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.
Thriving, and IRT the men in your scenario, thriving that exceeds their personal goals.
Quote:
This new age claptrap doesn't fly with me. A lot of people stand in my way in a lot of areas.
I simply don't buy this in the west from a white male. Sorry, that's just how I feel about it. Minorities might have other arguments, I really wouldn't be clued in about that. But, other than significant extraneous variables, I'm not buying into it. You have made your choices. You have clearly had opportunities presented. What you do with them is your business and whatever fruit yielded from your efforts clearly lays in your lap.
Quote:
Sacrifice is at the heart of manliness.
Then women are real men according to your pov. Again, as a woman embarking on pregnancy, I simply cannot fathom a greater sacrifice. Nothing, and I mean nothing, in my life approaches the commitment I am attempting to make. No greater sacrifice.
Quote:
Nope. You don't understand what it is to be a man. How important it is. Not because of society, but because of instinct.
See Redisca's recent post. I'm certainly not a man, but I care for one. I listen to his opinion, dreams, desires. Everything he does matters. What he wants out of life matters. His goals matter. He is not threatened by my education, my job, my place in the community. If anything, they are characteristics that contribute to his love for me. That's the difference between his kind of man and what we see on this board all too often. He's interested in his heritage. He loved his grandfather so much and is following in his footsteps. That's his goal (to be a passionate scientist), not whether he's earning 30-50k +/- than his wife.
Quote:
Well, it's too bad you haven't experienced proper leadership.
Proper leadership according to who? Whether it's the home or at work, if the people involved do not have ownership over their endeavors quality will suffer. You cannot talk your way out of this. It's nonsensical. My dh and I take responsibility for our home equally. Any other way it would fall apart. The same thing goes at work. Take a look at your opinions on our president and notions of responsibility. Clearly, this isn't a difficult concept to grasp.
Quote:
I don't disagree. Although ownership is ownership of responsibility, not of people you lead.
Yes it is. For example, last year my group hired a temp (an established acedemic). The research didn't work out well and the responsibility fell on our lab head. It was her choice to hire him. It was her choice to choose his project. It was her responsibility to manage him. When it all turned to cr*p, she was the one held responsible. What I do, what my labmates do, it's on her. For good or bad.
This makes absolutely no sense to me. So if a man has a career and makes lots of money, that makes him a good provider. If a woman has a career and makes lots of money, she's materialistic and puts herself above her family. Is that what you are saying? If so, it's utter nonsense. Why would her income not go into the family budget? And why are you suggesting that even if her income does go into the family budget she's still being "self-serving" whereas her husband, who is doing the exact same thing is being selfless and heroic? I think that between a woman who earns her own income and one who expects men to support her, the latter is the more selfish one. Why is it okay for a man to seek self-realization and to pursue exciting things in life and to have choices, but a woman who merely wants the same opportunities is suddenly materialistic and selfish? Because we are "meant" only to serve and to live vicariously through others? How convenient for you. Unfortunately (for you), many of us don't see it that way.
We need to have a sticky voting thread! Read the above smartalx et al, and then read it again ^100000^100000, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliTerp07
That has nothing to do with the level of income. A selfish, materialistic person is going to be that way if they make $10k/year or $110k/year. Income level is not correlated to innate materialism.
Wow, excellent point. Thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar
I'm only willing to have relationships with one person at a time. I don't have a relationship with any family members.
That^^^ see this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redisca
Of course, lacking emotion doesn't automatically mean you are capable of logic. Those who have neither merely make noise.
In my opinion money has no gender, so whether the man makes more or the woman makes more as long as it is equally shared, who really cares who is bringing in the most.
It only becomes an issue when the person making more money is holding the power cards and is subtly demanding more 'rights' in the relationship because of the higher earning power.
I do believe my favorite part of this entire thread was pretty much the same as my favorite part of all the other man-vs-woman threads we see in these forums:
Neither side cares to acknowledge even possibilities or yield a single inch with regard to a two-sided view on the problem yet each is convinced of their broad-minded, realistic view and my Brown Cow Theorem raises its ugly head over and over again.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without accepting it." -Aristotle
You see? Even a blatant misogynist can have something useful to say!
This makes absolutely no sense to me. So if a man has a career and makes lots of money, that makes him a good provider. If a woman has a career and makes lots of money, she's materialistic and puts herself above her family. Is that what you are saying?
No, you ignored the key points.
"He might want equality and be willing to work and give every dime he makes for food and shelter for the family but she might not understand that her desire to have a career could be self-serving especially if her income doesn't go into the family budget too."
If her income goes to the family budget, then it's all good. You are picking and choosing what to argue.
Quote:
Why would her income not go into the family budget?
You'll have to ask her. I said "if."
