Yes..your correct..most men wouldnt want this job either.

There must be something wrong with me..I dont always fit the profile of what passes for most men today.

I dont approve of men who dont help out or know how to do things to maintain a home. I cannot sit in front of the boob tube forever. THe programming is so lousy for the most part. It has actually gotten to where some of the commercial appeal is better and more original than the programs. Same with television and beer drinking ..not my thing. Anheiser Bush will never make a living off me. I'd rather knock around in my garage or go fishing. At least fishing I can bring home something to eat.

Yes I can imagaine the chemicals used in the printing occupation. They would be more industrial than what you get at Wally world..et al. Same where I work.
If you are doing all that I would say you are working in a trade where most women dont apply or work long hours. THe conditions are not what most of todays woman will want in a work enviornment no matter what it pays. Alot of todays men too.

You are also correct about what is in many of the products the women spend moneys on for appearences. Many would be agast. THey literally dont want to know.
I dont tell women what to spend their moneys on in that type of line up if they are in fact spending thier moneys. Not really my buisness. I suggest...they will often do it anyway. THe shopping/make up allure ..is a drug to many ..male and female..very powerful.
Not to me!!! As long as they are spending their moneys.
What irks me about some women is that they spend thier moneys on this while thier children lack. Same with a man with beer and such..while thier kids lack. I think sometimes they think no one will notice.....or just dont care. These people need to have their behinds kicked up around thier shoulders. I dont approve of this either. I've seen alot of this with people in the high speed fast food lane.
I suppose some of the chemicals are better than in the olde days. I remember seeng many women who seemed to be literally dried out when compared to todays chemicals. These women used this stuff...religiously.
I can appreciate a "plain/amish " type woman better than one who is all outside appearences nothing inside. On that topic..some of the most beautiful women I have ever seen were Icelandic Women...they did not seem to wear make up or such as do women here. I was stunned when I first saw them. Had to slap myself and say." Snap out of it!".
It was the same with some of the Mennonite women I have seen selling merchandize at thier kiosks in some of the stores along the tourist routes. Some of them are quite striking but they dont wear all this makeup and rubbish. Some of it is of course good genes but alot of it I am sure is diet. It is noticable to me. THey seem to be very hard workers too.

Gotta go..work to do before shoving off to work.
Thanks for your post,
Orangetom

Originally posted by dawnstar

I noticed that that little article doesn't give you a clue as to what to do when hubby's overnight excursions leads to his permanant absence from the household leaving one wife and seven kids to fend for themselves. I still remember this happening to my grandmother's neighbor...hubby ran off with his sexitary, and well, momma and SEVEN kids were left to fend for themselves. Funny, I also remember every sunday that I was at my grandma's, this family would all pile into the station wagon, bible in hand and head to church.
Life's funny like that.

Dawnstar..

I have been musing on this part of your post for some time now.

I could make this same statement about several married women with whom I am familiar.... THey too are in the fast food lane..and when they determine marriage has not fulfilled thier expectations of life...they divorce..often running the streets before seperating and divorcing ..then run thier men through the courts to make them more expendable and disposable. Economically "raping " them every chance they get by social services or the courts. Much worse in some states than others.

Then to top it off...they continue in the fast food lane for years only falling back on the safety net of marriage when the kids are mostly grown and the biology is running out ..and life is not securely locked in to make up for all the running in the fast food lane they have been doing instead of preparing for life in their autum years.

Nevertheless ..it is always a pattern of the safety net...marriage ..then to disolve this on favorable terms...then court actions to keep the safety net up...then marriage again when the biology is running out and its getting close to midnight and the product many not be as merchandizable as in younger years.

What I call this is a "rape" of the social structure while appearing to be a "victim".

What I have found is that this happens more often than is ever recorded in any statistic. What we often see promoted or printed is the scenerio you post as a stereotype of all or most men...when it is not so.

Do all women do this ...what I am describing..no they dont. However it is much more prevalent than ever reported since thier is an entire social/buisness structure which depends on variations of this behavior to survive..courts ..social services..etc etc. They must silently promote and abet this type of conduct and look the other way when they know it happens ..to maintain thier jobs. THey dont talk about this either. It is in the buisness....called..."Trendys." Lawyers know about this ...That is how I found out about it..at a luncheon. Also most judges began as lawyers...they too know.

Several married women over the years, stuck in unhappy marriages, looking for ways out..at someone elses expence and responsibility, have attempted to work a variation of this formula on me ...with negative results. This was a very intresting education on how some women work and operate below the radar screen of what is publically visable. It was also a education on the values of some women who think no one sees what they do. It is the same with social services...or the courts ..very little is publically visable...so why worry. To survive on this doctrine/dogma...you must make others expendable and disposable while you walk off with the goods ..at someone elses expense.

