Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - realman

1
OK, so I'm a bit in shock (if that's still possible these days).... I've heard some pretty childish, immature, and/or sexist stuff goes on at bachelorette parties that already makes me cringe (for instance, hearing about how much fun grown women can have with suggestively-shaped exploding volcano cakes and the like, and of course the inevitable usual ho-hum male-bashing sessions)... but I've just recently come to hear about a product on the market called the "penis pinata" that apparently is quite popular.

It makes me cringe to think that there are men out there who would marry women who consider beating apart the likeness of a penis with a big stick a "good time." On a personal level it came as a bit of shock to hear this, because the two women involved in the conversation were people who, up until now, I had held in fairly high esteem as "good peoples". This one comment has made me reconsider that a bit....

Seems to me that a bunch of men beating apart the likeness of female genitalia would be treated as more or less of a hate crime or a psychosis. And that the typical "bad behavior" by men at bachelor parties (hiring strippers, going to a "gentelman's club", drinking too much, joking about mourning for their "fallen" brother, etc..) are all fairly good, clean fun when compared with the level of sexism and debauchery I hear about going on at bachelorette parties. We're talking 20-30 something women finding humor on a level comparable or below that which the boys and I found hilarious in the 6th grade gym locker. Really makes one think about what really goes on in the minds of modern women when it comes to their feelings about love, marriage, sex, and men. Not to read too much into it, and admitting that what goes on at some bachelor parties is pretty juvenile and sexist too... but still, even the bad bachelor party stories are mostly just about drunk guys getting stupid, or about "sexism" in the sense of objectifying women as sex objects- not sexism in the sense of bashing apart symobols or likenesses of female sexuality in a violent sense. There seems a difference between that, and the level to which some bachelorette parties sink in terms of sexual immaturity and sexism (and the fact that perfectly sober women will still find things like bashing apart a papier mache penis "funny" when they tell the story later, and that there is even seemingly a social "acceptance" of this, whereas if the guys were telling stroies of debauchery in a mixed crowd later, there would probably be a tone of "grow up guys"). I'm not sure if this type of behavior reflects on the immaturity or sexism  of the participants, their own lack of a comfort level in the topic of sex, or all of the above. I suppose it -could- amount to nothing more than allowing onesself to regress into a pit of juvenile hormonal disconnection from reality for an evening... but then again, you don't hear much about guys getting together and beating apart papier mache vulvas.

Just an observation from a guy who has just seen yet more evidence for being cynical about women. As I said, this really hit me because I heard this coming from women that I have known fairly well for about a year and had previosuly considered "quality people" and who I had never before heard or seen anything to suggest they bought into the typical "feminist/princess good-men BAD" mentalities. Anyone else have any thoughts or experiences to share on what goes on at bachelor vs. bachelorette parties and what it all might mean?
2

Even in a war zone, women are worried about not going shopping, not going out, not having sex, balancing work and home, or having to leave the country to find a husband (interesting the admission of a "need" to find a husband?) because all the men are getting killed and are too stressed out to get it up.

Surely these "women's issues" are pressing concerns in a country where men are dying, or afraid of dying, every day, right??!! Surely somebody needs to bring to light these "important" bushit issues in a country ravaged by war and terrorism and an unstable government??!! :angryfire:

Is it just me, or in a country where all these men are dying (and admittedly some women too)... shouldn't shopping (or the limitations thereof) be, well... not even a consideration? Apparently it is not just western women who are obsessed with materialism and vanity to the point of it overriding, oh, say, a dead husband?

This is off MSN BTW, if anyone cares.



************************************************************************

Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 2:04 PM
Categories: Baghdad, Iraq
By Michele Neubert, NBC News Producer
Taking advantage of a brief lull in the action while some of my male colleagues were out on a military embed, I tried to follow up on a promise I'd made to myself when I arrived on this latest assignment to Iraq - to try to find out who is the Iraqi woman circa 2007? 

Unable to stray too far, I started by chatting with some of the Iraqi women in the compound where our hotel is located. On another occasion, when it was just too dangerous for me as a Westerner to venture out, I asked our female translator, Rose, to do some of the leg work for me. I also persuaded her to make some pretty embarrassing phone calls.

What I found, while perhaps not exactly the in-depth take on female society I'd hoped for, offers a small taste of the everyday lives of some Iraqi women. The headline, should you choose to stop reading now, is no sex, too much food and no future.

Girl talk 
Shams, the 24-year-old woman at the security desk in the lobby of our hotel, made it adamantly clear that she believes she has no future in Iraq.

"The only way I have a future is if I come back with you to England," Shams said. "There is no hope for the women of Iraq. And with all these killings, we'll be left with no men. The only way to secure a husband is to leave the country."

And it's not just the future - it's the now. Shams' youth has been severely compromised by the security situation. It's too dangerous for trips out, so there is no way to meet boys on dates and the only recourse for friendship and intimacy is via a cell phone or the Internet. The highlight of the week for her is a visit to a girlfriend who lives next door.

"I miss everything we used to have in the old days [under Saddam]," Shams said. "The going out to restaurants or hanging out with friends eating ice cream till 3 a.m. These days, with the curfew, I have to be home by 7 p.m. max."

And then there is the shopping. "We all go clothes shopping in one safe area, which means everyone ends up buying the same things, so it looks like a uniform," she complained. Although she admitted that like so many of her Western contemporaries, she still manages to spend most of her salary on clothes. 

Or what's left of it after she's paid $200 of her $500 monthly salary to the taxi driver who brings her safely to work. Other friends who earn less simply cannot afford to get to work. "So they stay at home, unable to practice the professions they've studied for," she said.

Working 9 to 5
But at the bank, I did manage to meet a lively group of ladies who still manage to practice their profession. While the male manager hovered around nervously trying to inject his presence into our conversation, we ignored him and chatted away.

We hit the usual topics of the dangers of simply getting to work, frustrations of infrequent shopping trips, the nightmare of juggling home-work-cooking with power and electricity being scarce and money always being incredibly tight. Again, I was hit by a wall of hopelessness.

