The conspiracy against men and fathers

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Children need Mom's and Dads, the conpiracy is against the family unit.

I believe that children need Mom's and Dads to be together in unity, however I recognise that sometimes this can't work out.

I think that in the instance that it can't work out then the parents should work together ( but seperately) for the good of your children.

Who cares, he says, she says, he earns more, she earns more, children deserve a balanced bringing and the conspiracy clouds judgement and creates negative energy in order to produce further mixed up children.

Please look at your partner and ask yourself 'are they good enough to bear my children', if you have doubts don't have children with them.

Men and Women are different and have different skills, this is why children need both of you, this is not to say that a Dad can't change nappies or Mom can't mend a puncture but Children need the Masculine and Feminine energy.

At the moment humans are working with the conspirisits to ensure that they win, we all know Dads who don't pull their weight in the home, Mom's that stray ect.., but look after your own back yard,

Look after your kids, work at your relationships,

there is a lot to be said for traditional relationships, take the best points of them and work to have a happy relationship.

"be the change that you want to see"




posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Men are being discriminated against, and if they say anything, they're treated like sexist ass prats. Here is a little something that happenned.
I was with 2 of my friends, my friend Adam just got his credit card, so he went on a shopping spree (he's not very smart). So we go into this little store where he's looking at zippos. While we do that, we overhear the cashier talking to her friend, also a girl. "We don't hire men here, our manager finds that men are slobby and good for nothing. After many bad experiences she decided not to hire anymore guys." They huged and her friend left. Obviously, me being such an ass prat of a shovenist pig who dares to speak up for all the men present in that store, I openned my mouth. "This is discrimination, sexism at best. This is yet another example of men being discriminated against. I am now in the mood to apply and sue this store, I have 3 customer whitnesses." A guy I didn't know continued this, asking her if he applied, could he get hired, as a joke. You know, I never expected a cashier to give attitude to customers, me being a cashier myself know that you can get fired for this. But she just told us to buy something or get out. Now, seriously, isn't that just plain bad?
Should I let this go or should I sue that store? Most guys just shake their heads and let it go, this is why women have gotten so much more privilaged than men. Talk about equality where women are on top of men, and men are brainwashed into thinking that it's alright, and worst yet, that it is normal.



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by TPL

Originally posted by WestPoint23
That's why you always, always, always, get a PRENUP!!! I cannot stress how important that is.

One other thing, it really bothers me that no matter the reason of the divorce, the woman most of the time gets the children. I don't understand that, a father cant take care of his own children?


Wouldn't it be nice if prenups weren't needed and trust, one of the things marriage is meant to be built on, to settle things was only needed.


That would be nice... but if your marriage fell apart it might be due to your trust in each other falling apart and you would then wish you had a prenup.

It's a Catch-22.. I bet most people feel awkward asking the person they are about to marry for a prenup...They would be worried it would be offensive to their spouse-to-be...

"I think we should get a prenup, you know, just in case"
"What, you think we will get divorced?!?!?!"
"No, honey, it's just that..."
"JUST WHAT?!?!"
"Just that I think we should do it, just as a precaution, to protect ourselves"
"That's it!!! I'm calling the wedding off! GOODBYE"

See? We don't need prenups after all!


[edit on 10-3-2006 by please_takemyrights]



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Ok, here is my position on this. The Non Custodial parent gets the ROYAL SHAFT
I was married for 5 1/2 years when my ex and I got divorced. My idea for the divorce since she had become very controlling.

Her family had money, mine didnt so when it came time for the court hearing she had a much higher priced lawyer than I did so needless to say I got screwed. Over the years for some reason my child support went up yet my income didnt. There was a time when I was bringing home 70-100 a week IF I was lucky and worked all the OT available. It got to the point where I was ordered to pay more in child support than they could legally take (60% gross if single, 50% if marrried) and that added up. I called CS about it and they said get a lawyer. I looked into it 1500.00 just to START the process, and that was making maybe 100 a week.

My ex then moved to florida knowing I could not afford a lawyer to fight it and I didnt see my kids for almost 5 years. I got remarried 4 years ago and my wife said this was bull. We hired a lawyer in florida, it cost us 6,000 by the time it was done to get my visitation back, plus I have to pay air fare from florida to ohio for 3 kids, average of 800-900 a pop 3 times a year, PLUS I have to pay for transportation to and from the airport, another 150-250 depending on which airport we fly them out of.

I am now in the process of getting my child support straightned out, another 2 grand for another lawyer.

Are my kids worth it?>
HELL yes, they are now old enough to see the bs my ex isw pulling and they also realize that dad is not the SOB mom says he is.
The system needs to be overhauled badly, but, its not poliltically expedient to do so which means nobody will touch it.

Maybe someday

Peace yall



posted on Mar, 19 2006 @ 03:08 PM
link   



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Striker8441
Ok, here is my position on this. The Non Custodial parent gets the ROYAL SHAFT
I was married for 5 1/2 years when my ex and I got divorced. My idea for the divorce since she had become very controlling.

