Here We Go Again

Started by Christiane, Jun 13, 2006, 07:45 AM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Darth Sidious

Quote from: "Christiane"
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.      :?


I have been known to have a flair for the dramatic myself.  We are all human.  We get angry.

I am approaching this from this perspective:  a few posters do not find value in certain cases of "staying at home" and have provided some argumentation as to why they hold that opinion.  Yes, the opinion has undoubtedly been presented in a hostile manner, but we would do well to understand they are not the authority when it comes to appraising the worth of a traditional lifestyle choice like "staying at home."

Personally, I do not understand why these discussions are so important in the first place.  To me, the real problem is "no-fault" divorce and the casual disregard of marriage vows.  I have never been married, but if I ever do, I intend to take the vows seriously.  There is, of course, no guarantee my spouse would have a similar intention.  What is worse is the law does nothing to encourage couples to take marriage seriously.  It can be ended at the drop of the hat with no consequences for the one who initiates it.  That is not only wrong but destructive.  Marriage is taken much less seriously than any old contract, and it enrages me.

You seem to regard marriage highly, and I applaud you for it.  Marriage is an institution worth saving, and we need more people to fight for it.

Sir Jessy of Anti

Quote
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.


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.
"The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master." -- Ayn Rand<br /><br />

Galt

Quote from: "Darth Sidious"
To me, the real problem is "no-fault" divorce and the casual disregard of marriage vows.


I agree with that, but the further problem is that the woman is held to the "modern" standard in divorce court, i.e. I want out when I want out and not a second later, but the man is held to the "traditional" standard. In fact, it has arguably only gotten worse with the draconian "Friend of the Court" enforcement.

I say pick one or the other.  If marriage today means "going steady", then give the woman the appropriate dues when she throws his frat pledge-pin back at him. Which means "unfortunately, you've got to try to get your waitress job back again, because your target isn't going to support you by court order".

Caveat: No, I'm not personally paying alimony and I have no children. I have seen male relatives and friends literally get destroyed, however, for a smirking ex-bride.

Malakas

Quote
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.
Thanks, Sir Jessy.
The problem with 'The Ring' is that it's advertised as 'one on one'. For most people that sounds like a lot of hard work that few would read. A dinner-party debate is fascinating if you're there, but it's meaningless in cyber-space.

When a thread in 'Main' descends to mud slinging,  personal attacks,  heartfelt experiences, silly comments, broad-minded observations, and narrow-minded bigotry; all get lumped together into something that has little to do with the original thread.

I'll risk this challenge: Have we become so feminised that we're no longer capable of linear thinking? Does a hotch-potch of personal feelings constitute debate? I don't know, but it certainly pulls the posts.
'm an asylum seeker. Don't send me back.

Somebody else

I stop paying attention to a thread and it's all over the map.

If you are going to use a quote Christiane, don't pull it so far out of context.

Quote
"SAHMs could benefit their families greatly..... Do they? Most, no."


What I said was...

"SAHMs could benefit their families greatly. Stretch the family finances by doing all they can. Make clothes, rather than buy all the time. Buy food in bulk and can it. Grow a garden where applicable. Cut coupons. Pool together with other SAHMs for greater buying power or labor management, i.e. cooking quantities of food together and freezing it.

Do they? Most, no."

So, do most SAHMs do these things I listed? No they don't. They used to in the past.

If you do, then more power to you. It wasn't aimed at you.


Quote from: "Wookie"
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?
ust because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they AREN'T out to get you.

Christiane

My apologies Somebody else if I took your comment out of context.  It was for the sake of brevity.   Quoting the entire comment in no way detracts from it's insulting nature.  I don't do any of the things you listed, so the implication is that I'm one of the "most" of SAHM's who don't benefit their family greatly.  

I should not have edited your comment.   Please accept my sincere apology.

Malakas

Quote
And 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.  :)
'm an asylum seeker. Don't send me back.

Somebody else

Thank you Christiane. Well for the sake of brevity, I didn't list all the things SAHMs do either.

In fact, though, I very much like the idea of SAHMs, especially when the children are small. An invaluable job.

I just don't like the attitude (possible foot in mouth moment) of those that take advantage of the situation and don't use their time effectively to better the family.
ust because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they AREN'T out to get you.