This is in stark contrast to the womens movements ...whose main forte is male bashing..this view or concept is never brought up. The really stupid thing is it is not brought up by males either ..they are to dumb to think this through. This is why you often see me say ..what a bumb bunch of males.

When I see you make posts like this ..it only confirms my belief in the dogma so widely practiced and prevalent today of Male disposablity and expendability. It is a dogma and it is a religion practiced by many women and also ignorant males.

THanks,
Orangetom

ahhhh.....but Orangetom.....the lifestyle you are describing as even close to typical for women was very atypical back in the 50's when that article was written, wasn't it? wasn't in the 60's or 70's either. back then, many women would put up with some very unpleasant family experiences mainly because there wasn't much in other options! you confuse me sometimes. on the one hand you sound like someone who wants his women to be holding thier own, but then on the other you also want them to to commit their lives to providing you with that nice, quiet, pleasant and safe home to retreat to after work...which is it? since well, if she is to hold her own, well, unless she's been endowed with a nice inheritance, more than likely she will have to commit a major portion of her time and effort earning money, just like most men do, so obviously, her commitment to providing that nice safe home will be forced down to second or maybe even third of fourth place.

when you speak of the women's movement....I think of the original feminists of the late 1800's early 1900's...they were never asking for any special treatment, just equal treatment, ya know, legal right to control their own wages they earned, equal pay, equal say in their children's futures, equal rights to screw up our country by use of the vote, ect. I veiw the social service disaster as the ploy that was substituted for what they were seeking. it didn't bring in equal treatment in any way...just made women more willing to accept the inequalities. the wome who use, or abuse the social services network are in reality more vulnerable than those who live in the unhappy marriage....the latter has only one master, her husband, who well, more than likely their was at least once love within the relationship. the other has just traded her lords....and is now at the whim of the politicians and public opinion. sooner or laters, the tide is gonna turn drastically for these women.....and well, it's not gonna be a pleasant sight. this is why I keep harping about how the lower end of the wages should be raised a tad, or that the men really need to lift some of the burden off of women when it comes to household chores. I believe that if the social service disaster is allowed to continue as it has, we will ALL lose our freedom!! dependancy= servitude. which is worse, a women and her children (and now many men!!) be dependant on their spouse, parents, employers, or for some lucky ones...themselves....or to be dependant on the government for their needs?

[edit on 27-9-2006 by dawnstar]

Dawnstar,
I agree with your opinion of the social services boondoggle. To me social services is just like politics..it is about preserving jobs for government employees and preserving the womens votes...on womens issues. In otherwords...gauranteed predictable,controlable voting blocks.
We have a few men at work who are staunch liberals and they constantly harp on the concept that the government has cut social programs. After awhile I began to look closely at many of them and they are all of the same fingerprint ..to cater to groups who are identified as predictable, controlable , gauranteed voters.

The number one voting block for most elections and especially the major four year elections for which all the media shilling for thier respective partys look to for trends is women. Everyone else takes second seat or further down the line. The key index for controlable voters is a sense of victimization...or emotions associated with this dogma...it gets so predictable ...so often. Phil Donahue did a great job cultivating this dogma and the body politic did not miss out on the message. As long as the "victim" mentality is kept alive and cultivated ..these groups can play through unaccountably....unlimited free throws from the free throw line at public expense.

What the so called "War on Terror" had done is make this "Victim" dogma less effective in the marketplace of votes and dollars. This is why this administration is so disliked..one of the main reasons...they have pulled the rug out from under the standard vote grabbing technique of certain political partys. THey cannot count on the standard vote grabbing methods in the face of the new fear Mantra...being promoted in the public mind. It does not play through unhindered as was before.

As to....atypical....my reference is not to back in the 50s, 60s,or 70s. I am talking about women I know today...right now..not back in some time warp situation ..which is the dogma used so often by the movements. They must constantly stick thier examples back in a time warp somewhere and then conduct themselves as if everyone today is doing it ..all males.
Either way ..today or in yesteryear...I am not impressed with what I see.
Another thing about this....I have always liked to talk to women ...older women...I date mostly older women. Amazing the older women ..in thier sixtys and seventys....the stories they would tell when they percieve you as no threat and enjoy the attention a younger man will give them. It was going on with women back then too....the running around. It is not new or a recent phenomonon.
What I have learned about women ..running around is that if a woman decides to run around...they can be much more sophisticated/smoother about it..than most men give them credit. The men usually miss the initial signs by a long shot. Another women usually figures it out before a man. Most men are way to dumb.