Peace yall


So sorry to hear your troubles. It really hurts me to see these things happen to anyone. My current wife is very controlling as well.

Your story reminded me of my first marriage;

I had to take her to court to get my visitations, because the ex wouldn't let me have my daughter.

When I started getting them, my daughter LOVED coming to see me. In fact, she didn't want to go home to mommy - SCREAMING not to go home. She was 3 or 4 at the time.

After a few months, I went to get her and she was crouched in a corner screaming for me to leave, she didn't want to go with me all of a sudden. This happened for a few weeks.

I knew the ex was doing something, but she'd deny everything.

I ended up not getting her anymore for years because I thought it would be better for her if I didn't make her home life worse.

That was a mistake.

She is 20 now, and has some reservations for me not being there throughout her life. We talk now, but I wish I took a different path.

At the very least, make sure you call them often. I hate what women are doing doing to us just because they can. So many families are breaking apart at no fault of the kids. 80% of divorces initiated by women in the US should tell you something.

Western culture = want more, appreciate nothing, hatemongering, anger, blame others, take no responsibility, take from others, give nothing.

Equal rights I am for, but it is not equal anymore.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Radekus
While we do that, we overhear the cashier talking to her friend, also a girl. "We don't hire men here, our manager finds that men are slobby and good for nothing. After many bad experiences she decided not to hire anymore guys."



Originally posted by Godservant
Equal rights I am for, but it is not equal anymore


My friends... your awareness of sexism against men is rare, but I'm happy to see more people have it.

I wasn't sure whether or not to really post on this subject - because way back during my college years, I took up a debate against a group of feminists on campus on a university forum much like this one.

What the research and debate taught me was that, for those who have been indoctrinated in women's studies classes, there is the notion of a "patriarchial society" - supressing women and empowering men. I offer an alternative view here - instead think of our "old" social structure as one that was set up with the "roles" in place to ensure the survival of the civilization. In other words, women were caretakers, homemakers, gatherers, etc... Men were hunters, protectors, fighters, etc...

Before technology and social advancement, those "roles" were essential to the survival of communities. If people failed in those roles, a family would starve, get sick, and possibly die. However with the advent of technology and social advancements, these gender roles became less essential and the possibility of true gender equality became possible - the sharing of all "roles".

However - this is where society took a wrong turn and never looked back. On the way toward gender equality, the women's movement - a great and noble movement in history - first provided the access for women to vote and eventually take part in the political processes (in the U.S.), giving them an equal say in government and politics. Over time, the confines of those "roles" which women were forced into, have slowly been stripped away. Women can now work in fields where only men have worked, without ridicule. They can vote, be the breadwinner in a family, work on cars or motorcycles and act "tough" - and society has grown to accept women who do not choose the old "roles" women used to have to rigidly follow.

But the mistake is that society has remained rigid to the "roles" men are forced to follow. This is the fault of everyone, men and women, within society. Boys are still strongly pressured into the most dangerous professions in our society - firefighters, policemen, etc... While occasionally a woman can "choose" these professions, it is a much more rare occurrance for a man to "choose" nursing, child care, etc... And those who do, face a much larger share of ridicule.

Remaining Gender Inequality:

Divorce: It goes into every aspect of society - yes, men are discriminated against in divorce proceedings, there's very little question about that and if you speak with most divorce lawyers they'll tell you how biased the system is.

Consider auto insurance. Car insurers charge men higher rates. They justify this discrimination by stating that men are more "dangerous" and have been shown to drive more recklessly and to use the insurance more often. Younger men in particular. While on its face (and viewing it with our current "ok" attitudes regarding discrimination against men) most people are ok with this - but consider this alternate scenerio:

What do you think would happen if health insurers charged women higher health insurance premiums because studies show that women utilize the health care system much more often then men do and create many more health care costs to the insurance companies than men? How well do you think that discrimination would go over? Want to see an instant protest of hundreds of thousands of people across the country? Give it a shot.

Financial Aid: Another example is with public universities. Any man that applies for public financial aid must sign up with military selective service or they will be denied any government financial assistance for education. Women are free of this obligation. These federal financial aid applications are one of the few remaining "applications" in this country were blatant sexism is still allowed. And it is from our very own government. And no one cares.

While the movement toward gender equality has advanced and empowered women to break out of traditional gender roles - society has left men behind and men are still forced (by men and women alike) to fulfill their rigid roles as "hunters, protectors, fighters" Society has been "educated" to support women in breaking free from their roles. Men are provided no such support.

Stay at home Dads (my brother-in-law was an example of this) continue to be ridiculed, and shamed. And the government still creates programs targetting "women & children". This is because if people continue believing that our society was and is a "patriarchial" one, with rules in place to empower men and supress women - we'll never achieve true gender equality. Because that isn't an accurate view of our history or of our society. We need to change our social views not only to empower women to escape traditional gender roles, but we need to change social views to empower men to escape their traditional gender roles as well - so that they can enjoy a better, happier, and healthier lives. So maybe, equally protected and cared for, they can live longer lives too.