"The situation is worse than ever. It's spiraling right down," said Aseel, the 26-year-old single woman of the group and office siren who had regrettably just started wearing a headscarf because of the deteriorating situation. "Only God can help us," she said.

That was exactly why her married colleague, Hoda, 28, started wearing a headscarf three years ago. "I thought, I better play it right by God," she explained. "I've given up on the future."

"It's the worst possible thing, not having anything to look forward too," Hoda said. "Most people spend all their money on food. They just sit inside, in front of the TV, during curfew and eat. It's the only pleasure we have left," she said, reminiscing about the days when they could walk in the park, go to a club, have a swim.

And on that note, I waited until the male boss left the room and broached the subject of sex. Was the situation taking its toll there, too? I'd read that the birthrate in Iraq had dropped by six percent since 2003, so something must be up.

Menal, a 24-year-old newlywed blushed and conceded that, yes, like everything else, her sex life was suffering.

Hoda was more forthcoming. "Because we are both so stressed - the desire for sex, as for so many other things in life, has diminished."

Looking on the bright side, Hoda added, "The only good thing is where I was once worried about my husband cheating on me, now I don't think he'd be up to it. And even if were, there would be few willing partners!"   

Home alone
Meantime, Suha, a 32-year-old housewife, told us over the phone that she and her husband quarrel all the time because of the situation and that the depression it brings is impacting their sex life - big time.

"I just don't go out. I spend all my day eating and sleeping," she explained. "I can no longer afford a hairdresser, and even if I could, it would be too dangerous to go there. Some people were kidnapped at the pharmacy round the corner the other day, so that's now a no-go, too. There are no social visits, and it's so bad that I couldn't attend my uncle's funeral. It's got to the stage where I change my clothes three times a day just to pretend I'm going out."

Suha also shared a total mistrust of Iraq's newly elected  politicians, even the women. "These women don't take the needs of the normal Iraq women into consideration," she complained.

Ladies who lunch
I asked Rose, our translator, if she'd mind asking a few questions at the up-market Alwiya Social Club, a middle-class bastion in downtown Baghdad. There the tempo was a little more upbeat.

Zainab, a 36-year-old professional who was lunching with her friend, Hyam, believed the role of women was actually improving. "Now at least we have women in parliament, ministers and ambassadors. Unlike under Saddam when we didn't even have a parliament," she pointed out.

Hyam, 43, and the mother of three, was also more optimistic.

"We hope that the role of women in politics will improve the lot of Iraqi women. I have to hope, otherwise I couldn't live," she admitted           

And her life at home seemed not too bad either. "I manage to get out to some social events and the hairdresser is right next to my home, so I go whenever I want. I work out at home on my exercise bike and when things get too much, we go to Kurdistan for a break."

What about sex? Well even for Hyam it's a no-go. Now that's a real leveler.     

3
Main / As if we didn't already know...
Jul 12, 2007, 04:50 AM
The below article is kind of funny... first, because is anyone really surprised? Apparently the researchers are?

My thoughts: When in history have men ever, as a rule, been in charge of the domestic realm, other than providing the income and have some say in how it is used? And i think it's funny because they put a spin on it as if women being in charge at home is a a new thing resulting from "advances" women have made- but again, when was this EVER not the case? Also interesting how them seem SURPRISED that men would "accept influence" from their wives- again, considering teh sterotypes about "yes dear" and "honey-do" lists, why does this surprise ANYONE? And finally, they seem to be missing the obvious here... that if husbands don't keep the wife happy, the state is on her side, society says he's a slacker if he doesn't keep her happy, and she says "no more sex" if she's not happy... so any husband who doesn't let her rule the roost knows he's "over the line" and just might get screwed for it.

I guess I'm jsut amazed that anyone thinks this is "new". :dontknow:



Kings don't rule the castle -- queens do
Women are the deciders, dominant ones in relationships, study finds
LiveScience





Updated: 2:26 p.m. ET July 11, 2007
Men might throw their weight around at the office, but at home, women are the bosses.

A study, which was just released, finds that wives have more power than their husbands in making decisions and dominating discussions.

"The study at least suggests that the marriage is a place where women can exert some power," said lead author David Vogel, a psychologist at Iowa State University (ISU). "Whether or not it's because of changing societal roles, we don't know."

Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The results counter past research.

"Most of the research literature in psychology has suggested that women have less power," Vogel told LiveScience. "They have largely based that on the fact that traditionally men earn more money and so therefore would have the ability to make big decisions in the relationship." That wasn't the case in this study.

Spouse survey says ...
Vogel, Megan Murphy, also of ISU, and their colleagues surveyed 72 married couples in which the spouses were an average of 33 years old and had been married for about seven years. Most of the participants (66 percent) were Caucasian, followed by Asian (22 percent), Hispanic (5 percent) and African American (4 percent). The final 3 percent represented other nationalities.

Each spouse answered questions about relationship satisfaction and overall decision-making ability. Then, each spouse noted a relationship problem that could not be resolved without the spouse's cooperation. While money and housework were popular picks, sex didn't come up much as a marital issue.

Topics chosen by husbands/wives included:

Money -- 18 percent (husbands) / 13 percent (wives)
Housework -- 15 percent / 15 percent
Friends and family -- 10 percent / 19 percent
Feelings and emotions -- 10 percent / 13 percent
Time together -- 13 percent / 10 percent
Making decisions -- 18 percent / 4 percent
Sex -- 4 percent / 1 percent
Intimacy -- 1 percent / 1 percent
Communication -- 3 percent / 4 percent
Children -- husbands never chose this topic; 3 percent of wives
Other relationship changes -- 4 percent / 17 percent
The scientists videotaped the couples while they discussed each of the issues for 10 minutes.

