The role of women - your thoughts

[RIKA]

Okay you guys, you've talked about the retrosexual and you've talked about chivalry.

Now I want you to talk about the role of women. Not necessarily your wife or girlfriend but women in general.

You are free to use me as your target, good or bad. I know that I don't fit into the standard definition because I choose not to. I will comment on my philosophy after your comments.

Lucille may be included in your comments but only if she chooses to be, we being the only two female people here. Apologies to Lucille if I brought you into this thing inappropriately. No harm intended.

This could be fun if you want to join in. No feelings will be hurt on my end. Be honest. What do you want a woman to be in your world?

Please no comments about Lucille until she gives permission. Thanks.

RIKA

[DaRkWoLf]

I usually abstained from posting in the man vs woman threads but here goes:

First of all, in my personal belief and opinion, women have every right to fufill "mens" jobs. Anyting else is discrimination by gender.

As far as the armed services go, if they standardized PFT scoring so that the same scoring that is used for men is used for women I would have no problem at all seeing a female in spec ops. Just last year the first USMC female sniper was certified. She was examined on the same scale as the men. I think thats a good start. I do not have a direct link, but look on Sniper Country (www.snipercountry.com), they had some article about her and a link to the full story. If im not mistaken, www.snipersparadise.com also had it on their page.

As far as married domestic life goes, I think that if possible the woman should stay home and keep the kids in line. Im willing to bet that if mothers were around to better mold the characters of their children the world would have less problems. However, we know that this is not economically viable in most cases. Yet, the mother functioning as the upbringer is a natural occurance. Once again, I feel that the couple should arrange whatever they felt best.

I really just dont believe that men have the right or option to define the role of women or the other way around.

[Flinter]

I believe in traditional roles, I like women who let me be a man.

My wife cooks, cleans, takes care of school issues (for my son), and takes care of the day to day issues of running our home. She hasn't worked outside of the home in 5 years.

I go to work, take care of the yard, do the upkeep on the vehicles and handle most of the discipline of our son.

We tried it other ways, this works for us.

[RIKA]

I believe in traditional roles, I like women who let me be a man.

My wife cooks, cleans, takes care of school issues (for my son), and takes care of the day to day issues of running our home. She hasn't worked outside of the home in 5 years.

I go to work, take care of the yard, do the upkeep on the vehicles and handle most of the discipline of our son.

We tried it other ways, this works for us.

Good answer Flinter, for those who have children and who choose to assume that role which I consider to be a totally honorable one. Now what about women who are unmarried or who don't have children yet. What about their role?

RIKA

[Kent]

What role do "they" want? Who am I to say what their roles should be? You dont answer to me. I have no power over you or any other woman, thats not MY role. Sorry if this is no help, regarding your question. It's your life, you live it according to your conscience and abilities.

Thats what I would say to unmarrried women, if asked.

[ballistic_ken]

I agree w/ both DW and Flinter.

Women can do anything they want, if they prove themselves on an even playing field.

Otoh, as a single father I think that women are more "wired" for the raising of kids. I do my best, My daughter seems to be well adjusted. As well adjusted as a 6yo can be.

On the personal side, If I find a woman that can be independant and a team player as far as family goes, I'd grab her in a heart beat.

Still looking.

Ken

[KJUN]

However, we know that this is not economically viable in most cases.
That is only the case because members of society decided that everyone MUST have 2 new cars, color TVs and cable in each room, eat out almost every meal, ....., and have all of the extra's that make life more material.

Basically, being "economically unviable for both parents to not work in MOST 9or even many) cases" is hogwash. Sure, you can have more stuff with more money coming in, but you might be losing more than you are gaining. "Stuff" frequently isn't what we need more of. The library is cheap. They'd do better WITHOUT a TV. New cloths every month is NOT a necessity, etc. A bigger house than the "Jones'" isn't all that important! If more parents would teach their kids what IS important instead of just buying them "stuff," ferwer and fewer would "need" both parents working.

Saying that, we both work. BUT, we would do it if we were weathly enough that our pay wasn't even a blip on the screen. Both of us do jobs that we enjoy AND that we feel are important in the long term. I am sure glad as heck that we've got plumbers, programers, highway workers, electricians, etc. out there. I respect them for the job they do, but I would go crazy working a job like that where the results are just short term with no long-term meaning. This is the "work to live or live to work" type comparison. We both choice jobs that let us feel like we are doing "something meaningful" with our lives via our work.

Now, with all of that said, I like having lots of "stuff," too.
KJ

[DaRkWoLf]

KJUN,

I understand your opinion. Mine may be based on that my appartment overlooks 2 all out ghettos and one immigrant district. Liberty City, Hialeah (including the bad part), and the immigrant area is right next to my school. A fair travel north (40 mins) is the bad part of Hollywood.

