American Women

Equality my foot!

How can we be equal, while women still expect men favors in day to day life (physical assistance, manners, financial help, etc).
1- How often do they want to pay for your bills? share the expenses of a dinner?
2- Do they ever offer precedence to men? offer assistance to carry heavy bags?
3- How willing are they to be in relationship with a lower income men?
4- How willing are they to take care of you financially? (you only see that in Canada)
5- Will they help an Ex in financial difficulties?
6- Will they try to defend an attacked man?

Women still expect care and attention while contending for equality. The only real justice is to give them their true equality: treat them as you would do for a man. Always remember that she is a "man". The only difference will be them in term of sexual relations where she can hardly pretend to be a man.
The response to this equality should be polarization
1- Assistance or help proportional to what she did for you
2- Financially focued mind to prevent her attempts to draw money from you
3- No assistance whatsoever to one if you no longer have any interest

Basically treat them as "men"
Be as tough and insentive to them as they are to men

Make sure you avoid sex with those over 35 years old, since men are naturally more attracted to young women that should be pretty easy. Do them what they fear most loneliness as they grow older (hence less attractive). You can then easily shorten thei scope of impact (between 18 & 35) Even though you may be spending more for younger girls at least you can evaluate what you are paying for. Young women don't care to date older men, in fact it's a bargain. However, young men may bang an older woman but he's less likely to date her.

Since even those who use Child support as an easy source of money (they are 25 yeard old with 5 children from five dads) are still afraid to stay lonely. It's justice to send them to retirement at 35.

Pay your child support since it's a legal requirement but in the social life you can still win. Almost every women expect a baby or a stable relationship, while men are more tempted to sample women. Biologically you can still prevail since you keep you strenght longer than her, you'll be able to make more money as you grow older & afford young women

joe>...It's your body, you should be able to give it away or sell it as you please, whether you're male or female. No one is forcing anyone to pay anything -- if it's a deal you don't like, walk away. If there's not a market for you ... then you'd better look for another source of income.

So, why not to say to women - you are on free market, so your problems and children are your problems. You are free to do what you want - go and earn your child support with prostitution ( they do it often anyway ). No estranged husband must pay to you support for free. 'No one is forcing anyone to pay anything' - law of free market. Women have some advantage on this market - let them have disadvantages too. It's just fair. Looks fine ?

Joe, if this is law of free market - it must be this way. If society cares about weak side on the market - it should care not only about women.

for Bootylover : In your 6 points you are absolutely right. But then you seem to advocate sex war, hatred, revenge for women. That is, in fact, what we have now. But I believe there is better way - friendship between sexes, but for this prostitution must be destroyed, not supported.

RN>And yes, I have avoided the "single mothers don't get depressed by lack of money" statement.

1. Let's make a psycological experiment. Could you answer truly : let's say, by some magic you could choose to be not a women single mother, but a single man - will you choose it in your 'another life' ?

2. I don't really want to discuss myself, because it's not about me, but about millions of people. But to satisfy your curiosity - I am from 'happy married' family. I am also not a victim of blatant pregnancy- for- money sceme. Women, I lived with, usually even loved me ( I hope ). And that's enough about me.

>So, why not to say to women - you are on free market, so your problems and children are your problems. You are free to do what you want - go and earn your child support with prostitution ( they do it often anyway ). No estranged husband must pay to you support for free. 'No one is forcing anyone to pay anything' - law of free market. Women have some advantage on this market - let them have disadvantages too. It's just fair. Looks fine ?

I don't see where you've at all established that they don't already have disadvantages, frankly, and those disadvantages, according to everything I see, outweigh those of men. And I'm sorry, but we're never going to agree on this -- a man who's signed up for a marriage has signed up for the possiblity of kids, and the responsibilities they entail. Free market also means living up to your end of a contract. Ex-husbands should simply pay their damn child support! They helped make the kid; they're responsible for making sure the kid is ok.