And no, it isn't only up to the men to do this. Next time you "tsk, tsk" at a man who doesn't follow the "traditional" rules of "women & children" first..... next time you tell someone you want an "old fashioned" guy who opens the car door for you, takes off his jacket in the middle of winter to make sure you are warm enough, and kisses the ground that you walk on......next time you look at a male nurse, waiter, artist, actor, dancer and think "he must be gay" - consider that maybe there is no conspiracy against men and fathers. There's just something wrong in all of our minds where we (men and women alike) can't seem to allow men to break free from their traditional roles, as we have allowed women to do.

Of course, changing a society's world-view won't happen in a single forum posting... but I hope this can at least help one person make some small changes in their own life. Do something simple - just give a guy a hug.


Take care,
-Ry



[edit on 20-3-2006 by rdube02]



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 01:03 PM
link   
To me, the conspiracy here is about the destruction of the nuclear family, the discrediting of parents, especially the male authority figure, and the forced dependence of children on the state.

I agree with rdube02, wholeheartedly, and have already responded to godservant's sentiments in the thread he started about the outcome, not the intent, of equal rights.


o.p. by me
And herein lies the salient point of the thread. Women's Liberation has created an abusive sub-class of females that are just as bad as that abusive sub-class of males that Byrd points out got the legislation they deserved a while back.

However, this is not the 50's and 60's anymore, McFly. The pendulum has swung all the way in the other direction, where we now have women who claim equality, but contribute zilch sans complaints. When dear, multi-tasking, double-jobbing, over-stressing hubby calls them on it, they scream foul! and run to hide behind those same laws created to deter real jerks. They even can twist those same laws into a new means of control (I know, it almost happened to me) because police are now programmed to protect poor, defenseless (yeah right) women, and innocent children from big, bad, mean, abusive husbands.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 01:49 PM
link   
On top of that, they'll argue the income difference in their defense, overshadowing what was said in the last two posts.

They really do have control over us now.

They moved into our fields and left their area's. We are also ridiculed of we do not move into their former fields and do what they used to do.

rdube02 spoke a lot of truth there, but it is VERY few women who will agree. It is understandable - who wants to let go of a benefit.

A study I saw a couple of years ago stated that about 1/4 of US homeless men were the result of a divorce.

Another said almost 80% of divorces initiated by women.

There is only one interpretation.

Please don't get me wrong - I am not a sexist, I love 98% of all, but when I see good, hard working men getting screwed over SOOO much more often than good, hard working women in a divorce, it shows life altering sexism towards men.

Part of the movement was a fight for independence for women, yet there seems to be more dependence upon men after a divorce.

I think that divorces should, by default, be a 50/50 custody and no financial support for the woman. That is if both parents are fit.

Why is it that women don't do that most of the time? Financial support. Kids equal money and control. Even though it has been proven that kids in a split custody divorce do better with equal access to both parents, money matters more.

It really would be nice if both sexes were equal, but I don't think it will ever happen. Womens and mens strengths and weaknesses lie in opposite areas.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Great post. I had not considered those types of discrimination of which you speak in Financial aid, auto insurance , also health insurance. Divorce is well known about...as to how men are often shafted thoroughly in this process.
That is a good point about health insurance because most of the women I know use theirs or thier mans health insurance more than do the men...by far. They should pay for it more. Great point.
As to auto insurance...I submit to you that the auto insurance industry is catching on to this inequality in insurance. They are raising the rates for women. More and more women are spending thier lives in the fast food lane/pit stopping and as a result are getting involved in more and more accidents. Statistics are bearing this out. Insurance companys will adjust accordingly. Insurance companys are not in buisness to lose moneys.

Very intresting points made by some of the men in here and I would like to make some points to supplement some of what is spoken here.

Equality is a myth...promoted by the public education system, politicians and social thinkers/engineers. Women are not looking for equality at all. Not possible in a system like we are running in the more "civilized nations.

It is not possible for women to be downtrodden victims in this social structure. They are looking for options and calling this method of steering these options ...."equality".

Lets get something clear right away..Women in these nations are not looking to support a man or his kids from thier career earnings. Not going to happen as a career for women..this would mean to much equality. Equality among many women is desired without risk...especially the risk traditionally taken by men as a carreer. This kind of thinking and expectation does not fit in with the social expectations and beliefs held by the bulk of women in this civilized world.
Women are not looking to take risk by taking out large insurance policys for their men in case they die first. You know ..the security blanket..if they die first.
Women are most certainly not intrested in taking out a insurance policy to pay for sexual security blanket for her man if she dies first. It just isnt socially done. It doesnt fit in with the religion in which they believe. After all..the default setting is that most men are only intrested in sex and phat yams. So why does she not take care of his sexual security blanket if she dies first??? Equality or social default settings??
Think this is a dumb bunch of statements....then what is the valuable commodity a woman insures for a man if she dies first???? Traditionally??
See how simple it is. See how disposable and expendable a man is in this kind of system.???