Christiane

Thank you for the clarification, Somebody else.   I agree with you.

Somebody else

Quote from: "Malakas"
Quote
And 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.  :)


I don't quite understand your response.

Hypothetical situation - a couple is married, he works, she decides she will not work. He is not agreeable to this.

It's the stereotypical - the woman has the choice; the man must work.

What course of action exists for this man?

He has no way to force her to work. Can't really quit his job and join her in not working. A divorce, he will likely lose much that he would rather not lose. Seems like he's between a rock and a hard place.
ust because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they AREN'T out to get you.

Mr. Bad

I'd like to offer clarification to my comment I made early on the thread re. women's priorities.  A trusted and respected member here PMd me with their thoughts on my comments and it got me thinking that I really need to clarify this.  So here's what I wrote to them:

Quote from: "Mr. Bad"
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.  


Self-preservation and self-interest are not a bad things at all, and as I've tried to note, can be quite beneficial.  Plus, we might be able to use that innate human trait to our advantage, here and in other arenas as well.

I also want to make my views of SAHMs clear, so here's another excerpt:

Quote from: "Mr. Bad"
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.


I really think that I need to pay more attention to how what I say might affect other people, so to any of you who were insulted by my comments, I apologize.  The 'net being what it is such things are easy to do.
"Men in teams... got the human species from caves to palaces. When we watch men's teams at work, we pay homage to 10,000 years of male achievements; a record of vision, ingenuity and Herculean labor that feminism has been too mean-spirited to acknowledge."  Camille Paglia

TheManOnTheStreet

Quote from: "Mr. Bad"
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?


I agree Mr Bad.  THat was the point of the post.  Intentionally fork-tongued to show an example of what I was refering to.  I wish I could take back a few things that I have said in these past few days on this thread.  Not because I believe they were "wrong" per ce.  But because they didn't come out exactly the way I meant.  But I don't like editing (or removing) posts after folks have read or responded to them.  It makes for poor flow for those that have not seen what was said.

Furthermore, I am human, I make mistakes.  I say things sometimes that don't come out exactly the way I want, or just plain idiotic things.  But hey, I think people should see that side of me as well as the post that they may "agree" with.  It is only fair.

TMOTS

PS>  Shit.  No this is not a stab at Galt for allegedly removing a post of his.....
The Man On The Street is on the street for a reason.......
_________________________________
It's not illegal to be male.....yet.

dr e

Darth - We have tried the ignore function before and what happened was pretty interesting.  Very very few people used it.  There was a good deal of interest prior to it being installed but once the option was available it was ignored.   :wink:   The upcoming version of this software will have an ignore function built in so your idea will be available.  I'm not sure when it is supposed to be ready.  They have been working on it for years....  In theory the idea of an ignore function is a good one.  We will see.

Christiane - My apologies for letting others know that you had sent an email complaining about this board to one or our male members.  I should have realized that you would be embarrassed.  My bad.

This thread has certainly been a strange one.  One poster attacks another by telling the poster to "fuck off" and then is portrayed as the victim of veiled personal attacks.  It's hard to imagine going to a new board somewhere and telling one of the members to go fuck themselves and then to complain about the way I was treated.  Maybe it's because I'm a guy.  

This SAHP issue has proven itself to be very volitile.  Having been a partial SAHD I see the immense benifit for small children and for the bonding and love that is shared during those times.  The feminists simply HATE this bond and experience and have done everything in their power to shame SAHP's and minimize SAHP's because it sabatages their agenda of getting women in the workplace.  So much for the best interests of the child.  They are only thinking of the best interests of the feminists. I think we need to be able to honor SAHP's and their efforts while also pointing out the inequities and the lack of choices for dads.  Baby, bathwater.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

dr e

Malakas wrote:

Quote
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.


I have always thought it was best to get things ironed out on the original thread but am starting to wonder if maybe it would be a good idea to come up with something like this or a variation.  Thanks Malakas.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

The Gonzman

Boy, go AWOL for a few days....

Funny how similar things are going on over at Hugo's, with the femherroids arguing that he's just not vociferous enough in denouncing someone who is coming around to feminist thinking, but isn't there yet.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the Shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am the MEANEST son-of-a-bitch in the valley.

Go Up