As to men helping around the home I have no problem with this ..helping ones mate out with chores. I do think that ones mate should help the male with his chores too ..not just the ones they choose to help with and shun the others because they dont fit in with the views of what is female and not female or female socialized roles. I mean really help the male with his male chores..and tediums.
I also think that the children should be trained to help with chores too..thus relieving both mom and pop of much of the drugery and learning some basic diciplines in life. Chores first...not television and styling and profiling...but helping mom and pop..and each other. This is so reversed today in many familys..the children are practically running the house...and giving mom directions...who is giving pop directions. I detect this very quickly when I see a woman with children.
Women who split from their men...it doesnt usually take long for the children to begin running the show unless she is a very diciplined individual.

yes..you are correct ..I think in a relationship ..I should control my own wages..not default them over ..in otherwords I should have more options with my wages..and the direction I want to take them. Dont you??? Not responsibilitys by default...but more "Options " to play through...on "Victimization." This is only equal..fair..dont you think?

I think that in a marriage relationship..a woman should buy me a car..dont you..well no ..not really I prefer a new pick up truck. You know ..out of her career earnings.

IN a marriage relationship I think a woman should take out a insurance policy on herself so that if she dies first...I am covered by at least a sexual security blanket ..dont you?? AT least something that she does in marriage for me can be preserved and secure for me if she dies first..dont you think this is fair and equal??
After all..most men are so dumb and stereotypical that they only think about sex and sports...or some combination of the two. Since I dont like sports ..it has to be the sexual security blanket.

You see Dawnstar...I can get Peace on my own without a woman. I can get Piece too..all day and night long. I know some women who are so dumb that Piece is the only tool in thier inventory..along with the beauty skills they think go along with it. Other than that they are empty shells of women. You try to expect behavior and conduct outside of what they think they deserve or are entitled...some of these women would rather sleep with you ..it is easier and requires less commitment. I was amazed when I discovered this.
I also know many men who have only sex or some variation of this as a expectation of women. Talk about stupid.

I can cook ..clean ..do all those things you try to post men are so helpless and invalid in doing. I dont come to a woman for those things..though I know some men who are so dumb they do come to women for this. Talk about dumb. They are pigs too...these men. I dont like that either...nor do I like piggyness in women.

Peace is the rare and valuable commodity I come to a woman for...little else. Unfortunately I have discovered so few really know much about maintaining it in lieu of slowly ..sometimes rapidly attempting to switch their requirements for mine...with or without children. Understand?? Some have actually been dumb enough to tell me that this is what men are supposed to do with thier lives and time. Talk about stereotyping!! The problem with the men is that so man actually believe this too. These women tend to be very good consumers. They are not accustomed to dealing with men who know the difference. They are accustomed to men picking up on their clues and cues for approval. I am not going to fit the Cosmo profile. I am not intrested in 50 sex tricks..to increase her value in the marketplace by trying out.

I feel like a modern multitasking woman can do all of this ..no problem. You wont find me in front of the television watching sports and drinking beer...I can gaurantee you that. Your stereotypes dont fit me. Anheiser Bush just up the road in Colonial Williamsburg will never make a living off me. Not intrested.

OH...and I think you are also correct about the social services becoming eventually a disaster for women. Correct here. I say this because I think we are rapidly heading for a war. The real war has not gotten here as of yet..contrary to what is posted in the news media. When it gets here I believe it will be a meat grinder...as was the case in WW1...only much worse. I say this because we no longer have leaders with any backbone. They are more politicians not leaders. They will let it drag on and on and on and on and on....picking at each others political partys....while grinding up men and women. The women who remain home are mostly not the type who will undergo hardship to maintain their lifestyles or the standards they enjoy..or that to which they believe they are entitled. Some will..but they wont be willing to do it for other women. If it goes down in this direction ..social services will not be able to help these women.

Let me close by saying this ...what passes for much of womanhood today is just as low as what the movements like to stereotype as typically male. They seem to me to be trying to enforce by courts and politics ..more of this low standard as normal. Now this will be equality..which is what I think you are alluding to in the end of your last post.
Equality will be found at the poverty level...physically as well as spiritually. Male and female. The body politic will still not mind as long as they can get the votes. I think you alluded to this in one of your early posts..nothing seems to change with voting. I agree on this too.


Thanks,
Orangetom

I think, in the perfect world, which this isn't....what a person earns is their money, to do with what they wish. many times people wish to share their belongings with those they care for. this is a good thing for the human spirit. when you throw in laws, and customs to force people to give what is theirs to the point that they no longer have much to share then well, this isn't good for the human spirit. what you are describing is part of the dependency trap. arrange things so that we are all dependent on others for something, detail (or dictate) what each person's commitments and responsiblities will be in this dependant relationship and patiently wait for all heck to break lose because soon the people will begin to resent being forced to give that which they would have naturally shared if only the situation was a little different.