Women power
Trained volunteers coded the videotapes using a scale that rated couples' interactions based on words and behaviors associated with blame (blames, accuses and criticizes the partner); demand (nags, pressures for change, requests); withdrawal and avoidance (avoids discussing the problem by hesitating, changing topics, diverting attention or looking away); and discussion.

Wives were more demanding -- asking for changes in the relationship or in their partner -- and were more likely to get their way than the husbands. This held regardless of who had chosen the issue.

The women were not just talking more than their husbands.

"It wasn't just that the women were bringing up issues that weren't being responded to, but that the men were actually going along with what they said," Vogel explained. "[Women] were communicating more powerful messages, and men were responding to those messages by agreeing or giving in."


  One reason for in-charge wives could be that they carry the weight of making sure the family farm is running smoothly.

"Women are responsible for overseeing the relationship, making sure the relationship runs, that everything gets done, and that everybody's happy," Murphy said.

Wife power could signal a harmonious couple. "There's been research that suggests that's a marker of a healthy marriage -- that men accept influence from their wives," Murphy said.

The study, published in the April issue of the Journal of Counseling Psychology, was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health along with ISU.

2007 LiveScience.com. All rights reserved.
4
Main / Heterosexual
Jul 03, 2006, 12:43 PM
A few thoughts occurred to me recently:

If a woman hates men, is it possible for her to be heterosexual?

If a woman thinks male genitalia are "ugly", "offensive", "dirty", or "funny looking", is it possible for her to be heterosexual?

If a woman likes the idea of dismembered male genitalia, thinks it's funny, or thinks there are times when it's "justified", is it posible for her to be heterosexual?

If a woman thinks men "owe her", is it possible for her to feel genuine love for a man? Or will she therefore always view men only through the filter of "what has he done for me?"

If a woman thinks she's heterosexual, but hates men and thinks the penis is a vile organ and should be mutilated (or at least, it's ok if it gets mutilated), is it possible for her to be really psychologically f*cked up?


Makes for some interesting thought....


On a related note, if a woman is the type who gives a guy dirty looks and calls him a "pig" for just looking at her "the wrong way", is said guy at all in the wrong if he calls her a "dyke" back? Or to put it another way, is a woman who thinks all sexually functioning heterosexual males are "pigs" capable of being a sexually functioning heterosexual female?

Thinking about it this way I'm starting to realize more about another aspect of the "hows and whys" of why so many women are insecure, unstable, confused, hypocritical, etc. They are in an emotional, psychological, physiological, and sexual tug of war with themselves over how they feel about men.

(ironically- or perhaps not!- these same women seem to have created an internal conflict for men as well- the dichotomy of feeling physical/sexual attraction to a group of people (women) who are otherwise in so many cases a complete turnoff)
5
Main / Admin Day
Apr 26, 2006, 11:32 AM
Since it's admin day and all, and since most admin professionals are female, I think we men should stand our ground and make it know that we will NOT stand for the unfair bestowing of free lunches out and flower bouquests upon these mostly-female admins. Men are just as entitled to lunches and flowers and women are, yet it is WOMEN who get most of the lucnhes and flowers. It really is unfair because we as men are told we CAN'T be admins and few of us are able to get jobs as admins... it's just not fair that we men have to do other jobs and that most of us can't be admins and enjoy the free lunches and flowers.

Ok, so I'm kidding... but it was kinda fun to look at something like this in the same way that feminists look at so many things in life! (ooo! ooo! some men have something some women (i.e., ME!) don't have! It's OPPRESSION, I tells ya... :roll: )
6
Main / Boys in School
Apr 05, 2006, 12:58 PM
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/departments/elementary/?article=battleofsexesmain&GT1=7967


This article, while not providing any answers to the quetsion, does seem to acknowledge some things from a boy/male-friendly perspective.

Too bad she had to fall back on that "women only earn 75 cents on the dollar" claptrap... but I suppose if a bit of feminist-stroking like that helps to ease the shock and help more women see things in a more "pro-male" light, it's not entirely bad.
7
Flipped through another really obnoxious anti-male book at the bookstore the other day. Called "dating Sucks", it appears inccuous enough at first, but it turned out to be one of an entire genre of books that helps women feel better about their pathetic selves by putting down men in order to feel "superior to them". I'm sure most of you have seen some of them...

In any event, after presenting a laundry list of types of men/losers, (including the "nice guy who is everything you want... but you have nosexual attraction to" among others...), it all goes downhill once every failure in any woman's dating life has properly blamed on men. It even delves into important bedroom issues, like the fact that the names of the male sex organs are "unapptractive" (like "testicle" or "scrotum" somehow sound ugly, while "uterus" or "fallopian tube" or "cervix" soemhow sound like a warm gentle breese on a summer evening or something?). Then, the kicker- she asserts that all women know that the male sex organs, the penis, testes, and scrotum in particular, are ugly (she compares the testes to a pir of dangling dried figs). Whatever... frankly if you wanted to you could say a woman's vulva is pretty hideuos- and sometimes smells odd too!

The msot ridiculous part is that despite the author's assertions about the ugliness of male genitalia, she obviously considers sex important  and expects "good" sex. How the F___ can you have "good sex" with something you think is gross and disgusting and look like rotting dangling dried fruit????? :evil:

Just tired of dealing with world full of angry, self-abosorbed, self-righteous little girls who's only source of self-esteem is derived through their hatred and belittlement of men...

I feel like saying "f*ck you" to any woman who finds the male sex organs visually unappealing.... and doubly so to any woman who, despite this, still wants sex!" :twisted:
8
Main / The perfect orgasm
Oct 12, 2005, 10:50 AM
Was in teh book store the other day and saw a book (by a woman, for women, of course) something to the effect of how to have the perfect orgasm.

Naiively, I picked up the book and flipped through a few pages. I have to say that what I read was somewhat nauseating.

In particular- the books starts out with a few anecdotes from women (real or fictitious we don't knwo for sure....) about the best orgasms tehy've ever had. One is from a high-rolling young lady who says the best she ever had was at soem fancy party where there was this one guys who was "average looking but had those eyes that just..."" and she spent the whole evening looking at him but never got to talk to him.

