend to come off a bit self-righteous. Like Black Panthers and Neo-Nazis. Somehow "feminist" smacks of superiority.
I prefer equalist or humanist - implying similar rights and responsiblities. Equality is earned by positive action and won by positive interaction.
Hey - but that's just me!
I agree that it can be a loaded and dated word. I disagree that it denotes (has the definition of) female superiority or privilege, but I know it can have those connotations. Working for causes that affect women doesn't mean that the people who do so are anti-man or their causes. I donate time and money to the Easter Seals but do not impede people who do things for multiple sclerosis or diabetes--same thing. I view T-shirts and parades for black history month and gay pride the same way: they are simply promoting their own goals, not standing in the way of anyone else's (although there are some wacklaoons out there, as I said).
"Egalitarian" is almost excessively neutral but does the trick at times. Still, it does not mean the same thing.
I'm sure even next time, I'll charm my way out of ticket (not the first, not the last time).
But I still want that cake!!
I would lke some cake too, Please.
hahaha
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.