The US is susposed to be the land of the free, in order for that to be, we need to be as independant as we can posibly be. Free to share our resources as we see fit, not to have laws or society and "tradition" dictate that to us. When it comes to the relationships between men and women, tradition fosters that dependancy. and, historicallly speaking, those who couldn't or wouldn't follow tradition were left out in the cold...with women and children usually ending up with the short end of the stick. this is a historical fact, women who left their husbands condemned their children to a life a proverty so they would stay in the abusive relationships. It was a better alternative. women at one time couldn't sign any contracts.....they needed a man to do that for them. wages were paid to the husband, not the women.....their employment opportunities we slim and designed to keep them financially dependant on another (got to preserve tradition, right?) well, in any dependant relationship, there's kind of a quirk going on. the one who susposedly is enjoying all the power finds himself in actuality in about the same boat as the one he has power over. so, while the women were working hard to keep home and children for her husband, well, he ended up finding that he was working harder and harder to pay for their needs. it's only natural that they would start to resent what was being taken from them. just as we are beginning to resent all this foreign aid that we have to send around the world, just as we resent having to pay the social services programs to help the poor, just as employers are beginning to resent having to pay the high bill for health insurance, ect. we like the perks of having our servants, but tab for them is a killer!! historically speaking we've always had our servents, our free or next to free labor, we need this labor alive so, some means have to be found to keep them that way. this is expensive, and we don't like the cost, and round and round we go!! and considering the time and energy demanded, a stay at home housewife and mother is about the cheapest labor you can find. throw in the biblical "be submissive in all things" mentality, and well, it's a bargain that can't be found anywhere else. like I said, historically speaking, women have been getting the short end of the stick for a long time. It seems that some would have women just to go back to accepting that short stick (for the sake of society!!!). let's just go back to having our little servant society, were children are taught at home what absolute authority is so they aren't questioning the rulers throughout their lives. where men nd women or slaves work for absolute bosses and masters for however long it takes for them to earn their living, under whatever conditions the employer choses to provide. and where he kings has absolute authority over everyone. it was all one big system....designed to enslave...men, women, and children. Have the women forever subservient to the men, so the children can have a good example at an early age how to be subservient to the ruling elite. breed slaves, not free independant thinkers!

by the way, I don't dislike bush because he's a threat to the social service system....I dislike him because he's a threat to america!! If your gonna fight a danged war, fight the danged war, don't pussy foot around, give them four months warning to prepare, leave our borders wide open so they can send sabataors here to blow us up, send in less troops that are needed, fail to provide those troops with what they need to do the job, declare yourself free from any laws and then to top it off act like the whole venture is just some money making scheme designed to enrich you buddies!!! I hear the pentagon is a few billion short??? what happened to all the billions spent already?? we'll never know because the pentagon's books are unauditable! then the dems are threatening to refuse to fund the Iraq war if they get power over he congress......
I have a son home on leave now, then he leaves for a nice 300 day vacation. to Iraq.....I am just wondering if the government is giving him a one way ticket only.....will the crazy polywogs in washington at least pay for his ticket home??

the social service net couldn't do this much damage in my lifetime!! it's just gradually leading us into a nation of slaves all dependant on our government for our livelihood....socialism.
Bush and his fellow polywogs (dems included), in just the short time he's been president has about assured us that there will be no government to take care of anything!

Originally posted by dawnstar


When it comes to the relationships between men and women, tradition fosters that dependancy. and, historicallly speaking, those who couldn't or wouldn't follow tradition were left out in the cold...with women and children usually ending up with the short end of the stick. this is a historical fact, women who left their husbands condemned their children to a life a proverty so they would stay in the abusive relationships. It was a better alternative. women at one time couldn't sign any contracts.....they needed a man to do that for them. wages were paid to the husband, not the women.....their employment opportunities we slim and designed to keep them financially dependant on another (got to preserve tradition, right?) well, in any dependant relationship, there's kind of a quirk going on. the one who susposedly is enjoying all the power finds himself in actuality in about the same boat as the one he has power over. so, while the women were working hard to keep home and children for her husband, well, he ended up finding that he was working harder and harder to pay for their needs. it's only natural that they would start to resent what was being taken from them. just as we are beginning to resent all this foreign aid that we have to send around the world, just as we resent having to pay the social services programs to help the poor, just as employers are beginning to resent having to pay the high bill for health insurance, ect. we like the perks of having our servants, but tab for them is a killer!! historically speaking we've always had our servents, our free or next to free labor, we need this labor alive so, some means have to be found to keep them that way. this is expensive, and we don't like the cost, and round and round we go!! and considering the time and energy demanded, a stay at home housewife and mother is about the cheapest labor you can find. throw in the biblical "be submissive in all things" mentality, and well, it's a bargain that can't be found anywhere else. like I said, historically speaking, women have been getting the short end of the stick for a long time. It seems that some would have women just to go back to accepting that short stick (for the sake of society!!!). let's just go back to having our little servant society, were children are taught at home what absolute authority is so they aren't questioning the rulers throughout their lives. where men nd women or slaves work for absolute bosses and masters for however long it takes for them to earn their living, under whatever conditions the employer choses to provide. and where he kings has absolute authority over everyone. it was all one big system....designed to enslave...men, women, and children. Have the women forever subservient to the men, so the children can have a good example at an early age how to be subservient to the ruling elite. breed slaves, not free independant thinkers!