Finally, she just couldn't take it anymore, excused herself to the ladies, and well, you know, "eased her sexual tension" (I have a hard time believing there are too many women in real life who would see a guy and have the need to go to teh ladies room and masturbate to deal with it, but anywho....). As she was washing up to go back out to rejoin the party, the guy came into the ladies room, pressed his pelvois against her as she leaned over the sink, and proceeded to drop his trousers, lift her skirt, and penetrate her from behind. She had the best orgasm of her life, he finsihed up and left without ever saying a word to her.

Now what gets me (other than that IMHO she's a bimbo) is that had it not been the guy she was so smitten with as to have just finished masturbating over him who came in to the ladies room, pressed his groin agaisnt her ass, bent her over the sink and screwed her- this same scenario would be called sexual harassment, sexual assault, or rape (depending on how things had actually progressed considereing with any other man she would have considered this all "unwelcome").

I guess this is just the sexual hypocrisy of today's women which we men must just learn to deal with? It just really gets me that teh same scenario can either be "the best orgasm ever" or "rape" depending on who the male stranger is that perpetrates it. And of course, women in either event are not held responsible for any of it, while men bear complete responsibility. Not that I'd ever join some strange woman in the ladies room at a party to bone her without even talking to her beforehand, it's just disturbing to see this kind of behavior encouraged among women while for the men involved it is risking incarceration! I suppose it explains a lot about many women's distorted views of the world, themselves, and men if this is any indication of today's young women and their views on life.
9
Typical MSN pro-anything-female article here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8284173/

My favorite quote, on why some women prefer to be single mommies than be married and have a traditional family:

"But others who opt to go this route don't think they're missing much. "With a lot of the relationships I see with my friends, you have a couple of kids and a husband you need to manage -- it's a lot of work to have a great marriage," says Anne-Marie. "Am I working harder as a single mom than a married mom? I don't think so. In some ways, I'm working less hard because I don't have another adult to work around and manage. In some ways it's simpler.""

Husbands need to be managed? Ah yes, I love the thinly-veiled misandrism. I wish I had ovaries so I could get off every time someone subtly reassured me of how useless and helpless men are! Just feel that estrogen surge at the thought!

I also love the "I'd rather be a single mom than have to actually WORK (horror of horrors!!!!) at a marriage" attitude. Wouldn't wanna have to do any work in a relationship (I thought men were the ones who had to do the dirty work in relationships anyway? At least that's what women keep telling me...)

As usual, it's "I want it all, and with as little work as possible on my part, preferably none".

What I hate most about it is that it's pretty much selfishness... "I don't wanna have to expend any effort on a marriage, I don't want to be "held back" by a relationship, and my life will be meaningless if I never had children, so even though children should have two parents I'm gonna get some sperm from someone I've never met and have me a baby so I can feel good about myself and give my life meaning and maybe not die a lonely old woman with 23 cats who nobody talks to."

I also love the feminist doublespeak- women don't need to have husbands or children to lead fulfilling meaningful lives, have a menaingful career, and "live life to the fullest"; in fact marriage and motherhood holds women back from their fulfillment; but if a woman never has kids she will have lived a lonely, meaningless, empty life so if she needs to have children alone, "ou go girl"."

I know my brain hurts trying to understand how THAT makes sense! From what I can tell it only makes sense if one contorts their brain to beleive that "women should have whatever they want regardless of the consequences to themselves or others" is an absolute truth.
10
Main / Women lose more $$$ in a breakup
Jun 21, 2005, 05:35 PM
I don't have much time to comment, this is off of MSN, I'm sure teh ridiculousness of some of this will be blatantly obvious to all-
I mean, it's not like it's written purely from a female, women-as-victims mentality or anything :roll:  Shit, if she didn't pay the bills why should she be entitled to any of the credit? If he bought the hosue (i.e., down payment) and all she did was pay mortgage for a while, as far as I'm concerned she shouldn't get anything back- did she not get a place to live in return? When you break an apartment lease to they refund your rent? Gimme a break! I like the "since the breakup was HIS fault" comment too :roll:



>>>

Who loses most in a breakup?



Few unmarried couples assess the potential financial pitfalls of a breakup before they move in together. Here's what to ask up front.

By Christian Science Monitor

Everything looked promising for Lauren Laughead and her boyfriend when they moved from Boston to Dallas in 2002 for his job. They had been living together for nearly four years and were planning to marry. They even bought a town house in Dallas.

But the dream was derailed two years later when her boyfriend ended the relationship. "Since the property was in his name, and he was at fault for the breakup, I just moved out," says Laughead, who handles advertising for a law firm. "I paid off my part of the credit card and left it at that. I had helped pay part of the mortgage for a year. I lost that money. He's got equity."

Her experience illustrates a little-noted peril of cohabitation: the potential negative financial consequences of breaking up. When unmarried couples who have been living together part company, women are substantially worse off economically than men, according to a study in the current Journal of Marriage and Family.

Men's household income drops by 10 %, while women lose 33 %. The percentage of women living in poverty increases from 20% to 30%, while men's poverty level remains relatively unchanged at about 20%. Credit card interest
out of control?
Find a lower rate.



Women lose more across the board
Even the 33% drop for women strikes some financial experts as too low. "That's a nice statistic, but I think it's far worse than that," says Doris Theune, senior vice president of Bryn Mawr Trust Co. in Bryn Mawr, Pa. "I live in a very affluent area, yet I see women all the time lose out across the board. It's the same as divorce. If women have given up a career, or if they have relocated, then they lose."

More than 40% of American women under the age of 45 have lived unmarried with a male partner at some point, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. In 2000, 9.7 million Americans were cohabiting with an unmarried partner of the opposite sex, while 1.2 million lived with a same-sex partner.