This is not a womans fault per se..it is a mans fault for not understanding the risk he takes on when he marrys a woman....or a woman with kids..etc.

The facts of the matter are that we socially default one set of roles for women and another for men and take them for granted...like a default to play through without understanding the inequality taking place here but implying equality.

Implicit verses ..explicit..important that you as a man know the difference in these two words ..their definitions.

We automatically assume one sex is weaker...than the other...by default.
When you have a sex ..in a certain group for whom whole sections of market share are directed ..this is not a victimized group.
When you walk into any department store...you see ..once the blinders come off..how much product is directed to women and kids..not men. This tells you very clearly how much men are important in this social structure.
They arent...they are disposable and expendable in maintaining it ...they are implicit here ..the women and kids are explicit. 'Especially in he court systems.
This means that economically it is the women and kids who are important. This also means that since women and kids are economically important ..they are also politically important...not men. Understand yet..??? This is also one reason the courts are so stacked against men. Becasue of economic reasons....ie....votes. Women have become by economic default the important vote in the election process in this country ..not men. Wise up you guys.

Social Services and CPS I think it is called in some areas ...are mostly staffed by women ...for women...this is a openly discriminating group. Legitimized politically...in their discrimination. They have been developing large cracks in thier political structure in some states having lost several children in the processes and also by turning over many children back to unfit mothers where they are often killed or seriously injured/abused.
This is because it has become a jobs program with the mothers and especially the children often coming in second or less down the road. THe mothers and children are there to support the system ..not the other way around. This has happened several times in this city and the adjoining city with hardly a whisper...incompetance. This gap is widening.
I became aware of this jobs program mentality when I saw a public bus with the advertisement on the side of it for welfare give aways. I couldnt believe it...welfare has to advertise???
Another woman involved in the Foster Care program ..told me that they dont encourage adopting of Foster Children ..because they lose federal funds if a child is adopted. I was shocked by this. But it is the same with Senior Skip day in school..they at least like to get you into homeroom..so that they can take attendance..for funds. A jobs program agenda.

By the way ..among those of you who have dealings with lawyers frequently ..the term for many of these women who play the system ..is "Trendys" They follow a trend which is predictable ..playing the system. It is not always admitted publically or in court but it is known.
YOu often see them married once or several times and high speeding it in the meantime..with their kids carrying much of the baggage...along with their exes. They usually settle down finally in their late 30s or 40 when the biology starts running out and a career hasnt quite made it for them. Its getting to be midnight cinderella..pumkin time....watch for this one carefully. Especially the fear of the biology running out. Marketability then runs out.

What you find with women like this is that men just like the fast food lane are expendable , disposable commoditys in the marketplace...a option which can be renewed over and over....as long as the biology doesnt run out or the biology also can be surgically renewed.

Male disposability and expendability is what this system supports, calls equality ,..and is for the most part totally unknown by the men who are victims of it. What a dumb ignorant bunch of men. They sense it but cannot define it...Male disposability and expendability.

The most valuable and marketable commodity a woman can bring to a man who knows the difference..is Peace.....not Piece.. Peace will require a lifetime of commitment from a woman. Piece will not require that much commitment at all.
I know so many women for whom Piece is the only commodity they know anything about ..outside of their consumption levels...and they tend to think this is the ticket to consumption career. The sad truth is that so many men dont know any better than this too. This is why I say ..what a dumb bunch of men out here. This is not a womans fault ..it is a mans fault for not being perceptive and expecting more from a woman. This kind of man makes himself expendable and disposable in his ignorance. Then the system gets ahold of him and takes more...his very soul.

By the way ..something I am curious about ..I dont know where most of you guys are located...but I am noticing a trend here....Trendys...which to me is very telling. I wonder If you guys know about this among the women you know. What I notice here is that more and more noticably ..more and more women are leaving thier children...and opting for the fast food lane..the pit stop lifestyle. I personally know three women who do not have thier children. This was unheard of when I was coming up. Of these women..only one is paying child support...for two children. The others are not. I told one of the guys ..you need to be demanding child support...or jail time..she would do it to you the other way around. He said ..no I dont need it. His ex cant hold a job down..nor will she...insufficient attention span. She is out now hunting and gathering another man now that she spent the 20k for her half of the house...in less than a year. What a predator. Options are running out ..so is the biology....fast. She will have to use alot of Piece..and quickly..to blindside a man..and there are many out there who will take a bite out of this pie.
This Trendy happens more often than most men know.
By the way..this friend of mine ..sued for divorce..first...because he never knew Peace with this woman..he finally figured out that all the Piece in the world was not worth the misery. This is very important to a knowlegable man.