The law of the free market is not without its rules, either. To follow your thought a little further, if you, as someone who is a customer on the free market, damage something beyond expected wear and tear, then you're responsible for damages. You can't just drive rental cars into walls and not expect to be held responsible, or trash apartments and not pay for repairs or forfeit your security deposit. Same thing with pregnancy -- it's not the usually desired outcome for non-married sex, so those who contribute to the extraordinary equation have to contribute for dealing with the outcome. A woman who gets pregnant most decidedly does, as her life changes radically and irrevocably. If you want equal treatment, then the same should be true for men.

And I'll say it again -- this is not simply about the women, it's about the kids involved. I simply don't agree with your perspective that somehow kids are only an asset (and a financial one at that) to women and not to men. "Someone to carry on the family name" is not a female perspective, for example, given that it's usually not her name in the first place...

[i]"1. Let's make a psycological experiment. Could you answer truly : let's say, by some magic you could choose to be not a women single mother, but a single man - will you choose it in your 'another life' ?"[/i]

As much as I adore my children and would never wish them away...if I had my time completely over again, I would be a single woman, with NO children. I don't think I would want to be a man...not because I think it would be bad, but just 'coz I enjoy being a girl. :) But if I had my time again I would NEVER get married. I have no desire to ever be dependent on anybody.


Bootylover,

In my opinion, you are totally right. That's exactly what I meant about our gender roles getting confused.

For the record, I can answer yes to 5 of the 6 points that you listed in your post. I have done all of them, including financially supporting a partner for two years, and backing up male mates in violent altercations (Yes, I'm tougher than I look! LOL). I can't say I would financially support an Ex, because I can't see any reason to do so. I'm not sure if I agree with the whole concept of alimony. However, if my Ex had custody of my children, I would definitely pay child support.

RN, you are one a rare type. Great! I still some of these types of women with whom i deal on an unrestricted basis since I 've learned to expect the same from them in every aspect. I won't let them down for any relationship.

Unfortunately, I can tell u that you on at one extreme of a normal statistical distribution (bell curve). I'm not foolish enough to expect that the women facing is of that type.

By the way, what are the odds to meet a women in yout type, frankly?

PS. As you may see, I'm not mysoginist at all, just rule my life rationally

joe_zop >I don't see where you've at all established that they don't already have disadvantages, frankly, and those disadvantages, according to everything I see, outweigh those of men.

That is your opinion, also not supported by facts and statistics. Here is an example : RN for the question 'would you prefer to be born a man' said NO. And, believe me - all women would say the same. They understand who have the upper hand, while you deny it.

I think it's time to stop our discussion. It's all the matter of opinion, you think women's problems are more difficult, I say men's. It's difficult to prove this or that by facts or statistics. You say it's OK for women to use their biological advantage in sex area, while their disadvantages must be compensated by Law, I feel it's not OK. I cannot convince you, that free sex is more important, then financial matters, you cannot convince me that well being of children is more important, then of adults.

I will continue to post my initial message from time to time here, and in other place in hope, then many people will read it and not argue with it, but quietly agree, and maybe post it further. I don't really hope that marriage can be cancelled easily ( I've written about it in the message itself ), but it may shift the balance of opinions and make men to boycott it de-facto, if not in Law. For those people, like you, who believe, that it's basically OK I can't do anything, go continue, get married and feel it on your own skin.

Sorry for disagreement.

Fair enough, let's end the discussion. (We can now return to the normal discussion on fat.) But I simply can't agree with you at all that the idea that women don't have disadvantages is simply an opinion (please note that I did not at any point say they don't have advantages, too) as I think I've been very forthcoming in that regard with facts and statistics from specific sources, which you've not done. It's looking at the overall balance of things that becomes a matter of opinion.

Since you use RN's response as though it proves something other than the fact that RN is basically happy with who she is, I think it's only fair to turn the question back to you -- are you saying that if you had it to do again, you'd prefer to be born a woman?