Unlike divorce, cohabitation offers no economic protection for either party. For married couples, there are precedents, formulas and divorce court, says Debra Neiman, a certified financial planner in Watertown, Mass. "For unmarried folks, there is no such playing field. It's up to the couple at the onset, or early in the relationship, to set the stage and make preparations for what would happen in the event of dissolution."

When dreams go awry
Yet starry-eyed young lovers don't like to think of that possibility. "It's amazing how many of my friends in their early to late 20s go through this," says Laughead, referring to her breakup. "A lot of us go into a (live-in) relationship with a positive outlook. We think, 'Oh, nothing bad will happen.' The girl typically thinks, this is going to be great, we're (eventually) going to get married."

Among Laughead's friends, the woman is typically the one who moves out. She must find a place to live and buy furniture. "You realize, 'Oh, my college furniture -- I sold that,'" Laughead says. "Or you have a couch and a headboard and no mattress. Those are expenses you don't think of."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related news and commentary on MSN Money Tie the knot without busting your budget
Why we fight over money
9 ways to rein in a spendthrift spouse
New parents' top 10 money mistakes
How to shack up, financially
8 financial tips for newlyweds


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Her ex-boyfriend incurred expenses, too. "When I moved out, all the kitchenware was mine," she says. "He came home and didn't have any kitchen supplies anymore."

But because her boyfriend paid the bulk of the down payment, the town house was in his name. "We figured when we got married, we'd change it to include me," she says. He was also the primary account holder on the utilities. After she left and needed her own telephone and utilities, she had no record of having a good credit standing.

Call in an attorney for a big purchase
Unmarried couples who want to buy a home should have an attorney draft a property agreement, says Neiman, coauthor, with Sheryl Garrett, of "Money Without Matrimony," to be published next month. "It could simply say, 'In the event of a breakup, Party A has the right of first refusal to buy the property from Party B.' It could be more explicit and say, 'The purchase price will be based on the average of two or three market appraisals.'"

Some women discover less obvious economic penalties when cohabitation ends. "They're not saving as effectively for themselves," because they see themselves as part of a team, Allen says.
Women also tend to feather the nest more than men, buying curtains, towels and sheets, Theune says. "That's hard to put a dollar value on."

Pepper Schwartz, a sociologist and relationship expert for perfectmatch.com advises couples who are thinking about living together to ask serious questions:

What are we doing here?

Is this an open-ended situation that may not turn into anything?

If we love each other, will we marry?
"Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean you don't need to know the answer," she says.

Dogs and credit cards
In the event of a breakup, Schwartz adds, couples must consider another key question: "What do we owe each other under these circumstances -- money, furniture, dogs?"

Dogs were part of the negotiations when Stacy Katz's first live-in relationship ended. She and her boyfriend had two dogs, and they were a big issue in dividing their property. Each took one.

Since then, Katz, of New York, now a manager for a financial regulatory service, has had two other cohabiting relationships, each lasting about a year. When the first and third ended, she incurred no serious financial losses.

But with her second boyfriend, she learned a hard lesson after she allowed him to use her credit card. "I was the cardholder, but he had his name on it, too. When I moved away, he ran it up and didn't pay it," she says.

Katz had also cosigned a car loan. After she left, her ex-boyfriend let the insurance run out. He had an accident and couldn't pay for the repairs. "Creditors were pursuing me for a long time for the credit card and car loan," she says. That hurt her credit rating.

Set up joint accounts
To protect both parties, Allen says, the safest approach is to have joint accounts, joint assets and run the household on a budget that both people contribute to, perhaps pro rata based on income. But even a joint tenancy account carries risks: Either party can empty it out. She suggests an account that requires two signatures -- an "and" account, not an "or" account.

Very often, couples go into these relationships in a state of "gleemania," Theune finds. "By the time the bloom is off the rose, they find themselves in this financial, emotional, psychological bind. Getting out of it is legally easier if you're not married, but the devastation is as harmful." She finds that many women "didn't take time to prepare themselves to leave, financially or otherwise."

One woman she knows relocated to a new city with her boyfriend after they became engaged. When they broke up, she had to move back and find another job. But they did work out a financial settlement to cover what she would need for one year to get reestablished.

Higher stakes for those at midlife
Among younger couples, cohabitation can often involve a lighthearted commitment with lighthearted exits, Ms. Garrett says. But as the practice becomes more common among middle-aged couples who may be altar-shy after a divorce, the stakes are higher. "When they were 22, they split up the lawn furniture they were using in the living room. When they're 40 or 50, they often have significant assets and liabilities."

If a couple can't work out the financial aspects of a breakup in a civil manner, Schwartz suggests getting a third-party mediator to help. "If you end up in court, it'll be just awful," she warns. "You might need somebody to talk to, to see if you are due any economic recompense for the relationship. But in general, you signed up for something that wasn't marriage."

Laughead offers her own cautionary note to unmarried couples. "If you're paying toward something, you need to make sure your name is on it somewhere. If the worst-case scenario happens, you want to protect all your assets."

Garrett takes a similarly pragmatic approach. "You need to think of unmarried couples more like business partners," she says. "If you own anything together, or owe anything together, this is your business partner. It's definitely not romantic, but it's very healthy and a smart way to protect yourself and your loved ones."

By Marilyn Gardner, The Christian Science Monitor
11
Main / Anti-Men's Movement Page
May 18, 2005, 01:04 PM
http://www.overopinionated.com/men.htm

This page gives us an idea of the ideology that must be broken down in order for the men's movement to be taken seriously. She does make a few reasonable points (regarding such things as being responsible when it comes to sex/birth control) but in general she's basically spewing feminist drivel. I just thought some might find it of interest as it directly address the men's movement.

It is not too difficult to see that on most matters she only sees the female side of the coin, and pretty much says anything that takes the male prespective into account is whining or being "irresponsible". Please. Actually this could probably be considered a "trojan horse" (as per the other thread) tactic... she tries to appeal to men to not be whiney and irresponsible as a means of gaining support for her opinions...almost seems like she intend to make men believe she is "here to help them grow up" or something; she's also implying that if she says these men are whiny and irresponsible she must be correct.