I have posted this before in other rooms about my other friend across the river. He is widowed and has worked several years of 7 days a week 12 hour days. He paid off his house finally and added a swimming pool and garage to it. He finally told me one day when he got tired of dating so many women who mostly think the same. He said.." you know I finally figured out something. These women come over here to get what they they and their kids think they deserve...not looking at what I need but what they need. They dont think about what I really need. They mostlly think that sleeping with me is some kind of property investment. A down payment or something. They never stop to see what is really missing from my life..but what is missing from thiers and thier kids."
This is a very stark revelation and very textbook of male disposability and expendability...which is the same fingerprint quoted by many of these posters concering the court systems...and social services. Men need to be smarter than this about getting real value from a woman. AT least my friend knows this much.

By the way..if he marrys a woman like this ..is he a "victim"?? Is he looking to be abused...and used...a door mat??? Is he looking to be economically "Raped". Remember ..rape only happens to women...it is only a womans trend...Its impossible for a man to be raped!! Wow!!!!
This never enters the question ..when she is counting her share...as a "victim"

Are all women like this...no .they are not ..but it is more prevalent than it is recorded or identified due to existing defaults in place in the system.

There is no equality out here..it is promoted so as to take advantage of male ignorance.. the investment is in male ignorance. Males tend to get wise after they have been burned once or twice.

It will take some time to level this field out ..then it will not be equal either. It will just be level. Its up to you guys to wise yourselves up.

By the way..I strongly recommend a book to you guys by a author named

Warren Farrell

The Myth of Male Power.

YOu can find this on Amazon or Barnes & Noble. Many of the problems you guys meniton are also addressed here especially about divorced fathers. This Guy ..Warren Farrell was a member of NOW. Somewhere along the line he began to see that there was something wrong with some of the programs they were pushing. He details some of this his book the Myth of Male power. There are also other books by him in the jacket of the flyer in this book " Why men earn more money" is another. " Why men are the way they are ".

His common sense answer about women earning less moneys...is that if women are working the same jobs for less money...than just like illegal aliens ..they would be firing all the men and replacing them with women who would work the same job for less moneys. The facts are that most women dont want the same jobs that traditionally men take upon themselves. They dont want the travel..the discomfort levels, the inconvenience that men traditionally suffer. Women usually miss more time than men..require more costly facilities than men. None of this is spoken about when these "experts" are quoting all these statistics. In this statistics are often very misleading...this is what I mean by male ignorance. YOu guys ought to be smarter than this...me too.

Some great posts here guys.
Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
I have posted this before in other rooms about my other friend across the river. He is widowed and has worked several years of 7 days a week 12 hour days. He paid off his house finally and added a swimming pool and garage to it. He finally told me one day when he got tired of dating so many women who mostly think the same. He said.." you know I finally figured out something. These women come over here to get what they they and their kids think they deserve...not looking at what I need but what they need. They dont think about what I really need. They mostlly think that sleeping with me is some kind of property investment. A down payment or something. They never stop to see what is really missing from my life..but what is missing from thiers and thier kids."


OMG!!!! That really says a lot - it speaks to me big time! It is all I have seen.

I thought about that for a while - out of all of the married women I know or have known, there is only ONE woman who does that. A very good friend of mine has a wife that is just as concerned about his needs as he is of hers. They have a perfect marriage and found that the key to a happy marriage is BOTH giving and finding whats missing from the other instead of taking or wanting.

Lots of 'Give me' going on.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Thought you might like this "Female of the species" by Space, it's one of my favorite songs:-

[align=center]A thousand thundering thrills await me
Facing insurmountable odds greatly
The female of the species is more deadlier than the male.
Shock shock horror horror, shock shock horror!
I'll shout myself hoarse for your supernatural force!
The female of the species is more deadlier than the male.
Oh, she deals in witchcraft and
One kiss and I'm zapped. Oh,
How can heaven hold a place for me
When a girl like you has cast her spell on me?
Oh, How can heaven hold a place for me
When a girl like you has cast her spell on me?
Frankenstein and Dracula have nothing on you
Jekyll and Hyde join the back of the queue
The female of the species is more deadlier than the male.
For she wants to conquer the world completely
But first she'll conquer me discreetly
The female of the species is more deadlier than the male.
Oh, she deals in witchcraft and
One kiss and I'm zapped. Oh,
How can heaven hold a place for me
When a girl like you has cast her spell on me?[/align]

For the record I'm female and happily married.

I agree with a lot that orangetree has to say but sometimes the story is not clear cut, for instance:-

I'm currently friends with a young couple with 2 toddlers, husband works a full time job and then has his own business doing jobs so is hardly at home, he has lots of hobbies and earns a good amount of money, wife is a housewife and earns no money deperate to get a part-time job but hubbie says he has no time to have the kids and she is unskilled so will only earn minimum wage hence can't afford nursery bills.

Tension is bubbling, slowly but surely, now I hope it doesn't come to this but lets say they split up, I know this particular husband won't want custody of the children,

Now in my eyes, his desire to persue his own career has stilted the wifes opportunity to develop a career herself, when they split up should she need to live on the bread line??

The questions are how much and for how long should he pay??. My instict says that for the until the children are at least 18 the family unit should be kept in the same financial position as they would have been if they were together.

I think that women and men a equally to blame.