Quote:
And why are you suggesting that even if her income does go into the family budget she's still being "self-serving"
I didn't. I said it COULD be self serving. If the money goes into the family budget then at least she's providing for the family.
Of course the guy's income could be self-serving too but once again we are inside the mind of the man. He knows he's not going to be self-serving. He doesn't know that of the woman. Not 100%. They could talk about it but I don't think I need to prove to you that someone might say something before the wedding and do something entirely different after. I say a bigger income is a yellow flag. Why isn't a big income a yellow flag for the girl? Well, it could be but first we are talking about men. Second, he has demonstrated by dating that when he spends money he expects nothing in return. This is just the way it is with a lot of people. Not everyone is like that but these are the people I am talking about. If they exist then you can't say that every man feels threatened because he can't exert control.
Quote:
whereas her husband, who is doing the exact same thing is being selfless and heroic?
Only if he is giving his income to the family.
You all are fighting the wrong guy here.
Quote:
I think that between a woman who earns her own income and one who expects men to support her, the latter is the more selfish one.
Sure but we aren't talking about a woman who expects a man to support her. If she is willing to contribute in other ways besides monetarily then super.
Quote:
Why is it okay for a man to seek self-realization and to pursue exciting things in life and to have choices, but a woman who merely wants the same opportunities is suddenly materialistic and selfish? Because we are "meant" only to serve and to live vicariously through others? How convenient for you. Unfortunately (for you), many of us don't see it that way.
I'm going to just chalk this last bit up to a misunderstanding of who I am and what I believe. All of this is just based on your presumption that I think the woman is not supposed to work so it's pretty moot. Although I will point out that a man seeking self-realization through work goes hand in hand with providing for his family. His family is his inspiration to succeed. His REASON to work. I know for many people their work is reason enough. It defines them. They don't actually "work" because what they do for income is fun for them. Men and women experience that. Well, it's great to have that but it's also important to not lose perspective over your highest earthly priority: family. Not everyone wants family. But we are discussing the mind of men. And the man I am describing wants a family. If you admit that the man I am describing can exist, then you haven't a leg to stand on because my point is that not ALL men who feel emasculated feel it because they are chauvinistic.
Now I know that some men are jerks who do use their money for power and control and THEY might feel that the woman making more money would take away their power. But these men are actually pretty rare. If you thought that I'm saying that 100% of all men who are threatened by a woman with a bigger income are altruistic in nature, then I guess I wasn't clear. So let me be clear. When I am arguing against someone who says that men feel emasculated by a woman who makes more money because he is chauvinistic I'm telling THOSE PEOPLE to not generalize. THEY are putting ALL men who feel emasculated into the same group as chauvinists. But that is not true. Men feel emasculated for many reasons. One of them might be a threat to their power but that is taking a very narrow pessimistic view of men. Men really aren't all that chauvinistic, even men who feel emasculated by strong "successful" women. Most of us do believe in equality. But we want TRUE equality, not this pseudo-equality that gives more importance to female rights. You know. The brand of equality that feminists like to shove down our throats. We fight that kind of "equality." And sometimes it is equal. But is equal always good?
I once had a girlfriend who would make lunch or dinner for us. She was small framed so she weighed about 85 pounds. She wasn't anorexic, she was just small. Very healthy girl. I easily weigh twice what she weighs. She would prepare the meal and our portion size would be exactly the same. Equal but unfair. She would fill up after one portion and I would still be starving, but she didn't make enough for second helpings. In her case it was just a misunderstanding and poor communication on my part but this anecdote illustrates pretty well what I am talking about. It seems a lot of people who are pro-equality are anti-fair. And the fact of the matter is in reality in real genuine relationship equality is impossible. But fairness isn't.
So a man might think of ANYONE who makes a lot of money as a materialistic sort of person, ESPECIALLY if he doesn't make a lot of money himself. Not out of jealousy but because he is the sort of person who knows that money isn't all that important. Money isn't the goal for everyone. A LOT of us value other things more than money. And people that value the other things sometimes tend to think people who make money are materialistic. Does that make them bad people? The poor guys or the rich girls? No. Not at all. But a good guy is willing to give this "materialistic" (notice the quotes) girl a chance. She seems nice. But the money is still a yellow flag. THAT is what I am saying. Over the course of their relationship she might demonstrate that her money is just "what she makes" and it doesn't have any bearing on him. But he is probably still aware of it and the yellow flag is still waving. Not because he is chauvinistic or he feels that her money will threaten his ability to exert control over her, but because money corrupts and career minded people often lose sight of what is important in life.
That's all I'm saying. Not all men are chauvinistic.
Ah, there you are Sasquatch. I was wondering when you would lumber in here.
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.
Those who have neither merely make noise.
