Originally posted by Suspiria
Originally posted by chiefsmom
LOL, well if the future doesn't include men, because the women don't need them, I will be living in a cave collecting all the strays.
I'll become a man hoarder!!! LOL
What a crock. I am even mad at the hubby right now, but still wouldn't get rid of him for anything.
Funnily enough that's what Mr Suspiria suggested I would do.
Originally posted by SLAYER69
So far the best we can come up with is that we are bug killers and trash monitoring...
Guys, we're blowing here. Come on we can do better rationalizations for our existence than that!
edit on 30-8-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by SoulSearching8
reply to post by DARREN1976
Hello again, Sure wish I could stay on ATS all the time and make replies faster. My opinion? well, I am not really good at expressing myself in words. I can think it, feel it, but when it comes to words they come out jumbled and backasswards but I'll give it a try. So there are 2 articles we are looking at. One that states the mens Y chromosone isn't as dominate as it used to be. Another where the human-made (I didn't want to say man-made) birth control pill is causing havoc on the male gene through the water system. I think the male Y is just part of evolution. The male will always remain even if hanging by a thread. Generations down the road will be reading an article stating that the male Y has surpassed the X and everyone will be wondering if woman will disappear. I really just think its part of the cycle of life. Besides the male can not be removed from the equation, it would throw the balance of life off. Yin/Yang. As for the affects of the birth control pill. I had never heard of that before and I don't think many people have. I was floored when I read it. I can see why it would affect fish, etc. with their tiny little systems. I would think anything foreign to their bodies would be devastating on them/hence, possible cause of some mass die-offs. The female hormone from birth control isn't enough to cause (changes) in the human male. It only accounts for 1% among the other crap thats in our water supply. Besides, most people in the U.S. don't drink tap water anymore. I know I don't and won't unless I absolutely had to. However, according the article it is also from cow urine and all the other animals that are injected with hormones. I don't think the pill or hormones will ever be out of production, so, to protect our health we all really need to go back to organic living, and everyone should have their own garden growing and only drink spring water or purified. Sometimes easier said than done, unfortunately.
I know and I agree. I couldn't care less how far medical technology/science has advanced. I live my life to the fullest and just be happy with what I have (a good family).
Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by hp1229
It's not like people who are advancing said science all want to end the male gender, sex, or relationships between the genders. People seem to fear scientific advancement and make wild predictions based on it.
Very very difficult to conquer whats designed by nature regardless of the progress that the scientific community has achieved.
Children in father-absent homes are almost four times more likely to be poor. In 2011, 12 percent of children in married-couple families were living in poverty, compared to 44 percent of children in mother-only families.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Children’s Living Arrangements and Characteristics: March 2011, Table C8. Washington D.C.: 2011.
In 2008, American poverty rates were 13.2% for the whole population and 19% for children, compared to 28.7% for female-headed households.
Source: Edin, K. & Kissane R. J. (2010). Poverty and the American family: a decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 460-479.
Data from three waves of the Fragile Families Study (N= 2,111) was used to examine the prevalence and effects of mothers’ relationship changes between birth and age 3 on their children’s well being. Children born to single mothers show higher levels of aggressive behavior than children born to married mothers. Living in a single-mother household is equivalent to experiencing 5.25 partnership transitions.
Source: Osborne, C., & McLanahan, S. (2007). Partnership instability and child well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 1065-1083A study of 1,977 children age 3 and older living with a residential father or father figure found that children living with married biological parents had significantly fewer externalizing and internalizing behavioral problems than children living with at least one nonbiological parent.
Source: Hofferth, S. L. (2006). Residential father family type and child well-being: investment versus selection. Demography, 43, 53-78.
Infant mortality rates are 1.8 times higher for infants of unmarried mothers than for married mothers.
Source: Matthews, T.J., Sally C. Curtin, and Marian F. MacDorman. Infant Mortality Statistics from the 1998 Period Linked Birth/Infant Death Data Set. National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 48, No. 12. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 2000.
Even after controlling for income, youths in father-absent households still had significantly higher odds of incarceration than those in mother-father families. Youths who never had a father in the household experienced the highest odds.
Source: Harper, Cynthia C. and Sara S. McLanahan. “Father Absence and Youth Incarceration.” Journal of Research on Adolescence 14 (September 2004): 369-397.
A 2002 Department of Justice survey of 7,000 inmates revealed that 39% of jail inmates lived in mother-only households. Approximately forty-six percent of jail inmates in 2002 had a previously incarcerated family member. One-fifth experienced a father in prison or jail.
Source: James, Doris J. Profile of Jail Inmates, 2002. (NCJ 201932). Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, July 2004.
The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth found that obese children are more likely to live in father-absent homes than are non-obese children.
Source: National Longitudinal Survey of Youth
In a study using a sample of 2,537 boys and 2,446 girls, researchers investigated the relationship between Body Mass Index (BMI) status at ages 4 to 5 years and mothers’ and fathers’ parenting involvement and parenting styles. The results showed that only fathers’ parenting behaviors and styles were associated with increased risks of child overweight and obesity. Mothers’ parenting behaviors and styles were not associated with a higher likelihood of children being in a higher BMI category. In the case of fathers, however, higher father control scores were correlated with lower chances of the child being in a higher BMI category. Moreover, children of fathers with permissive and disengaged parenting styles had higher odds of being in a higher BMI category.
Source: Wake, M., Nicholson, J.M., Hardy, P., & Smith, K. (2007). Preschooler obesity and parenting styles of mothers and fathers: Australian national population study, Pediatrics, 12, 1520-1527.
Originally posted by Aeons
You're missing a shout out to the Grey Aliens here, for real ATS flavour.
If they are an indication, the men doing science, running banks, owning corporations, and governments instead get rid of women. Then spend a lot of energy trying to fix it.
Hopping dimensions, time traveling, kidnapping people, big floaty labs, stealing cows and other what not.
Okay, more seriously: I notice that most of the responses here are the usual women appeasing men for something a man said and did, and men blaming women for it. Because they can't really come up with why they'd want themself around as far as I can tell.
Seems about normal.
edit on 2012/9/19 by Aeons because: (no reason given)