My husband thinks that women need to be respected more, and I would agree that women need to look after men better.

Respect each other and don't even consider children until you know yourself and each other.

Oh and Orangetree, Im a female Housewife and my life insurance is the same amount as my husband, afterall if I go first he will need to leave work/part-time to look after the kids - don't cast all women the same.

Loving the postXX



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by thereddragon
For the record I'm female and happily married.


I've found that currently married people typically add more of a balanced note to such a debate as gender equality. Of course, I'm probably biased because I'm very happily married myself..





The questions are how much and for how long should he pay??. My instict says that for the until the children are at least 18 the family unit should be kept in the same financial position as they would have been if they were together.


This is a fantastic point. Ideally, whoever the wage-earner was during the marriage, should have to sacrifice some of those wages while the homemaker can get their career started. Maybe a year...maybe two... But on the flip side, the homemaker should have to sacrifice child custody for a while, and the person who had to sacrifice time from the kids to be the wage earner should be given a majority of custody for a year or two in order to allow the wage-earner time to catch up with the emotional connection they missed from their kids, from being the sole wage-earner for so many years. That would be a case of true equality.



I think that women and men a equally to blame.

My husband thinks that women need to be respected more, and I would agree that women need to look after men better.


My wife and I believe that men need to respect women more, and women need to respect men more. If you watch movies - watch which gender most of the violence is against. Or better-yet, watch "comedies" made for children - and watch the violence and which gender it is against the most. I think the point we're making here is that women are gaining respect in society - which is fantastic. However society, as a whole, is respecting men less and less - they've become the expendable gender, the ones we sacrifice to war. So you're very right - respect is at the root of what is preventing true equality.




Respect each other and don't even consider children until you know yourself and each other.


Well said...and so true...



Oh and Orangetree, Im a female Housewife and my life insurance is the same amount as my husband, afterall if I go first he will need to leave work/part-time to look after the kids - don't cast all women the same.


Indeed...I've learned through the years that most women actually are very open to new ideas - working together toward changing social belief systems regarding gender. After all - that's why the women's movement made the kind of progress that they've made...

Oh...and orangetom1999...Warren Farrell's "The Myth of Male Power" is an excellent book... I highly recommend it to anyone with an interest in "true" equality. I disagree however that true equality is not possible, it is possible when both genders learn to respect eachother. That respect for eachother is evident in good marriages where partners give as much to eachother as they expect in return.

Fantastic posts everyone...

Much respect,
-Ry



[edit on 20-3-2006 by rdube02]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 03:53 AM
link   
the red dragon,
I think that woman should go to work and let her husband stay home with the kids and become sensitive and caring. She should work two or three jobs and learn how much emotional unfullfillment many men must go through often in jobs they may be good at but dont even like but do so for thier familys. I think it is a fair tradeoff. She would be learning a job skill too and become independent at the same time. Two birds with one stone.
You see red dragon..men must often stow their emotions to get a job done and focus ...or get hurt..or even killed. They often have great difficulty making the change back and forth to being sensitive to hardning ones self up for work. I think it is fair that women should learn this kind of emotional barreness in order to survive in a work enviornment and bring home the bacon..while the man learns about sensitivity through Ophrah and Dr Phil.
Dont you ???
Women do want a more sensitive man...dont they??? Or do they want a man who is sensitive to them?? There is a difference. Most men are to dumb to know this difference...much less vocalize it.

By the way rdube02..something for you to think about ..on a very serious note. Your statement about violence in the movies.

Something very seldome made plain both in public education or by social engineers ...or the news media about violence.
Most violence is against men..not women. This is true statistically both on and off the job.....yet hardly mentioned for what it is. Only in violence against women is it protested loudly.

This confirms my point about male disposability and expendability. Only "experts" in social engineering and public education can dumb a people down so much they dont recognize this simple fact of life. Yet common sense tells you this is true. Just look at the evening news ...any night of the week.

However ..to reconfirm my point about male disposability ..and expendability..Crime and violence by women is statistically on the increase though not spoken about loudly in the news for what it is. Keep awake when watching the news..this will be borne out more and more clearly in the future.

By the way ..speaking of violence ...I hear this woman who drowned her five kids in the bathtub will get a new trial. Wonder how this one will turn out. Also wonder if it was a man would this be happening. I will keep a eye on this one in the media for defaults. YOu know ...default settings to play through ..like that teacher who seduced her student in Florida ..I think?? HOw long did she get in Jail??? Think it through!!!

Hey people ..while I am thinking about it..speaking of male disposability and expendability.
At lunchtime this evening I read Fridays paper..the editorial section. There was a editorial piece by a woman named Ellen Goodman titled
"Lower standards equal happiness?"

www.postwritersgroup.com...

IN this editorial Ellen uses implicit verses explicit and male disposability to make her points.



"a husbands emotional engagement is crucial to a wifes happiness. So is her belief that the housework is divided fairly."


Nowhere in this editorial does it declare that a womans emotional engagement is crucial to a husbands happiness..nor is it told what non housework...this progressive woman in engaged in to give the man..her husband more time for emotional engagement. This is implicit..not made explicit.

