Same short hairdo (unless that a dude)!
Posted on 09/05/2017 2:33:53 PM PDT by BJ1
How self absorbed is this chick?
About as self absorbed as any other feminist imo.
Some women might want marriage more than some men. But that doesn’t necessarily mean they need it more.
Men benefit greatly from a good marriage too. Companionship and being loved (and giving love) goes a long ways in health and sanity wise. We already know men who are married live longer and are healthier.
Lets also not forget how wonderful it is to have someone to share the cooking, cleaning, bills, and everything else with. Very nice to share a movie or snuggle up to is a very big plus too. And if one gets sick or loses a job, it isn’t as hard as going it alone though the rough spots.
Strange, isn’t it? That real kindness to each other can do so much for someone’s life and well being. Remember, you want the ‘Queen (or King) of Hearts’, not of ‘Diamonds (beautiful just to look at’). That is where most men and women both fail.
The acceptance of fornication has led to the higher rate of singleness. Of course, God hasn’t changed his mind. It’s just another symptom of a dying culture.
Sounds like sour grapes.
As a doctor, I was a happy single. I made the decision early, because 50 year ago it was hard to be a physician and married if you were female. I made the decision and no problem.
In contrast, she is saying she can’t find a man to fulfill her life, so she now insists she is happily single. That’s not the same thing.
Years later, I got married and was a happy married lady.
Her problem is that she thinks marriage is about her wants and needs. She wants a servant or nanny not a husband.
Same short hairdo (unless that a dude)!
New statesman is a leftist rag. I’ll believe them when they tell muzzies not to have babies.
Carley Simon was VERY attractive-and rich every step of the way. Someone else did the dirty work with her kids I’m sure. So she, like this author gets to speak for all women.
Do you think her attitude of wanting a servant/nanny as you say, is very common among young women? Or is this lady just an outlier?
“Prior to the boomers is prior to the pill. Therefore, it’s not worth comparing to today’s generation of child bearing age women.”
Really?
The first Boomers were late teens when the pill was introduced.
There were lots of women of child bearing age still around,in other words,another generation.
.
Are you really gonna harass me over not including the silent generation in my statement? The typical woman of that era was married by 25 and the pill was around 1965. For all practical purposes, being a career woman was not a choice for most of the women of the silent generation. By contrast, the oldest boomers were 19 in 1965.
You don’t have to be so argumentative. The point stands that the the Millennial women are going to be childless much more so than the prior generations.
Sir, you are a wise man.
Me too. The writer was irrational half the time; the other half she was like a kid. (She herself probably is better off single.) I couldn't even finish it, it was such drivel.
Study the effect of oxytocin on women as compared to men. The biology debunks her whole premise.
Also consider whether this author is possibly displaying an autism spectrum disorder. She of course would not be unhappy with herself and would not recognize that she does not form relationship attachments as normals do. The narcissism that you are noticing in her writing is one type characteristic of the autism spectrum, but she could even be a high-functioning sociopath.
At any rate she points out that she is atypical and rages against what other women do, so I do not think she provides an answer to the question of why singleness is on the upswing unless you think there are a lot of girls who also think like this. The “economics” paragraph is included to show her great moral superiority over other women who fall for the “happy ending.” What are your thoughts?
Wow, what a joke. Good luck with that career without the real happiness of life.... children. Such a hollow victory a career and money will be for them.
Only reason I’am still single is one easy line: “I believe in no physical activities until after marriage.” Normally that is good enough to even get ‘Christian’ girls to dump me, lol. My generation is so screwed up - and they don’t even know it.
Can’t blame them. The other side of it was oppression although it was typically the wife/mother/woman who ran the house and made many of the important family decisions.
The traditional relationship was of respect and no hanky-panky before marriage. Birth control has definitely liberated both sexes including men. Men can be less committed to a relationship. Not good IMO because that kind of intimacy should be tied to commitment.
Before birth control, the consequences were not good, after there was and is less risk. Less commitment for women too I guess. And maybe they feel the same way. But I wonder...
But as many a woman have told me — for a woman to have sex, she is totally committed to the relationship and very deeply, too. It hurts her immensely if it is treated by the man as anything less. This is well after the invention of birth control and women’s lib. “Modern times.”
Men are confused by this mostly because of what they are told by everyone. Sow your oats, etc. No risk of getting the girl pregnant, and if she does get pregnant “who cares” it is not your problem. Very bad stuff.
If they truly knew how much it hurts a woman to be “used,” they might think twice... if he has the right foundations of compassion and understanding. This is the baby in the bathwater that was lost with the “sexual revolution.”
Anyway, my interpretation here is that even though the old traditions are gone, there is an underlying “instinctive” desire for commitment that those old traditions brought. Maybe, at least in part, the old traditions were a good thing.
No doubt men benefit but do they realize it? Many men don’t. Do they appreciate a stay at home mom’s sacrifice for the children. Bringing home the bacon and keeping the home safe and healthy are equally important.
Unfortunately, it seems that the single crowd thing seems to be exactly the opposite of what you talk about. No commitment but plenty of dating can mean lots of frustration.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