I have freinds in the immigrant area, and lets just say the plasma tvs are not abundant. Both parents are running jobs just to get some cash to pay their mortgage/rent and be competitive in society.

I guess its just my localle.

[Magnum88C]

I'm not going to get into the "role of women" argument/discussion here, because it will only cause trouble. But I do want to address KJUN's post.
One thing you have to understand is just how low the wages are in FL. This is a "right to work" (i.e. slave labor) state. It was just in the paper last week that just to pay the bills (NOT including ANY car payment, or mortgage), takes $10.47 per hour. Yet most jobs pay $8 per hour or less. It really IS a necessity to a be a 2-income family here unless you own both your home and your vehicle(s).
People make fun of people living in trailers and mobile homes, but to be a "southern man of means" it's often necessary. Because a mobile home/trailer can be paid off long before a house can, and the typical southron down here will have 2 cars. Often two ****ty ones, sometimes a new one and a ****ty one. The trick is, the ****ty ones are paid for. The homes with two ****ty cars (truck usually) have them not because the wife also needs a car, but because if one breaks down, you drive the otehr while fixing it. Or, the ****ty one is there if something happens and they lose the new one.
That's basically what I do. I've got the old (1978) Jeep sitting around while I pay off the fairly new ('03) Chevy 2500HD. When the Chevy is paid off, guess what I'm going to do? That's right, I'm NOT going to trade it. Then it's on to paying the house off as fast as possible. Once the car(s) and house are paid for, I'll be sitting pretty, even if for some reason all I can get is a **** job (not likely, as I'm a skilled tradesman, but. . .).

[Flinter]

Rika.......I believe an unattached woman can define her own role.

[SatCong]

Any attempt to describe roles or ascribe them to any demographic only serves to limit the potential of those being described.
SatCong

[Wylycoyte]

Any attempt to describe roles or ascribe them to any demographic only serves to limit the potential of those being described.
SatCong

Big +1 on that.

[RIKA]

Rika.......I believe an unattached woman can define her own role.

I have very carefully and thoughtfully adopted the strengths, mindset and interests that I want, love and respect. They are part of that which makes me the person that I am, good or bad. I wasn't asking anyone to define me but just trying to stimulate conversation that I thought would be interesting.

RIKA

[Aslan]

Hmm, interesting thread...

I think of men and women as being equals - they are two halves of the same whole. Where men have weakness, women have strength. where men have strength, women have weakness.

Does this mean that a woman can't have many of the same strengths that a man has? nope, same for vice versa.

But the roles of a woman (or a man, for that matter) depend on the individuals. I like the traditional family roles. But at the same time, I don't feel it is right to denigrate someone to some preconceived notion or ideal.

If you want to work and you find a mate that is ok with it, then it is cool.

I do have a problem with relying on a "nanny" state to raise any children you have though. You have kids, it is your (family's) responsibility to raise them.

my two cents..

:devil:

[41mag]

Lifetime bachelor here.

I promised myself years ago that I wouldn't get married until I could support my wife/family in a traditional way.I want to be the one who works full time & let her run the household & take care of our pre-school age kids.She could(if she wanted to)get a job after the kids were in school but I wanted her home when the kids were out of school.A "Leave it to Beaver" family.

Which is why I'm a bachelor.lol.

[lucille]

Hmm, interesting thread...

I think of men and women as being equals - they are two halves of the same whole. Where men have weakness, women have strength. where men have strength, women have weakness.

Does this mean that a woman can't have many of the same strengths that a man has? nope, same for vice versa.

But the roles of a woman (or a man, for that matter) depend on the individuals. I like the traditional family roles. But at the same time, I don't feel it is right to denigrate someone to some preconceived notion or ideal.

If you want to work and you find a mate that is ok with it, then it is cool.

I do have a problem with relying on a "nanny" state to raise any children you have though. You have kids, it is your (family's) responsibility to raise them.

my two cents..

:devil:

In my opinion, this is one of the best answers I have ever seen to this question.

[Thirdeyex]

If I do it, I'll get a whoopin'...............I'll do it. :evilgrin:

Because our government is now occupied territory and the push for global governance has accelerated the current ROLE of the woman is to effect social change to further the ideals of communism. (by design) These ideas are over 100 years old and still in effect today. Those that understand the machinations put forth by this ideology can piece together the fragments of today’s society by reviewing the benefactors and authors of this movement. If you want to know the next move in social engineering merely review what the educational system is teaching your child. (I’m sure you have already witnessed the filth being taught)

Here are examples:

Marx taught: "Anyone who knows something of history knows that the great social changes are impossible without the feminist ferment.” (Letter to Kugelmann, 1888.)