Watch this again...further down in the article...Ellen quotes a "expert"



"Wives who work full time and have more progressive attitudes are more liklely to be unhappy with the division of housework."

Once again neither the "expert " nor Ellen say what new jobs they are helping the husband with to give him more time for housework..he must do his jobs and help her with hers..too...whether both of them work or not. Notice the implicitness...for him but explicitness for her. This is core to the nature of male disposability and expendability in this type of article.

Watch Ellen go on again......


"How many women who work equal hours for lower pay end up doing more laundry because he brings home more bacon."


Remember what I said in my previous post about women making less money. Notice how Ellen and others play on this "victim status".
Notice once again the clue and cue is that laundry and housework are the absolute doledrums. Worse than death. Notice once again ..the abscence of what this progressive woman is doing to help her husband out either with the bacon situation or his honeydoos list while he is taking on new roles to prevent her housework blues!!! What blues is this modern progressive woman preventing for her husband. What new roles and expectations is she taking on for him??? in addition to what she should already be doing as a modern progressive multitasking woman doing everything a man is doing and doing a better job of it.???
The only thing I see Ellen doing in this article is whining...soon to be nagging.
You guys need to be smarter than this. Dont settle for this kind of second best when you are expected to give first best and more.
This article/editorial is not progressive..it is a hunting licence for more consumption rates...with someone else making up the difference. Think ...beyond the fluff...who is the victim here!!!

Thanks,
Orangetom

Hope some of you get my point and start thinking about the real nature of many things out here in front of you. Wise up..dont just run around like a bunch of dumb glandular males blindsided by sports and cheerleaders.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 21-3-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
By the way rdube02..something for you to think about ..on a very serious note. Your statement about violence in the movies.

Something very seldome made plain both in public education or by social engineers ...or the news media about violence.
Most violence is against men..not women. This is true statistically both on and off the job.....yet hardly mentioned for what it is. Only in violence against women is it protested loudly.


Absolutely - excellent point. I made myself more sensitive to these issues back in college, and I have a hard time even watching children's "comedy" slapstick style movies because the violence against men in those is sometimes pretty horrible - and children are trained to laugh at it.

When my wife became aware of this, she now notices it in every movie we watch - the horrible disparity of violence against men in movies. What makes it so much worse today is that it was bad enough years ago when it was male/male violence. Now that women are "empowered" to take part in the violence - we now have women on male violence, but if you watch very closely it is horribly one sided - movie producers are very careful to avoid male on female violence because that is considered a very taboo subject and most women's groups would cry foul if it was present, or at least if it is present, the man must be presented as a horrible evil monster. Ever see a male superhero "beat up" a female villain? Nope. Ever see a female superhero "beat up" a male villain? You get the point.

Violence in the movies is already bad enough. When you introduce gender vs. gender violence in movies - it opens up a nasty can of worms because the balance of kindness and understanding between genders is already all too fragile.



This confirms my point about male disposability and expendability. Only "experts" in social engineering and public education can dumb a people down so much they dont recognize this simple fact of life. Yet common sense tells you this is true. Just look at the evening news ...any night of the week.


You don't really even need to watch the news, just look back through court cases where the attacker is female vs. male. The Department of Justice has officially stated (in 1994, I haven't reviewed more recent years, however the pattern hasn't seemed to change) that men actually receive longer sentences for murdering their spouses than women, the average prison sentence for murder of a partner in large counties being 17.5 years for males and 6.2 years for females (Bureau of Justice Statistic, NCJ-149259, 1994).

The reason for this goes back to traditional gender roles. Women were to be protected - and with the recent feminist viewpoints where women are "victims", it furthers those traditional "protectionist" views so that women receive much more lenient sentences than men in just about every case. It's unfortunate, but I see this as one of the last inequalities that will ever be changed in this country, because the women's movement lobby in government is forcing legislation that continues to make the matter even worse and more unequal every year. It's ironic how an organisation like NOW claims to stand for equality, yet is one of the worst promoters of inequality in our society.

My wife, god love her, has a new awareness of the world now and while she (and I) have always been horrified by violence against innocent women - we are equally horrified by violence against innocent men. But that's the key word - *equally*.

If you're watching a movie with one of your girl friends, and there's the typical scene where they guy cheats on the girl or offends her in some way and she punches him in the face or kicks him - a lot of girls will cheer at that scene, or laugh. Ask them to reverse those genders - the same situation, but the girl cheated and the guy hits her. Still funny? This is the awareness people need to have about the world around us and our acceptance of certain "kinds" of violence. If this awareness can be changed one person at a time - we may realize a day when people no longer laugh at any kind of violence, because it isn't funny.




At lunchtime this evening I read Fridays paper..the editorial section. There was a editorial piece by a woman named Ellen Goodman titled
"Lower standards equal happiness?"

www.postwritersgroup.com...