The willingness of the male to turn over his labor and moneys earned with his labor to a woman and children is one of the greatest adapatations in human history. Without it ..the structure will break down.

Do you think for one minute the modern independent diciplined consumer oriented woman today will be willing to do the same for a man and children...as a career...or to manitain the systems in a social structure which are necessary for thier livelyhood.
Or will they Queen Bee it out to the subject bees???

For Queen Bee...you can substitute the term. "Chaos Theory" "Ordo ob Chao"
Order from Chaos.

As to the structure breaking down...I observe many males today raised by women ...little male structure in their lives...they are high maintenance themselves.
It is obvious to me that they will be more of a liability to women than an asset. THey have womens values ..womens entitlements, womens thinking.."Options". THe need to be entertained constantly..fed constantly..by someone elses labor ..someone elses risk taking. Most women will not be willing to take on a man like this..especially once they perceive what the true cost will be. Many of these men can barely take care of themselves from their labor ..much less a woman and children.
In otherwords these men like many women ..are great consumers. Predictable, controllable..gauranteed voters. Very emotional. I know lots of them.

What I am saying ...is that the willingness of a male to work and labor for his woman and children often at great risk is a huge human adaptation. Ironically in todays consumer oriented structure...it is not even given the credit it deserves..in lieu of the hijacking that is going on.
I am also saying that todays modern educated(programmed) woman is not going to do or attempt the same ...to keep the structure going. THey are not going to want that much risk. It takes to much commitment...when Queen Beeing will do instead.

Women today have the option to work themselves in the marketplace or go the traditional route of which so many in the movements complain. Marriage for survival. THese are "two" options available to women.

Note that while complaining....women do not traditionally grant men the ability to survive out of thier female career earnings while exploring male "Options." And the male gets to complain about servitude. This survival option is not one traditionally granted to men by women....ever.. Women who make more money than a man traditoinally as a survival technique ..tend to marry up the economic ladder..not down. This is very telling about womens thinking and values. It is social in nature..not about equality ..or fairness.
For every woman complaining about the system and servitute...you find as many or more men subject to this same system..with no relief in sight. But no one goes to bat for them...even thier women...outside of traditional female roles. But they dont have any spokespeople..they are invisible in the consumer oriented system. Expendable and disposable.

The amazing thing to me is that most men cannot seem to think this through...ever.

I am also saying that the consumer oriented structure is taking a toll on our children by a sense of entitlements. Not all of them but it is more prevalent than spoken.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Do you think for one minute the modern independent diciplined consumer oriented woman today will be willing to do the same for a man and children...as a career...or to manitain the systems in a social structure which are necessary for thier livelyhood.
Or will they Queen Bee it out to the subject bees???

no orange, I go to work, earn my check, put it in the bank and blow it on bingo every night!!! my god orange...what do you think is happening in the majority of household today....men and women are working their arses off, the majority of the money is going to the household needs and if their lucky, they might consume a happy meal once in awhile!1

okay, so I am exagerating a little. but you are talking to someone who gets about $20 or so a week out of her paycheck....and manages usually to stash some of that....and this is what she has to spend. the rest goes into the bank account and isn't touched by me unless I clear it with my husband first. I wouldn't want to inadvertantly spend the rent money, or car insurance or whatever. the clothes I wear are either handmedowns from the kids, or were bought at the good will! my husband then takes whatever he can out of what's in the account and invests it...probably in his future, but well, what can I say....I plan on dieing before I can't work any longer anyways.

and no mention of the labor that the women has performed....for no wage whatsoever.....if she has made this her career, like you seem to want....doesn't she deserve to have a little of his $$$? I mean, gee, let the guy go out and hire a cook, a maid, a babysitter, bet his check wouldn't even cover all of that one.