And to Lenin the participation of women was more much urgent and important to the revolution: "The experience of all the liberation movements confirms that the success of the revolution depends on the degree in which women participate."

China proclaims, following Mao Tse-tung's thesis: "The emancipation of women is an integral part of the liberation of the proletariat." (Peking Review, No. 10, 1972.)

The proudest boast of Communism is that it has finally emancipated the woman. Marx writes: "Differences of age and sex have no longer any distinctive social validity. All are instruments of labor." The key word here is instrument which reduces a human being to the dignity of a monkey wrench. The assumption was that woman was free as soon as she became available for production. One of the paradoxes of our irrational world is that woman today is glorified when she produces an Atomic Bomb, but not when she can produce life. It is like praising violinists for producing sewer pipes instead of melodies.

Marxs continues,"The value of labour-power was determined, not only by labour-time necessary to maintain the individual adult laborer, but also by that necessary to maintain his family . Machinery, by throwing every member of that family on to the labour-market, spreads the values of the man's labour-power over his whole family. It thus depreciates his labour- power..." Thus we see, that machinery, while augmenting the human material that forms the principal object of capital's exploiting power, at the same time raises the degree of exploitation."

Continuing his analysis, Marx himself describes to us how capitalism uses even the virtues and obligations of women for its advantage: "Mr. E., manufacturer, told me how in his textile mills he employed exclusively women, preferably married ones, and above all those who had at home a family living from or depending on her salary, since these were much more active and zealous than single women; besides, the need to procure sustenance to their families forced them to work harder. In this way, the virtues characterizing women are turned against them: all the purity and sweetness of their character are turned into instruments of torture and slavery." (Note 57 of above quoted volume and edition of Capital, p. 331.)

Marxism conceives the struggle for the emancipation of women as a protracted but victorious struggle: "This is a protracted struggle, which requires a radical transformation of the social technique and of customs. But this struggle will end with the full victory of communism." (Lenin, On the Occasion of International Working Women's Day.)

Most will not acknowledge the facts presented because they have become indoctrinated by continual bombardment of these ideas through the educational system, controlled media, and lauded books. The mind has been conditioned to disregard all references to things not “PC”. Racism, sexism, ageism and all other isms are creations of the “new think” designed to stop the mind. Not all women have been duped but the idea behind social engineering is to create a division in culture, turmoil or a rift that can be exploited.

The can of worms is open,

Let the flame begin…..
:flamethr:

[John in AR]

Now I want you to talk about the role of women.

Some reason, I can't get the phrase "in the hay" out of my head... :duck:

[lucille]

Interesting timing, some of my female attorney-to-be friends and I were talking about male exotic dancers and lap dances yesterday evening (I have never seen such, BTW, and was well kidded for my protected life); one of them had a pic and 'business card' of one she had tipped to dance for her......

Hay is good..... :D

[KJUN]

Some reason, I can't get the phrase "in the hay" out of my head... :duck:

Great, now you've got "Rolling in the hay. Rolling in the Hay" AND the following scenes from "Young Frankenstein" stuck in my head. JUST FRICKEN GREAT!

[KJUN]

One of the paradoxes of our irrational world is that woman today is glorified when she produces an Atomic Bomb, but not when she can produce life.

So, where does a sterile or post-menopausal woman fit in?

[41mag]

I lied in my earlier post.Women should be kept like slave labor.Always available for sex(until they get too old-say 35.then they get replaced),always have dinner ready for the man of the house,& they must keep the house(& any of their brats)squeaky clean.
They should be educated through the 12th grade so that they don't give a "cow like" look in response to most questions.They need no college(waste of money for a domestic).

Old women(post 35ish) & those not good enough for sex should belong to the community.They should be the washerwoman,the mid-wives,& they should also take the role of grandmother for all the children.They should know enough to keep their opinions to themselves when around their betters too.Growing old doesn't make them any smarter.


:duck:

[RIKA]

Some reason, I can't get the phrase "in the hay" out of my head... :duck:

Women like "in the hay" too.

RIKA :dgrin:

[RIKA]

I lied in my earlier post.Women should be kept like slave labor.Always available for sex(until they get too old-say 35.then they get replaced),always have dinner ready for the man of the house,& they must keep the house(& any of their brats)squeaky clean.
They should be educated through the 12th grade so that they don't give a "cow like" look in response to most questions.They need no college(waste of money for a domestic).

Old women(post 35ish) & those not good enough for sex should belong to the community.They should be the washerwoman,the mid-wives,& they should also take the role of grandmother for all the children.They should know enough to keep their opinions to themselves when around their betters too.Growing old doesn't make them any smarter.