Oh lord....if you can help it, try to ignore articles like these. Feminists have a nasty habit of quoting other feminists as "experts". The funniest thing in my college debates with women's studies professors was that they would quote from a feminist book. When you trace through these books, you learn that they each quote eachother without verifying any of the actual facts. But when you trace from quote - to quote - to quote and end up eventually at the original study....you learn that it was a horribly biased and flawed study with inappropriate sample sizes, etc... I could go on and on (and I have before..lol) - but I won't do that here.

Suffice to say, there are actually some wonderful feminists out there truly fighting for real equality and they are great people to discuss these issues with. Of course I wouldn't really label them feminists even though that's what they call themselves...they're just true fighters for equal rights for everyone.

It's really nice to see people in here with their eyes open to these issues.

Take care,
-Ry





[edit on 21-3-2006 by rdube02]

[edit on 21-3-2006 by rdube02]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 10:05 AM
link   
The most important thing is to be a good dad when you are with your kids, and never talk bad about mom. If she is the Satan you beleive, your children will learn on their own. My son does now, and we have a better relationship because he thinks I still care about his mother, and he can talk to me about it.

As far as job descrimination, 12 years ago I applied at the USPS for temp to hire work as a carrier, (my father was with them for 25 years) and it was an easy way to get hired on, since i had already taken the test. I was in a room with a 1 white woman, 3 hispanic women, a handicapped woman, 4 black women and one other black guy. I remember leaning over to the black guy and saying, "well, we're not getting hired". I never saw someone laugh so hard, because he knew it was true. If you are a male, 25-45, any race, you don't get a break for anything, from anyone, becasue they feel that you have everything handed to you because you are a guy. This may have been true in 1958, but we are no longer the Cleaver's, and we are even past the Simpsons in dysfunctionality.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Greetings Fellow Believers,

I favor discrimination. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines discrimination as: " the quality of being discriminating; faculty of nicely distinguishing". However, it also is defined as: "A distinction, as in treatment; esp., an unfair or injurous distinction".

After reading the above definition--it would be easy to see me in your mind's eye goose-stepping around the square in my jack boots and shaved head. Want a hint: you just discriminated!

Discrimination is a natural human ability: the ability to choose. Decision-making shows our capacity as individuals to think for ourselves. Discrimination is also favoring something/someone over another based upon the experience and opinions of the individual making decions.

Big deal. Get over it folks.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I was just pondering a related subject to discrimination this morning; criticism.

It strikes me that the prophets of history are really special people who are super discerning, super accurate, critics. That's why so many of them were so unpopular with the various PTB throughout history that they were put to death. They exposed the inconsistencies between the actions of the rulers and the mandate given them by God, or the collective will of the people. In other words, the prophets pointed out the hypocrisy of the rulers, and the unfair, unlawful, discriminatory practices they employed to bend the law to favor their treasuries and horde the spiritual and temporal riches of the land at the expense of the people they had been tasked to sheperd. The prophets also pointed out, and this was the part that really got them in trouble, that the very practices and hypocrisy used by the rulers would be their undoing. "For the wages of sin is death."

Truly objective discriminatory thought brings forth constructive criticism, appropriate behavior, and positive outcomes. The biased, hypocritical, unlawful, discriminatory thoughts and actions of false prophets and corrupt rulers brings forth suffering and destructive outcomes.

Is that what you're telling us to get over?



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jack of Scythes
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines discrimination as: " the quality of being discriminating; faculty of nicely distinguishing". However, it also is defined as: "A distinction, as in treatment; esp., an unfair or injurous distinction".


OK, so we are going to be technical. What word would mean men getting the short end of the stick in most divorces?

Everyone knows what we're talking about whilst using the word 'discrimination' and I am sure no one being led astray by using the wrong word.

Maybe that is why almost no women are posting here lately in disagreement. It's either that or they know what we're saying s true.

No one wants to let go of power for equality, This is why I think they don't want equal rights, but rather take over.

There should be a class in high school that teaches about relationships and marriage and family. Also learn what equal rights really should be. If women want equal rights, they need to take equal resposibility. They need to understand that most men will be reluctant to enter their former resposibilities now that they want to do ours.

In my current marriage of 13 years, my wife wanted several changes in me after we married. I made most of them and are now habit. I wanted a couple and the opposite was done. I gave her everything I could and gave her more respect than I received.

And BOTH sexes need to understand that a marriage should be about equal giving, NOT equal getting. Everyone is focussed on what they are not getting instead of what they are not giving.

I fear I have become a bit sinical towards women in recent years, but there is no denying that there is an large problem. We hear what women don't get equally, but we never hear about what men don't get equally.

Oprah would go bankrupt if she said anything from this thread.

This thread is one of the greatest in all of ATS, but that might just be my current situation that mkaes it so. I feel for those who, like me, tried their very best only to see things stack up against them so unfairly. To work so hard, to love so much, so suffer for what?



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 02:23 PM
link   
You folks are really on the ball here. Will post again later when I have time. Work to do around here...today

Thanks,
Orangetom





top topics
 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join