Originally posted by dawnstar

Do you think for one minute the modern independent diciplined consumer oriented woman today will be willing to do the same for a man and children...as a career...or to manitain the systems in a social structure which are necessary for thier livelyhood.
Or will they Queen Bee it out to the subject bees???

no orange, I go to work, earn my check, put it in the bank and blow it on bingo every night!!! my god orange...what do you think is happening in the majority of household today....men and women are working their arses off, the majority of the money is going to the household needs and if their lucky, they might consume a happy meal once in awhile!1

okay, so I am exagerating a little. but you are talking to someone who gets about $20 or so a week out of her paycheck....and manages usually to stash some of that....and this is what she has to spend. the rest goes into the bank account and isn't touched by me unless I clear it with my husband first. I wouldn't want to inadvertantly spend the rent money, or car insurance or whatever. the clothes I wear are either handmedowns from the kids, or were bought at the good will! my husband then takes whatever he can out of what's in the account and invests it...probably in his future, but well, what can I say....I plan on dieing before I can't work any longer anyways.

and no mention of the labor that the women has performed....for no wage whatsoever.....if she has made this her career, like you seem to want....doesn't she deserve to have a little of his $$$? I mean, gee, let the guy go out and hire a cook, a maid, a babysitter, bet his check wouldn't even cover all of that one.

Dawnstar,

Taking a break here from cutting my lawn.

Ahh..good post you have made. Finally a lucid post. I dont play bingo either. I do on occasion play the lottery. I dont hold much hope for results. IF I wanted faster results I would probably play bingo. Actually I dont have much time for it,bingo either, and often dont get time to stop and get a lottery ticket. ..or check them. I have a basket full of them here by the computer desk. One day when I have little else to do I will bother to check them out .

What you are describing in your life ..Dawnstar..is precisely the situation many men I know are experiencing. And you dont like or approve of it. What you are describing to me is a husband who is "high maintenance". And you dont like or approve of it. IF what you are describing is correct ..you are in the position for which many men find themselves ...Expendable and disposable....even adjustable. How about equal??
I hear your bitterness...in your situation. I describe things I have seen among others or have experienced myself and how I have worked or avoided it.
No one comes to rescue me or flashdance me through life...when I am taken advantage..it up to me to say when I have had enough.
If you think modern day women..other women are going to take the burden off you ..not going to happen. They are not that noble. They are not going to put their goodie pile at risk. I have found they are not going to take the burden off me either. They will however take all the skills I can muster and put them in thier pile when they need them or in otherwords when they are succsssful in convincing me to lower thier risk with my skills. A high maintnence man is no different from these women. They know where are the fun good times, entertainments and how to get there on time. You are describing a man who is more femminine than masculine in these arenas...and you dont like the competition. It may look male on the surface but it is not ..it is femminine...worldly...high maintenance translates into high consumption rates...of this world. Remember that seven to one buisness I was talking about in the other board?? Is the man you are complaining about in the seven to one buisness??
What are "you" going to do to make the changes...you ..not others?? Not victimization.
Every time I made or make stupid mistakes to and these things happen to me..I did at least half the work or labor/moneys to put them in force...for others to take advantage. In otherwords I walked into it. It is up to me to navigate my way out and bear that responsibility too...the responsibility of walking out. NO Safety net.
You make mistakes going in or out you run the risk of hitting the concrete. No safety net. This too is equal.

By the way...men too do alot of labor for no wages..this is never brought to light..by any movements...so I dont buy it when women complain about this. Remember the key words I keep bringing up...Disposability and Expendabiltiy.

Remember what I said...in other posts...cooking cleaning ..et al...Microwave has made quantum leaps in these areas of obsolescence in the "traditional" womens roles and many women today cannot survive without a microwave..men too for that matter. Nonetheless it has substantially diminished a womans appeal in this arena as having this asset...cooking.

As to hiring a maid..cleaning....many men and women today are actually variations of "pigs". I was astonished by this. The number of women and men who are very high speed and have little time to pick up after themselves. They mostly do what I call "pit stopping " thier way through life.
Maid services is not a selling point to me...for a womans assets as I can do this myself...and also it is obviously not a selling point to many people today either in lieu of pit stopping lifestyles. I dont approve of piggyness..male or female and have said so in many posts.

Babysitting is not a issue to me either.. I have babysat for many women ..changed diapers too. Not rocket science. Dispoable diapers have changed this task tremendously and put the local diaper service out of buisness years ago. ( I know the people who used to run it) You will never sell me on this one. Lots of men do this while their women work thier options.

Speaking of options...the woman I am seeing went to Nags Head this week with her girlfriends to rent a beach house...again. I dont care much for the beach....rather go to the mountains. I gave her a hundred bucks..again... and said have a good time. There will be no twenty questions. I am not the territorial type..per se.
I hope she is having a good time. Wondering how I can get her to do the same for me....the hundred bucks I mean while I take a week without her?? What do you think?? I like equality ..dont you??

