Posted on 01/02/2008 12:03:03 PM PST by rollingthunder2006
That's probably true in this day and age. I don't think badgering a woman for sex is right, nor do I think it's right to withhold sex from a man for the purpose of inducing him to commit.
If a couple can't agree on when the relationship becomes sexual, they should probably end the relationship. Trying to force one to bend to the other's will is unfair, creates resentment, and probably indicates much deeper differences that will continually plague a continued relationship.
I believe in abstaining before marriage and respect women who do so. I also know our media culture is dead set against giving that message and ridicules those who commit to it.
I wouldn’t look at a women who refused sex before marriage as manipulating me into a commitment. I would look at it as her preconditions for finding a husband. If I can’t abide by that, shame on me. If a woman tried to pressure me into either sex or marriage before I was ready, shame on her.
Life’s a two-way street. Neither one ought to ever feel forced into sex or marriage. It should be a union mutually agreed upon or it will likely fail.
LOL! I like to offer a Guinness and a kitten.
Happy New Year to you, too!
Ah - but to do that, and have it work, I'd actually have to have some deeply felt resentment about men, and I don't. I generally start out on these threads actually trying to help men get along better with women... but the mean spiritedness often gets to me.
Shamefully I must admit that I have a kind of perverse, Jerry Springer-esque attraction to these threads. It would be very interesting and very enlightening (for both sides) to see the roles reversed.
Eh... me too... ;~) but they wouldn't see it as 'what goes around comes around'... they'd just view it as more evidence that wimmen are in fact, all b!tches.
And we aren't. I think most are just doing the best they can... they want, like men want, to love and be loved, and not all are very good at it. The bitter ones end up here, venting feelings they probably hope their current or future wives never see, taking out their aggressions on anyone who defends a positive outlook on marriage, all the while claiming they are not just as driven by emotion as women are.
I met my husband here, so I write what I DO want my husband to see. :~)
Using sex as a tool is manipulative and dirty. It is part of the mentality here that is being discussed. The mentality that women can manipulate men, and men let it happen.
First of all, what makes a woman so confident in herself that she is sure that I want it? If she says ‘you ain’t getting none’ I say ‘what!? None what?’ At that point I don’t want it and that weapon that she is using is immediately lost. Most of the time they have no other discourse.
“You’re sleeping on the couch tonight”
Bullcrap! Thats my bed that I paid for in my house that I pay for. I sleep where I damn well please.
I was single for many years and sex as a tool was the biggest turn off for me. It amused me when women flattered themselves by assuming that I want to have sex with them. (I did, but still)
If you take that out of the equation, then women have no game plan whatsoever. Its their only tool.
Bookmark
Nope,
even if I posted it, and pinged every woman who had ever posted in agreement with me on one of these threads, my bet is that the thread would be quickly and violently drowned out by every bitter boy called from the bastion of their misogynistic mecca with a “See! We told you so! You’re all hateful witches!”
What I’m saying is we females here just don’t think that way about the guys here. Sadly, it seems a loud and vocal group of males post here and don’t seem to get that their ‘scattershot’ attitude ain’t winnin’ converts to conseravative ‘values’.
Sheesh, I believe in freedom first.
Help me here,
What’s a Chi??
It’s one of those salon quality flat irons.
Frequent visits to Sephora keep her singing my praises, too ;o)
Not among women anyway...guys are a different story.
Yer a good Hubby (Sephora would do it for me!)
Really??
Is it so hard to concede the possibility the pendulum of oppression against women has swung past neutral...particularly when women in general are universally acknowledged to be superior verbal communicators?
I don’t disagree that the pendulum has swung wide. I just never want to see it swing back to what I knew as a child. It can be bad on both ends of the spectrum.
Both sides need to find a middle ground.
Real, substantive admissions women are receiving advantages to which they are not entitled.
I think I understand you.