I'll state it very solidly: that would definitely not be my choice. I like the advantages of being a man -- I like not having to worry about getting pregnant; I like the fact that women don't tend to base everything completely on looks, so I can still have a shot even if I'm older and not Brad Pitt; I like the fact that I'm going to be better paid and that I generally get to be considered better looking as I get older (as I acquire more "character" I guess) as opposed to being labeled "an old cow" when the first wrinkle shows up; I like the fact that I am almost automatically invested with more authority in a meeting because I'm male, I like the fact that it's presumed that I'll do something with my life other than produce and care for children, etc., etc.

And for what it's worth, I do have some experience in the marriage game, so I'm not simply talking theory.

Finally, Alex, please don't apologize for disagreeing -- I'm not going to apologize for my opinions (though I'll happily apologize if I've been at all offensive in stating them) and you shouldn't either. We're both adults -- it's ok not to look at the world the same way, and I, personally, know that I'm not going to grow or learn if I'm only involved in discussions on things about which I agree. As part of the process of this discussion I've been forced to think about why I think about things the way I do, to look back at things I read in the past, check out hunches, do a bit of research to justify my statements, etc., all of which is completely to my benefit, as I have learned some things and am better able to state others. And that doesn't even take into account your opinions and my consideration of them.

You've been consistently civil and good-natured in this process, and I'd welcome a discussion with you any time.

with the illegalization of prostitution and some other adult trades in america, single mothers here do not have the option of supporting their kids with prostitution. in fact america is not a free market because of censorship or banning. some single mothers are high school dropouts and have no skills to find a job so what do they do? they sue for alimony to leech off of the husbands they marry with jobs or their high school sweethearts with grunt jobs. they also sue for the child support as well. many strip clubs in new york have closed down as well. a lot of these strippers were single mothers. the illegalization of prostitution and even strip clubs have caused more trend toward suing for alimony and child support because they know no other option.
in other countries where prostitution is legal, at least single mothers have an option in making money to feed their children. single mothers usually get a lump sum amount (not a continuous withdrawal from a paycheck from ex-husbands like here in america), then they are on their own. they usually turn to prostitution for their money. some prostitutes scrape by just feeding their kids and others actually make a lot of money. some fortunate prostitutes who are lucky not to have been married just make the money for themselves and become wealthy. some even get paid in american currency. and that is a lot of money in their country.
it is rare in america to find a woman who doesn't rely on alimony to support themselves. even if prostitution is legal here, it is ingrained in them that it is taboo or immoral. rather than being a prostitute, they rather sue for alimony and child support. they want to keep the child for financial gains or else they get nothing if the husband gets custody. some like to sue for alimony because of the man-hating attitude that they sacrifice their younger years on the marriage like they did the ex-husband a favor for being their wives for many years. they feel they need compensation for these years so they also abuse the alimony laws. as always, the laws do favor the women and the judges buy this crap. about 98% of american women are like this and only 2% of american women are not like this and are good women like rn who would actually go out and earn the money to support their kids. i respect women like rn or women that go to college to earn their own pay to support their own kids rather than sue an estranged husband for alimony. unfortunately, most american women are like the 98% who are leeches.
american women also refuse to take care of their man when the going gets rough. most of them leave their man when they get laid off. two of my friends in college who were married got divorced when they were laid off because of 9/11. these women then try to find a man with a job and to add insult to injury, my friends had to sell their houses that they mortgaged and give half the money to their ex-wives because the house was bought during their marriage. the men in america are disadvantaged by the law and thus people liek myself are discouraged from being married. i always think that women who want to marry me have an alterior motive (financially and physically, because i do grunt work). i also rarely see guys in wheelchairs married in america because these wheelchair cases can't take care of these leeches called american women (except the 2%, like rn). i see more cripples married in other countries than here in america. most of them are single. in fact my brother is a paraplegic and he gets no dates. are these women so heartless as to care for only financial gain and not want to take care of a helpless cripple? also the law does not take seriously male victims of female partners. they thought i was a joke when my ex-fiance physically abused me and i refused to strike back at her for fear of being arrested myself.

joe_zop > Since you use RN's response ... I think it's only fair to turn the question back to you -- are you saying that if you had it to do again, you'd prefer to be born a woman?