There are whiny and irresponsible men out there, but asking for fairness in the courts, asking for an end to rampant female narcissism, and asking for an end to anti-male hate speech is not whining or being irresponsible.

I think the problem is both women and men are so used to women having the best of both worlds (i.e., keeping the good things from  traditional western society as well as the additions of feminism) and so used to the goverment's support of feminism that the populace at large doesn't even see it...they just automatically assume that for men to criticize women or deny accountability for that which they are not responsible for is to be "anti-woman" or to be "whining" and "irresponsible".
12
Main / Ramblings on women and dating
Apr 20, 2005, 09:08 AM
Ok, this is just some stuff I've been thinking about a little bit lately. I guess I'm curious to see if any agrees/disagrees or has anything to add. I will add a disclaimer that soem generalization may occur and that if I make disparaging remark about other's beliefs/interests/way of life it is not meant to be an overall condemnation of same, merely an acknowledgement that it is "not for me". Here goes...

Sometimes I feel like I'm inexperienced or clumsy when dating women...or like I'm just not what they're looking for. THis gets to me after a while. I mean, I've dated plenty of women and had some significat relationships...but at the same time, I certainly don't get much attention from females overall (but then, only about 5% of the male population do, it seems). The more I think about it, the more I think that it's true that I'm not really what most women are looking for...but I also think that's actually not a bad thing. For example, I suspect if I drove a BMW instead of a pickup truck, worked at a job that paid more money even though it wasn't a good fit for me personally, bragged more about my income and possessions, "dumbed myself down" a bit in my conversations, and showed more interest in shopping/TV shows/movies/night clubs/dancing/consumerism/self-ceteredness/shallowness/codependency/risky behavior and less interest in history/the environment/personal integrity/knowledge-seeking/hiking/reading/self-sufficiency etc. that I could attract a lot more women. But I think this is more a bad reflection of women than a bad refelction on myself. Not that I am perfect by any means-I certainly have my own set of flaws! But since I've realized this I do tend not to feel so bad abotu about not being "the man every woman wants"...because I wouldn't really want to be that man! That man is focused on sex, and very little else, and would compromise everything he has, even his own values, to give his woman whatever she wants while demanding nothing but sex in return (which is pretty close to the definition of "codependency"); he places little value on integrity or knowledge; and he must be kept "entertained" or participate in risky beahvior to seek "thrills" because he cannot find self-fulfillment in life.

Likewise, I realize that it's not that I am clumsy or inexperienced in dealing with women. It's that I know most women are looking for someone else..they're looking for a man who jumps through hoops for female approval, focuses his attention fully on her and expects nothing in return, and is interested in talking about the latest gossip/shopping/blah blah blah. They want a man who makes her the center of his universe and reduces himself to nothingness. I relaize that to do this would be to deny my own needs, beliefs, and integrity, and to become something I am not.

Fortunatley for me there are a few women out there who do not fit the usual mold and are not looking for an emotional tampon, sugar daddy, bad-boy, or someone to rescue them from their own unfulfilling life. Unfortunatley, there seem to be few women like this, and many men looking for them, so I don't get a whole lot of female attention and there are very few women who I'd really be compatible with long-term. But I don't beat myself up over it anymore (at one time I did) because I realize that while I may not be what 90% of women are looking for, I'm a better man for it. And I will not let some self-serving woman with less inetgrity, less self-awareness, and less self-esteem dictate who I should be, or how I should act in a relationship.

I do still get frustarted listening to women complain that there are so few decent men, and meanhwile being generally off their radar. I do still get frustarted that I usually must do the work to initiate relationshiops with women while they simply sit there and wait for suitors. But I've also come to realize that the problem is not just the women...half of it is MEN! Those men who are so focused on pussy that they'll act like something they;re not, compromise their beleifs and integrity, and waste their time simply for the reward of intercourse with a woman they don't even like. Those men who enter into relationships with women who are immature and manipulative and self-centered and treat them like princesses- simply because they've been taught that that is what men do.

I for one think half the problem of female sexual power, self-centeredness, etc. lies with MEN. I don' know how to go about doing it, and I do see some (like those here) who realize this, but the majority are still either completely unaware of how they're being manipulated or are vaguely aware but have not "dug deeper" . Somehow I think we need men to realize they should not put up with "girls behaving badly", not put up with female narcissism, not compromise their beliefs and values to be "what women want", and to expect that women give them the same treatment in return (as opposed to giving her whatever she wants and asking nothing but sex in return...sex which she enjoys just as much as he does!).

If we could get men to a.) realize that not being "what women want" likely means they are a better person for it and b.) realize that the current system is simply a game of manipulation which gives women the upper hand in relationships and reaps all the benefits with minimal effort....I think if thsoe two things happen en masse, the "gender war" would be more than half won- and BOTH genders would benefit because relationships could then be built on mutual appreication, love and respect instead of financial benefit, entertainment value or emotional neediness (and likewise if two people just wanted some sex they could get it, instead of a prostitue-john exchange of lifestyle/financial/emotional benefit in exchange for sex, or a situation where one party is just looking for sex and hurts the other party because they must "act like they care" in order to get the other person into bed, then "stops caring" after getting what they wanted). Women would no longer be worshipped as goddesses, they would then become human beings just like men. And for the rest of the gender issues to be resolved, women must be brought down to the level of human beings. Until then, little negotiation or intelligent dialogue can take place.

Okay, I'm gonna get off this soap box now...
13
Main / Men's Anger List
Apr 11, 2005, 11:43 AM
The following was compiled by James Novak in 1995. Many have probably seen it before, most won't learn anything new, but it is a good summary of whay most of us are here:




Men's Anger List

Feminist women want equality in the military, but will not lobby for women as a matter of civic duty to be obligated to sign uo for the draft or be required to fulfill their obligation of combat duty.

