Started by Christiane, Jun 13, 2006, 07:45 AM
Point taken, Darth. I will refrain from the further use of melodrama. It's not typical of me though - at least I hope not. I don't know what got into me. :?
The mods could decide when some thread has gone too far and needs to be moved. Anybody who wants to pursue a personal slight beyond a couple of posts does it in the new forum. If they feel that strongly they will, and they'll have a place for their views. If they don't feel strongly they'll just drop it and start a new thread in 'Main' - which will be subject to the same rules.
To me, the real problem is "no-fault" divorce and the casual disregard of marriage vows.
Sounds reasonable to me. We already have 'The Ring', which is not intended quite exactly for that purpose, but I'm sure it could be adapted since it is so rarely used.
"SAHMs could benefit their families greatly..... Do they? Most, no."
As I said b4 it is about educating men that they do not need to shoulder the burden of being the single wage earner and that they are not bad for telling the little woman "Get a bloody job or get out"
And if she does neither, then what's the course of action?
QuoteAnd if she does neither, then what's the course of action?Are you asking directions Somebody else? I understand what you're saying but if I wanted to go somewhere else, other than where you are, I wouldn't start from there.
Please allow me to clarify what I was driving at: I belileve that all humans - and likely most all successful species of life on planet earth - are first and foremost driven by self-preservation. And in my mind this is not a bad thing, and I suppose I should have made that point in my post. Indeed, I think that in many ways it may be why women are healthier and live longer than men. Men are notoriously cavalier about self-preservation, miny times to the point of self-destruction, and to me this is bad. Further, I believe that female Homo sapiens are innately conditioned by biology and culture to put their offspring first after their own self-preservation (i.e., the mother needs to live in order to keep her kids alive). I think that similarly male Homo sapiens are conditioned to provide for their families first and foremost, with self-preservation very important but, if not 'less' than for females, at least different. Thus, what I was trying to point out was that women (the General Human Female - everyone's individual experience obviously is different) are primarily motivated by self-interest and self-preservation (which I believe is true). However, the same could be said for men, except that while we're more than likely just as movtivated by self-interest, IMO our self-preservation priority is lower than women's; we can see this in the stats for excessive drinking, drug abuse, and countless other reckless and dangerous behaviors. Indeed, men could use a bit more self-interest and self-preservation skills when, for example, hanging out with their pals at the local bar before driving home.While I've become weary of feminists browbeating us MRAs to always qualify that 'men do or are so-and-so too' when we point out behavior in women, in this case I see that I should made that clear. This is such a touchy subject that I now know it requres one to go the extra mile vis-a-vis avoiding insult, hurt feelings, misunderstanding, etc.
I'm really sick of two things that this thread addresses: The wholesale dismissal and devaluation of 1) SAHMs, and 2) the right for couples to choose what works for them without interference from outside forces, what I call the "Nanny State." I was raised by a SAHM who was the most intelligent, dynamic person I've ever met, and I'm here to tell you that it had a profound effect on her. She wanted to be an archeologist, geologist, etc., but back in her day (she'd be 85 if she were still alive) women didn't have the kinds of opportunities that they do now, so she did what society expected of her: She got a teaching degree, taught high school english and then quit work and became a SAHM when she had kids. I believe that my sibs and I are much better people because she chose to sacrifice her professional ambitions for the well-being of her kids, and for that I will always respect - to the point of reverence - SAHMs. Those who make that choice are IMO truly noble.
TMOTS, while I admire and respect most all of your posts, here and elsewhere, I haven't seen evidence to suggest the type of "obssession" you refer to above, so I feel the need to step in here and side with TB re. taking umbrage at that comment. That's getting too close to personal attack for my comfort leve. Besides, who cares what people are in to?