Yes. It's not that I gay or something, I like it to be myself, but I realize advantages of being a worman at our times. They often don't have to work as hard , as men, and they don't have to pay hard earned money for sex. Yes, it's difficult to born and raise children, but it's their ultimate choice, to have them or not. And if they decide to have them, they really have children, no father can take them away from them.
Would I have a child, I'd like her to be a girl, not a boy in our times .

I understand your position, think it over. It's traditional position, but it doesn't mean that it's right one. I have my vision, based on what I see in life. My position, especially "child support must be voluntary only" seems to be harsh, unhuman but it is not. 1. Many men DO support children voluntary. 2. What if some guy is single father, his wife, unfortunately, died ? Will he not survive with children ? He will and probably will be quite OK. It's not an ultimate disaster to be a single parent. Even more, this guy doesn't meet same compassion in our concience, as single women - it's natural, we are programmed to have more compassion to girls. It's emotions and girls use it well, mother is something honorable in our mindes, single men is something despisable. It's all make quality of life for women in our time much better, then for men. So let's not increase this by feminist-oriented marriage laws.

darkseid>American women also refuse to take care of their man when the going gets rough. Most of them leave their man when they get laid off. Two of my friends in college who were married got divorced when they were laid off because of 9/11. These women then try to find a man with a job and to add insult to injury, my friends had to sell their houses that they mortgaged and give half the money to their ex-wives because the house was bought during their marriage. The men in America ARE disadvantaged by the law ...

Joe_zop - this is good examples for you. Without any statistics we now - it's true, it's style of life. We, men, don't like this. Cancellation of marriage law will improve the situation.

Ohhh puh-leeze. So now women don't have to work as hard as men either, Alex?? Let me ask you this...what do you do after a hard day's work, huh? I'll tell you what my ex-husband used to do...relax, watch a bit of TV, eat dinner, have a beer, maybe go out with friends or sometimes just go to bed early. When his 8 hour working day was over, it was over.

You talk about "tradition"....well, traditionally, women run the household and look after the children. (Even if there are no children, women still traditionally run the household). Let me tell you about MY working day. I get up early, dress myself for work and the kids for school, make breakfast and pack school lunches. I drop the kids off at school and then head to work for eight hours. Then I pick the kids up from childcare around 6pm, cook dinner, bathe the kids, help with homework, do the dishes, tidy up the house, put the kids to bed, then put a load of laundry into the machine. I then sit down at the computer to do two or three solid hours of paperwork that I certainly don't get paid overtime for, hang out the washing in the dark, lay out the kids clothes for the morning, have a shower and then finally get to bed well after midnight. But of course, "women's work" isn't work I suppose...

As for me choosing not to be a man in another lifetime, I had a feeling you would use my comment in exactly the context you did. You wanna know why I wouldn't want to be a man? Because it sounds BORING to me. You have it EASY. Biologically you have all the advantages, and you get to blame all your mistakes on your hormones, genetics, inherited caveman instincts or your dick...which you apparently have absolutely no control over. And yes, I will be very unpopular for saying that, but in my opinion that's the way it is. Being a woman sucks for all the reasons that Joe (brilliantly as usual) mentioned, and more. But I like a challenge.

Anyway....men's "acceptable" hair colours are very limited and shopping sprees for men's clothing are mind numbingly dull. You all wear the same thing to a black tie party, you don't meet any new people because you won't dare approach a stranger for directions or to ask for help (no I don't need to borrow a lighter, I can just use this stick as a flint against the bar...), and in all seriousness.....men look downright stupid in a halterneck and high heels. And that's not something I'm willing to give up...