Understand, my gut reaction is based on a being raised by a father who hated women and abused the both me and my mother. I was told I was evil because I was a decendent of Eve. That everything he did we ‘made’ him do (and there was little he didn’t do) because it was the sinful nature of females to make men act that way.
And yes, he truly hated me.
And of course, I turned right around and married my father....Granted, when it was all over, I was far stronger and not afraid anymore.
Will I get married again? No.
I don’t even date.
So I guess what I’m saying is that what you see as a concession and I see as a concession are two different things. That’s all.
But of course. And I would never seek to devalue your experiences. I know you to be a respected and honorable FReeper of long reputation and high standing. You are also sophisticated enough to transcend your personal history in the pursuit of an accurate characterization of modern culture.
If I can not convince you of the reasonableness of my position...it simply is not reasonable.
I agree that a lot of what has been gained is in the extreme .....What concerns me is that much of what some folks appear to be pining for here is not moderation, but for the pendelum to go back to their ‘good ole days’. The comfortable, familiar, when all was ‘good in the world.’
I was there when I ‘knew my place’ and those days sucked ;) And no, not much was good in our world.
Again, all I want is middle ground for both sides and for both to be free. Period.
Women aren’t evil— most want what all people want. And yes, some have pushed somethings too far. But sometimes you have to push things too far to even define what “too far” is.... Now we know what “too far” on both ends of the spectrum is....
Now with a ruler, we can find the middle.
Finally, something you and I can agree on. Idiot is too kind though as they normally show the men as having less intelligence than the family dog. He's shown as incompetent with no common sense and can't be counted on to contribute anything worthwhile to the marital relationship other than his paycheck. In some of those commercials even his capacity to earn a living is in doubt as he appears to be a danger to himself as well as to anyone in the near vicinity.
In any case, it's a book review, so the ideas he discusses are the authors, and I quote from the book, not the review...Further he notes, “What most of the men I work with don’t ‘get’ is that their relationship job description has changed…The refrain I hear over and over again from dissatisfied women is ‘I don’t feel like I have a real partner.’ A partner who shares in the details of domestic life and in her concerns about the kids. An intellectual partner who cares about what she thinks and supports her development. And most of all, an emotional partner who shows interest in and appreciation for her feelings and who has a few feelings of his own to bring to the table.” In other words, women want more so the direct sex must give it to them.
From the reviewer...The enduring theme of this work, which promises so much to women, revolves around men being to blame for the failure of modern relationships. It seems that we have neglected to alter ourselves to the necessary extent. If we did then we could better meet the needs of the liberated woman. Mr. Terry notes in the opening chapter that, “Newly empowered, women across America turned to men and began insisting on levels of emotional intimacy that most men—raised under the old regime—were not readily able to meet.”
The reviewer observes...Of course, there is much to disdain about The New Rules of Marriage, but what offended me most was its pervasive celebration of inequality amongst the sexes. Women want more out of relationships today so…men must give it to them. Why is that the case? In every equitable transaction, the side who asks for more must offer more in exchange. This leads us to ask, what do modern women offer men that is superior to what their predecessors proffered in the past?
...and concludes...Asking men to alter their consciousness in the hopes of accommodating women is preposterous. Such a wish should reveal to the direct sex that society’s advocacy for equality was a ruse all along; nothing but a dense smog concealing a desire for female supremacy. Rather than internalize these New Rules men should memorize a more imperative injunction: Caveat Emptor.
. That he thinks so only shows that he wants to be seen as a victim. Not very manly, and not true. I think the concept should apply to both...
You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts. If you have some ability to mind read what someone else thinks and wants, you're wasting it here...that you are suggests to me that you wish to attack the writer, not the thesis...you supposed high mindedness is nothing more than common demagogery.
While you may in fact think that the concept should apply to both, the author says it applies to men...as pointed out by the reviewer. I'm not sure how you intend to quote a line from a writer, yet ignore the context in which it is offered.
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.