U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-29-2010, 05:42 PM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,467,412 times
Reputation: 499

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
Yes, she is providing 24/7, but will this be acknowledged as a provider? No.
No, because she's not providing. She is NURTURING!!! It's a different but equally important responsibility.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redisca View Post
Protect her from what? And how?
The cold she experiences from the car to the door of the home... with his jacket, of course. Or the man will protect her from the man.
Your snide remarks don't account for the fact that more Women more often choose security over freedom. One of the primary lessons guys learn about dating a girl is to keep her safe. It is one of the driving emotions for a woman and for a man. Your minimizing a man's desire to protect is insulting to both men and to women.
Quote:
Quote:
And this is the same attitude, of course, that deems it "unmanly" for the husband to be the stay-at-home spouse. His labor goes unacknowledged just like a woman's would.
This statement sums up the argument succinctly.
Then we are fighting over two different arguments. I'd ask you all to STAY ON TOPIC!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-29-2010, 05:47 PM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,467,412 times
Reputation: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
You are really comparing biological evolution with cultural/societal evolution? Oy vey.
Stay on topic. The point remains valid.
Quote:
for your latter post, you're contradicting yourself all over the place.
No. You think I am someone I am not. Change your perspective about me and everything should become clear and not contradictory.

I don't believe either spouse should hold dominion over the other. You fail to understand the meaning behind the words. You insert your own preconceived notions and definitions rather than pay attention to the definitions that I provide. That is why you see contradiction.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 05:47 PM
 
Location: Northern Virginia
4,489 posts, read 10,275,822 times
Reputation: 3684
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
No, because she's not providing. She is NURTURING!!! It's a different but equally important responsibility.
Your snide remarks don't account for the fact that more Women more often choose security over freedom. One of the primary lessons guys learn about dating a girl is to keep her safe. It is one of the driving emotions for a woman and for a man. Your minimizing a man's desire to protect is insulting to both men and to women.
Then we are fighting over two different arguments. I'd ask you all to STAY ON TOPIC!
Uhh....what!? If that were the case, why are women going to college in record numbers, and marrying later? And of those who marry, they wait even longer to have children. Why are greater percentages of CEOs women than ever before?

Fact is, women are plenty secure on their own nowadays. It is a small number who require a man to take care of them.

And what are you keeping a woman safe from? The only thing anyone I've ever dated has needed to protect me from is myself--I'm a terrible klutz
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 44,120,505 times
Reputation: 11022
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliTerp07 View Post
Uhh....what!? If that were the case, why are women going to college in record numbers, and marrying later? And of those who marry, they wait even longer to have children. Why are greater percentages of CEOs women than ever before?

Fact is, women are plenty secure on their own nowadays. It is a small number who require a man to take care of them.

And what are you keeping a woman safe from? The only thing anyone I've ever dated has needed to protect me from is myself--I'm a terrible klutz
Question: If a woman is satisfied with her job, and wants to continue making lots of money, why would she even be concerned with finding a relationship? She has a spouse already--her job.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 05:53 PM
 
19,059 posts, read 23,680,655 times
Reputation: 13468
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
No, because she's not providing. She is NURTURING!!!
I call bologna again. Sorry! lol The one person that has provided for you in your life is the one that gave you life, carried you, and ripped her insides out to bring you into this world. And that's your momma. That's providing. End of story. Role playing is not providing. Any 5 year old can role play.

Quote:
Your snide remarks don't account for the fact that more Women more often choose security over freedom. One of the primary lessons guys learn about dating a girl is to keep her safe. It is one of the driving emotions for a woman and for a man. Your minimizing a man's desire to protect is insulting to both men and to women.
I'm speaking the truth, tho. I guess the truth is snide, but it is what it is. As mentioned, this thread is addressing professional western women. You're going to have to rethink your self-worth measuring stick if those are the women you want to keep company with.

Quote:
Then we are fighting over two different arguments. I'd ask you all to STAY ON TOPIC!
You don't even know what the topic is. You want to address women that want to be cared for. This thread is addressing high earners. You want to guide the thread into your fantasy land and it's not an appealing sale.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 05:57 PM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,467,412 times
Reputation: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliTerp07 View Post
I got engaged at 20. Married at 22. I'm now 24. We have said since day 1 that if we have a child, my husband would stay home with it if we could afford to have either of us stay home. (It's doubtful that we could make it on one income right now). I work because I thrive in that kind of environment. He works because we have bills to pay. If I made enough to allow him to stay home, he'd do it in a heartbeat. If we had children who needed caring for at home, I'd be 100% okay with him being the one doing it instead of me.

Sooooo...yup, I married him. Please stop making generalizations.
A few rare exceptions don't disprove the rules. You are in the minority.

By the way, I wouldn't be opposed to raising the kids myself if my wife and I decided it would be best. One of my dreams is to write so I could write at home.

But the entire point of the thread is over a guy feeling threatened by his SO who makes more money. If you aren't a man or don't understand feelings of emasculation, then how can you answer the question?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 06:00 PM
 
Location: Northern Virginia
4,489 posts, read 10,275,822 times
Reputation: 3684
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
Question: If a woman is satisfied with her job, and wants to continue making lots of money, why would she even be concerned with finding a relationship? She has a spouse already--her job.
I'm satisfied with my job, and will continue making lots of money. My job is not my spouse--that's a stretch at best. My job is a place where I can be challenged intellectually, use my talents, and interact with my peers.

My spouse is my confidant, my supporter, my partner in crime. He's my best friend. I'm not sure how my job could fulfill any of those roles.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 06:02 PM
 
Location: Northern Virginia
4,489 posts, read 10,275,822 times
Reputation: 3684
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
A few rare exceptions don't disprove the rules. You are in the minority.

By the way, I wouldn't be opposed to raising the kids myself if my wife and I decided it would be best. One of my dreams is to write so I could write at home.

But the entire point of the thread is over a guy feeling threatened by his SO who makes more money. If you aren't a man or don't understand feelings of emasculation, then how can you answer the question?
No, you're TELLING ME I'm in the minority. That doesn't make it true. Just because your group of friends and acquaintances follows one pattern does not mean that the majority of the world (or even this country) agrees with you.

Everything in this thread has been anecdotal at best.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 06:02 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 44,120,505 times
Reputation: 11022
My spouse is my confidant, my supporter, my partner in crime. He's my best friend. I'm not sure how my job could fulfill any of those roles.

Why would you need a supporter if you were secure?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 06:02 PM
 
19,059 posts, read 23,680,655 times
Reputation: 13468
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
Stay on topic. The point remains valid.
Your point is A. not on topic and B. not valid. As if you know the first thing about evolution. Quite while you're behind.

Quote:
No. You think I am someone I am not. Change your perspective about me and everything should become clear and not contradictory.
You state that for a man to be a man he's a provider. You state that a homemaker is nurturing, not a provider (when a woman is doing it at least). Then you state you would be a homemaker. So, you are either claiming that you're willing not to be a real man or you're contradicting yourself.

Quote:
I don't believe either spouse should hold dominion over the other. You fail to understand the meaning behind the words. You insert your own preconceived notions and definitions rather than pay attention to the definitions that I provide. That is why you see contradiction.
You are the one that feels you have the right to lead, which is holding dominion. What does leadership mean if not having ownership over what they are leading. When I lead a project at work I have complete ownership of that project. When I'm taking a class, getting a degree, wherever I'm leading myself, I have full ownership. Since when does leadership mean anything else?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top