I gotta go Dawnstar..more work to do around here..no woman to take this burden off me while I explore my "Options."

Thanks,
Orangetom

this will probably go unread but...oh well....

It used to be simple and revolve around the children,the women raised the child/ren and the man worked so the house could survive, it was, in essance equal.

the woman had the sadisfaction of being able to raise a human being, one thing which a man is not so good at, the man worked for material goods.......

take a look at todays society, its getting worse by the minute and who's to blame? not the children that had to raise themselves.

the dad still goes to work and now so does mom. where does little jimmy go? does he go to the school? maybe.......theres a better chance he might look for a gang, because gangs give out something PARENTS don't anymore.......family.

there was some time when my kids were younger that both me and my husband worked, other times when I was mainly just a stay at home mom. there were very few times when the kids weren't in the hands of either dad or mom, when that did happen they were in an after school program or the like for an hour or so. we made sure we worked different shifts, for the most part, it seemed to work out rather well.
now, we had neighbors down the street, neither of them worked, and they seemed to have no idea as to what their kids were doing, didn't seem to care much either, unless one of the other kids in the neighborhood got sick of their crap and hurt them.... those kids, by what I hear, are in jail, or at least were in jail.... my kids are active participants in society...
obviously, it doesn't help to have mom or dad at home if mom and dad don't give a crap to begin with... and, it might not hurt if mom and dad are devouting a good part of their day at work, if they are making sure their kids are being well supervised...
I don't think it's that women are working that is the problem in other words. We are afraid now days to let our kids out of the house alone, they might get kidnapped, murdered, raped, hit by a drunk, whatever. think back a few hundred or so years....the women were busy baking their bread, helping in the fields, sewing clothes, making candles, washing clothes in the stream, whatever....they didn't have all this quality time to give the kids either. they were relying on the oldest kids to keep an eye on the younger ones....and many of these older kids, by today's veiws, would not be old enough to be considered qualified to babysit!
na, it's not the fact that women are working that is throwing a kink into society...women always worked! matter of fact, I think you would find that the men and women today are working less than they used to, there should be plenty of time for the kids...they are just chosing to use that time for other things.

Feminism is a very simple concept that I think too many people are missing. Simply put, women should have the same rights as men. Women should be allowed to do what they want, provided it's safe and legal. Women should be paid an equal sum as a man for doing the same job. That's all it is. Nothing more, and certainly nothing less.

Blaming feminism for increased gang violence or society's problems is silly. As a matter of fact, most gang members come from single or no parent households. That being the case, there's no choice but for the mother to work (unless you're a proponent of an increased welfare state as a counter to feminism).

The nuclear family is a myth, and as useless as an appendix. I'm sure it works for some, but it certainly isn't the only way. Personally, I think my family is much more successful, well rounded and balanced than most 2 parent households that I know.

Originally posted by Infadel


the woman had the sadisfaction of being able to raise a human being, one thing which a man is not so good at, the man worked for material goods.......

the dad still goes to work and now so does mom. where does little jimmy go? does he go to the school? maybe.......theres a better chance he might look for a gang, because gangs give out something PARENTS don't anymore.......family.

Equal in terms of work? Certainly, but women's work has never been equally valued.

I think one of the biggest ideas of feminism is that a woman be able to choose her own life and what satisfies her, as opposed to assuming that she gains all the satisfaction she needs from raising a family and being at home. A woman shouldn't feel bad about pursuing interests outside being a "home maker" just like men shouldn't (and really never have).

On the contrary, it seems silly, as well as sexist, to imply that kids are joining gangs because their mothers (parents, not just the mothers, are working) are working now. Perhaps it's time for the men to stay home and give child rearing a try? Not going to happen... well, why should women go back to the home when their minds and abilities lead them out of it, and more importantly, when economics demands it of them?

While I do think that parents working long hours resulting in unsupervised children can be a problem, it's a social issue as opposed to an issue created by the social progress of women in society. If you're going to connect the two then perhaps you can address the social inequities that still consistently result in women finding themselves working in lower paying jobs, or essentially having to "sacrifice" either having children, or progressing professionally, in order to have children... while you're at it and all

[edit on 24-4-2008 by parrhesia]

Originally posted by dawnstar
I don't think it's that women are working that is the problem in other words. We are afraid now days to let our kids out of the house alone, they might get kidnapped, murdered, raped, hit by a drunk, whatever. think back a few hundred or so years....the women were busy baking their bread, helping in the fields, sewing clothes, making candles, washing clothes in the stream, whatever....they didn't have all this quality time to give the kids either. they were relying on the oldest kids to keep an eye on the younger ones....and many of these older kids, by today's veiws, would not be old enough to be considered qualified to babysit!