After Lorena Bobbitt cut off her husband's penis while he was sleeping and then threw it out the window of her car, many women laughed and made jokes about this mutilating act. They wouldn't have laughed if John Wayne Bobbitt had cut off her breast and thrown it out the window.

Lorena Bobbitt was out of treatment in 45 days after being found guilty. How would John Bobbitt have been treated if he had been found guilty of cutting off Lorena's breast?

Hallmark has a series of greeting cards that say, "Men are Scum." Women would be outraged by, "Women are Bitches" cards.

Capital punishment is a punishment for men. Only one woman has been executed in the past 25 years even though women commit (this does not mean their kill rate, only their conviction rate) 14 percent of the murders in America, but are 1/50th less likely to be executed.

The Dane County Advocate for Battered Women take public money, but will not respond or help battered men. Dane County's District Attorney will not bring charges against them for practicing discrimination.

In 1994, five men called me because they were battered by their wives. Three explained that they did not hit back or even defend themselves. They called the police and on arrival the men were arrested.

One battered man who called Family Services for help was advised to join a group of men who were batterers.

The Wisconsin State Journal mocked James Luscher and Hames Novak as "near candidates for the loony crowd" for filing a discrimination suit holding that giving free drinks to women on ladies night was illegal. The newspaper refused to apologize upon request. After the Court of Appeals upheld Novak and Luscher, the newspaper was silent, but did not editorialize that the Court of Appeals' judges were candidates for the loony crowd.

The U.S. Forest Service rather than hiring qualified white males for numerous positions, decided to drop their advertisements and hire no one.

Playboy murderer Benbemick, with the help of a boyfriend, broke out of a Wisconsin prison and fled to Canada. The boyfriend was promptly extradited, convicted and imprisoned. Benbemick fought extradition, finally came back to Wisconsin, and was released. The boyfriend remains in jail.

Salesman X who works for a Fortune 100 company was assigned to teach a young woman sales. Salesman X never stopped for lunch and followed the same routine that day. Salesman X also spoke about the group of sales people who meet at a bar after their weekly sales meeting. Salesman X was inviting the young recruit into the old boys network. The young woman filed a sexual discrimination suit claiming that she was one month pregnant and that Salesman X's invitation to have drinks with the old boys network was sexual harassment. Salesman X was suspended for 3 days and told he would be fired if any other sexual harassment claim was made against him.

Engineer X asked a secretary (not his) out for lunch. She gratefully accepted and the lunch was congenial. Engineer X asked her out for dinner and she told him she was not interested in developing the relationship. All was fine, except she filed a sexual harassment claim against Engineer X claiming she was "uncomfortable" working with him. Engineer X's boss found the whole topic of sexual harassment too hot to deal with; his boss banned Engineer X to using the back stairs of the building so that Engineer X would not pass the secretary's desk.

Manager J asked Employee C, who was a student, what she was studying at the University. She explained that her major was Women's Studies. Manager J followed up by asking what jobs were available for women with a degree in Women's Studies. That afternoon Employee C filed a sexual harassment complaint with the employer stating that Manager J was denigrating her area of studies. Employee C continued for 2 years to harass the employer into a money settlement.

Men are 50 percent of parents, do about 40 percent of domestic work, but upon divorce receive physical placement only about 10 percent of the time.

The United States has set up a huge bureaucratic apparatus to collect child support for custodial parents; nothing is spent to enforce fathers' rights to parent their children.

Judges do not even enforce their own court orders regarding fathers' parenting time with their children.

Fathers despise being considered an outsider or visitor to their children by the courts.

Fathers recognize the term "dead beat dads" as bigotry. The percentage of men who pay child support is six times higher than the percentage of women who are ordered to pay child support. Moreover, most men pay child support and those who do not are mostly unemployed, poor, or denied access to their children.

Women vigorously claim that there is little attention paid to their health care. Yet cancer of the breast research receives 6 times more dollar subsidy than cancer of the prostate even though the rates of cancer are similar.

A man accused of sexual harassment or assault is "guilty until he proves he is innocent" instead of "innocent until proven guilty."

About 3/4 of all charges of sexual abuse to children are known to be and are found to be false. Judges follow a safe path in all accusations by denying a father access to his children. After innocence as been established those same judges use the fathers absence and the children's accommodation to a life without a father as reason for awarding a mother primary physical placement.

Even though statistics and studies show that more than 50 percent of accusations of sexual assault are false, district attorneys will not bring charges against the lying party even though it is a felony.

Men receive 58 percent longer prison sentences for conviction of the same crime.

Paternity fathers are denied the right to physical placement by statute in the state of Wisconsin.

In Bosnia the young women are allowed to leave towns for fear they will be raped. The young men left behind are killed afterwards. The American media are outraged by young who are threatened by rape.

"Women and children first!" Do men's lives not have the same intrinsic value?

Men are first and normally only when it comes to being killed by terrorists or beaten by police.

If women make only 75 cents on the male dollar (which is debatable), then men pay 125 percent of the funding of social security. How is it justice in taxation that men only receive 33 percent of Social Security benefits?

How can it be said that women's health care is neglected when they are the primary users of the health care system and men live on average 7.5 years less than women?

Why is it that even though the city of Madison in Wisconsin has one of the strongest affirmative action programs in America, women will not take good paying jobs with a huge benefit packages as garbage collectors?

Why is it that only about 14 percent of grade school teachers are men and yet this is not an affirmative action issue even though young people are desperately in need for male role models?

Why is it when 10 men die and one woman is injured at a construction site, the newspaper headline will likely read, "Ten Workers Die, Woman Injured"?

Men are disgusted when presented as buffoons on almost every television advertisement related to the home or children?

Men are even more disgusted with all the television comedies in which the audience laughs when men are hit in the balls deliberately by women or other men? What reaction would take place if this same programmed laughing were associated with women being slapped in the breasts?

Much is made of the Korean comfort women during the Japanese occupation; what about the hundreds of thousands of men who survived or died in labor camps or who were simply executed?