There's no question that there are money-hungry b*tches out there who are only out to take someone for all they're worth. Also no question that marriages fall apart when someone goes out of work, no matter what the cause -- the stress is immense on all involved, and if the bond was based mainly on material things then goodbye. Absolutely every authority agrees -- problems with sex and money are the two forces most likely to break up marriages. I know the laws at times are very strange -- my brother was legally forced to pay legal fees for the wife who tried to kill him, and ended up bankrupt (and with the kid, I might add.) There's also no question that there are men who beat their wives, treat them like property, decide to dump them for younger models simply because the aging process happens, etc. While Darkseid's most definitely got a legitimate complaint about the unenlightened police he dealt with, part of that is because his is a decidedly rarer type of domestic abuse.

Alex, the guys who support their children voluntarily aren't the problem, any more than the women who aren't in it for the money. Laws are for those who don't do the right thing, not for those who do, and an argument where you cite best-case scenario to support your position and worst-case to attack the other is not productive. I frankly don't see how you can justify things based on "what I see in life" -- a completely personal take on things -- and then say it has nothing to do with you personally, you speak for millions. Either you're using a personal look at things or you're not; either you use actual facts as opposed to anecdote or not. It's disingenuous to lean on personal perspective as though it proves something and then shy away from giving any information about how that perspective has been formed. It means that the perspective is then unassailable by definition.

You say your position regarding child support is not harsh -- I say that if you believe that you are at best naive and ignorant of the situation of countless kids in society right now who have been abandoned by their fathers. And make no mistake -- that's the far more likely scenario than the mother leaving the child. I posted a series of stats earlier about the problems these children have, and those are problems that society as a whole ends up having to deal with. Your approach is to either ignore this issue or assert that the happiness problems of adults are more important than the survival problems of children. Tell me again how that's not harsh, ok?

One thing that's not been mentioned at all here is this -- the so-called no-fault divorce laws, mostly implemented from 1965-74, are considered to be one of the main reasons for the climb in the divorce rate -- with most estimates saying it increased the rate by twenty to twenty-five percent. Your "no obligation" approach would probably do the same, or worse, rather than act as some means for happier, more "equal" marriages.

While a basically traditional position on marriage laws may not be the right one (presuming, amusingly, that as you put it "feminist-oriented marriage laws" and no-fault divorce are traditional), a radical reworking of things based on sexual frustration, a few pieces of anecdote and some gut feelings isn't necessarily the right one either. Your approach is "well, it can't get any worse." Like hell it can't. :)

Ouch, RN -- you really need to work off some of that frustration in a good healthy non-work-involved sweat. :D I don't think being any stripe of human is easy, male or female, and both sides have their advantages and disadvantages. The pressures and values are different (you're a failure because you don't make enough money, you're identified with the job you do which is crap, haven't had any kids/too many kid/ugly disobedient brats, married an ugly/stupid/goodfornothing/whatever spouse, etc.) but they're still there and they're still difficult. It's like arguing over whose operation was more painful! As I listed in my earlier response, I do think there are advantages to being male, but by the same token, my odds of being "kept" do go down in this gender, regardless of your experience with your ex, for example.

Careful or we may get into a stereotype war -- there [i]are[/i] other ways to meet people besides asking for directions on a trip, such as doing research on directions before you leave :) and some of us have been through large progressions of socially unacceptable hair and clothes styles and colors. Not the haltertop or heels, though, thank the gods...

Awwww c'mon Joe...you should know me well enough by now to know that my post was totally tongue in cheek! :) I thought at least the reference to men in halternecks would have given that away!! LOL Of course I understand that there are problems for both sexes (but I DO think that being a man would be boring...the joy of hair-colouring alone is worth being female for!!!)

Mind you, the work bit was true. I certainly didn't mean that EVERY man behaved in that manner...far from it...but if Alex wants to talk "tradition", than "traditionally" a man's working day ends when he gets home and the woman runs around satisfying his every need until the wee hours of the night. And the chauvenist perception that what a woman does around the house doesn't count as WORK, is still all too common in our society.