Yea, your right..........mommy went out and worked aswell as at home......wana know the difference? the kids were out in the field helping!!!!

males would untill they were "of age" then they would learn a "trade" from their father, females would stay with the mother untill married off(<--disgusting,forcing a 13 YO into marriage, ((still in practice today))) or they would take over a certain amount of work and just live life as it came.......the kids get quality time with mom AND dad, WOW........i wish my parents were around..............

as for your little spree on your kids being fine.......that is because you care, and you kids can probably see that.........I on the other hand, didn't know my parents cared because they simply....were never around.

my parents did care, but because they were never around i got the illusion of carelessness and joined a gang (the "crew", Prince George BC, a drug front for the angels).......after i realised that they did care, i had to run the gauntlet......not a path people want for their children.

I'm not trying to be sexist on this subject, im mearly trying to show my prospective.............i'm sorry if i do come across as sexist.


Parrhesia:
i see your point of equal amount of work but not being valued equally and I need to say, THAT is the main problem.........if it was equaly valued, women and men would get the same amount of satisfaction from any job.

I think one of the biggest ideas of feminism is that a woman be able to choose her own life and what satisfies her, as opposed to assuming that she gains all the satisfaction she needs from raising a family and being at home. A woman shouldn't feel bad about pursuing interests outside being a "home maker" just like men shouldn't (and really never have).

freedom of choice...........its not a feminist ideal.......its a HUMAN RIGHT!

I see where you are coming from with this, and im not saying its JUST the women in our society, men need to pick up our socks as well. I'm not saying women should be the only people at home, they just do a much better job at raising a child than a man will ever do, and the children are our future.(cleeshea, but its the truth)

the "job satisfaction" you are speaking about should be achievable bye anyone who is human, but as a HUMAN, male or female, we have a RESPONSIBILITY to raise decent, socially accepted children who have a prosperous future.

Working a crappy 9-5 is one thing, because you only miss around 2~ hours with the kids.........but something like my mother on a 12~ hour job doesn't work, a mother only gets to spend like 1~ hour daily with the kids.

[edit on 6-5-2008 by Infadel]

P.S: I may seem sexist, but im truly not...........im one of the few men that would sacrafice my job for the children if my partner wanted to work for the living wage.

[edit on 6-5-2008 by Infadel]

Originally posted by Infadel

Working a crappy 9-5 is one thing, because you only miss around 2~ hours with the kids.........but something like my mother on a 12~ hour job doesn't work, a mother only gets to spend like 1~ hour daily with the kids.

What about men that have 12 hour jobs? Don't children need more than about 1 hour daily with their father too? Father's need to be a part of children's lives just as much as their mother, to put emphasis on a woman's percieved ability to raise a child better than a male is just as sexist to men as it is to women.

Men can raise children with the same results as a woman.

And that is true feminism.

We aren't angry PMS'ing girls, we are just about equality.

Originally posted by HeadFirstForHalos
Men can raise children with the same results as a woman.

And that is true feminism.

We aren't angry PMS'ing girls, we are just about equality.

While I'm not sure I fully support the statement about needing both parents in a child's life (many, many children have raised by single parents - male or female- and become well-adjusted adults), that's not the issue. I do agree with you that at the heart of it, both men and women can successfully raise children and to essentialize and say women are better at this is in effect condemning women to this role...

Originally posted by Infadel

the study results all show the same thing, children raised mostly/solely by their fathers are more oriented towards violent crimes.

Can you support this with some evidence, please? It's a large claim to make with out any support.

just for good mesure, women and men cant be "equal", its physicly impossible.......we evolved differently.........women will allways be better than men when it comes to social aspects of life and men will allways be better than women in desolate isolated situations.......

The equality that women seek is not one of a deluded sense of physical equality. It's more basic... it's a desire to be seen as equally capable... capable of making decisions, being autonomous, and leading their own lives. It's a desire to be free to assumptions and stereotypes about what it is to be a woman and what a woman is capable of. Now, don't get me wrong... I want the same for men. Stereotypes all around have caused problems, but historically women have been more trapped in stereotypical gender roles than men have been and have suffered as a result. Work traditionally considered women's work has consistently been undervalued in terms of how it is regarded as well as through the pay people recieve.

the men went out to the bush alone (or with 1-3 others) and killed the animal while the women stayed around the "camp" or, with a group (5+ adults with children) when away from the camp gathering food/suplies.

As you said, just for good measure... I'll throw out there that there are theorists who disagree with this interpretation of the physical, fossilized evidence. You have to realize that neither you nor I were present 1-2 million years ago so any ideas about how men and women interacted and the roles they played are purely based on interpretation, and interpretation of historical facts is always, always influenced by our current, internalized views of the world...