If Rodney King had been Roberta King, and beaten as he was, the police officers would have received life in prison. men are the routine targets of police violence.

Why is rape known about, acceptable, and used as a means of prison control in male prisons, but toleration of it would be abhorrent in female prisons?

Why is it that it is discrimination to charge men lower rates for health insurance in HMO's, but acceptable to charge men higher rates for car and life insurance?
Using a victim-defense for premeditated murder outrages any person with a sense of fairness or civility?


Excusing a woman from crime on the basis of a post partum or PMS defense is defended by pop feminists. Men are told by these same pop feminists that women are just as solid in their judgments to hold high office of a sensitive nature.

Men get tired of listening to women rant and rave about how few women are in political office when so few take the initiative to fun for office and of those who run for office, they have little agenda to offer demonstrating that they care to represent all the people of their district, including men and women.

Women to man: "Your income is family income; my income is mine."

Most men are enraged at being called oppressors and patriarchs. In a society with economic classes where 5 percent of men and women have 50 percent o the wealth, 95 percent of men struggle each day to make a living and are hardly powerful, rich or patriarchs. In fact, the vast majority of white men are not empowered.

Men do not have procreative rights in the United States. They have no choice.

If a man wants a woman to have an abortion and she chooses to have a child, he is enslaved to pay child support for 18 years.

If a man wants a child and the woman aborts the child, he grieves and no one even recognizes his grief as legitimate.

If two young people, both of whom are unskilled and unprepared to be a parent, have a child and the mother applies for welfare, she will be given a welfare check, healthcare, child care, a free education, and food stamps. The young man will be declared a deadbeat dad and imprisoned.

Young men's suicide rate is astronomical and society does not care.

Men at retirement are seven times more likely to commit suicide than women, and nobody cares.

Seventy-five percent of the homeless are men. Ninety-nine percent of the press coverage reads, "Homeless women and children."

Rep. Patricia Schoreder speaks about the brave men and women who fought America's wars. The number of women killed in all of America's wars from an accounting point of view is statistically insignificant.

Every blue collar "most dangerous" job ranks as a category numerically dominated by men. All but one of the white collar "most dangerous jobs" are also numerically dominated by men. Why are dangerous jobs men's jobs and why are men denied extra compensation for doing America's dangerous work where they are disabled and killed at a 19 to 1 ration to women?

How can marriage be an economic contract when divorce is no fault? Who created the nonsense that a woman can own a man's career in a marriage of moderate duration (10 years in Wisconsin)?

Judges routinely deny parenting time to fathers, and then want to increase child support so that a mother can afford more child care.

The Violence Against Women Act was written and passed with full knowledge that men are the victims of 80 percent of all violence in America.

White men often pay for three families of children: 1. Child support for their first marriage; 2. AFDC children via taxation; 3. Children from their current family.

No baby changing support apparatuses in public men's washrooms.

Men resent being told that the Christian religion is Patriarchal when women represent two thirds of its customers.

Men recognize the inconsistency in being told that God is Patriarchal when women are two thirds of its customers.

Men recognize the inconsistency in being told that God is a she, but with no mention that the devil is also a she.

Bar Owner Z has a swinging place where young men and women meet. Bar Owner Z has two ID checkers at all times. Sixteen year old Lolita obtains an almost perfect, near impossible to detect fake ID and gains entrance. Sixteen year old Lolita seduces Bar Owner Z and by evening's end, he takes her home for the night. Lolita's parents come to know the truth of her deceits. They call the district attorney and Bar Owner Z is charged and convicted. Bar Owner Z pays a fine, has his business closed for one week, and spends a month in jail. Nothing happens to Lolita.

In Wisconsin a woman who is drunk cannot give sexual consent even if she is not passed out. The next morning, she can charge her lover with rape. However, the same consideration is not given to her lover who also was intoxicated.

Women want to be equal, still they expect men to continue to take the sexual initiative. If they are pleased by the overtures of a man, they are delighted. If they are not pleased because he may be the wrong man or because of his style of responding to general flirtation, they accuse him of sexual harassment.

Men resent that the district attorney in Dane County seems to prosecute almost every case of sexual accusation and domestic violence without intellectually discriminating.

Men resent that women and minorities are "affirmative actioned" into jobs, promotions, and graduate and professional school openings even when they are less competent than white men who are applying for the same positions.

Men resent that those same classes are often excused for their failure to perform adequately in their new "affirmative actioned" positions.

Men further resent the same classes above calling white males "racists," "sexists," or some other kind of "ists" for pointing out that white men are smart enough to recognize that a person without adequate skills or experience has failed.

Men know that every man is not a rapist. Even women know that only a very few men are rapists, yet only a few decent women are standing up to the absurd antimale generalizations of radical feminists.

Men are angry when women continue to deny that they are sexually powerless and deny that they have power through the control of men's access to sex.

American feminists are reprehensible for their outrage at the use of clitorectomies in Africa while circumcising their sons. Only America is near universal in the sexual mutilation of male infants.
14
Just found this article about "toxic relationships" involving controlling/manipulative people mildy annoying...is it just me or is it saying that "men manipulate/control women and women are the victims" ...as if to say that women would NEVER do such a thing as be manipulative and controlling? :roll:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7115340/
15
Main / Women jabber about themselves
Mar 01, 2005, 10:41 AM
I've been noticing more and more that a lot of women seem to like to jabber about themselves an awful lot. Past girlfriends have done it. More often than not, the women I've met/dated lately seem to spend a lot more time telling than asking, if you know what I mean...they'll tell me about this, that, and the other thing, ask a quick question or two, then they're right back to "telling mode". I always thought comversation should be roughly  a 50/50 thing, and I also thought when you met someone new and/or started dating someone they'd have lots of questions to ask, but these girls seem more interesting in me learning about them than they are in learning about me. Anybody have 2 cents to add? Does this phenomena seem to be getting worse lately? :?