:duck:

This is NOT the way to win friends or influence RIKA and Lucille. Didn't John Wayne Bobbitt have the same attitude?

(just kidding) RIKA :D

[41mag]

This is NOT the way to win friends or influence RIKA and Lucille. Didn't John Wayne Bobbitt have the same attitude?

(just kidding) RIKA :D


:laugh01: :dgrin: :laugh01:

[Hard Rock]

I think women have the right and ability to choose their own place in life. This does not mean however that they should be exempt from pampering and idol worship from us guys. hehehe

Any man that treats a woman less than spartan should be shot.

As for using you for this little discussion Erika, I'd love to but my wife would shoot me. smootch.

Mike

[41mag]

HR?Didn't the Spartans treat their wimmen folk just like I posted above?

Until Thermopalye(sp?) that is?

I kinda figured that Molon Labve was refering-not to our weapons-but to our women.Was I wrong?

[Magnum88C]

Thirdeyex, I think the distinctive lack of response to your post, as well as one of the posts after yours, proves your point about the conditioning.

The fact that even thos ewho consider themselves "free" have been duped to me says there never will be a "resistance" or "revolution" when the end of our society comes, there will be those who conform, and the very few who leave. It's sad.

I didn't, and don't want to borach this subject much, because of the violent response I've seen before, and expected here. I'm not sure, but I think I'm more disturbed by the lack of a response. it shows we're further along.

[RIKA]

Magnum, please PM me and tell what the heck you're talking about. You totally lost me. On second thought, don't if you don't want to.

Thx

RIKA

[John in AR]

Great, now you've got "Rolling in the hay. Rolling in the Hay" AND the following scenes from "Young Frankenstein" stuck in my head. JUST FRICKEN GREAT!


Small world... I watched Blazing Saddles just last week.

Two of the funniest movies ever made.

[Thirdeyex]

Thirdeyex, I think the distinctive lack of response to your post, as well as one of the posts after yours, proves your point about the conditioning.

The fact that even thos ewho consider themselves "free" have been duped to me says there never will be a "resistance" or "revolution" when the end of our society comes, there will be those who conform, and the very few who leave. It's sad.

I didn't, and don't want to borach this subject much, because of the violent response I've seen before, and expected here. I'm not sure, but I think I'm more disturbed by the lack of a response. it shows we're further along.
Magnum88,

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer

There are very few that have studied, to a great degree, the history, process, development, implementation and most important the consequences of communist ideology. Today there are many that share some of the core values of communism believing that their ideas are progressive and evolving to a new level of understanding and freedom unaware that they have been spoon fed the principals that have been written generations ago for the express destruction of resistance to its implementation.

"By attacking the character and morals of Man himself, and by bringing about, through contamination of youth, a general degraded feeling, command of the populace is facilitated by a very marked degree . . . The first thing to be degraded in any nation is the state of Man, himself. Nations, which have high ethical tone, are difficult to conquer. Their loyalties are hard to shake, their allegiance to their leaders is fanatical, and what they usually call their spiritual integrity cannot be violated by duress. It is not efficient to attack a nation in such a frame of mind. . . . Thus, the first target is Man, himself." Kenneth Goff (presented by), The Soviet Art Of Brainwashing, A Synthesis of the Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics.

"The quality of education given to the lower classes must be of the poorest sort so that the moat of ignorance isolating the inferior class from the superior class remains incomprehensible to the inferior class. With such a handicap, even the bright lower class individuals have little hope of extricating themselves from their assigned lot for life. This form of slavery is essential to maintaining some measure of social order, peace, and tranquility for the upper ruling class." Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars, Operations Research Technical Manual - TM-SW1905.1. Lt. Col. Jack Mohr

"Corrupt the young, get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex. Make them superficial, destroy their ruggedness. Get control of all means of publicity and thereby: Get the peoples' mind off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and plays, and other trivialities. Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance. Destroy the people's faith in their natural leaders by holding up the latter to ridicule, contempt and obloquy. Always preach true democracy but seize power as fast and as ruthlessly as possible. Encourage government extravagance, destroy its credit, produce fear with rising prices, inflation and general discontent. Foment unnecessary strikes in vital industries, encourage civil disorders and foster a soft and lenient attitude on the part of the government towards such disorders. By specious argument cause the breakdown of the old moral virtues: honesty, sobriety, continence, faith in the pledged word, ruggedness. Cause the registration of all firearms on some pretext, with the view of confiscating them and leaving the population defenseless." -- Communist Rules For Revolution

Yes it’s very sad….