Posted on 04/13/2013 11:29:36 AM PDT by mylife
video is at the link.
That’s a big ol’ tall girl.
Yeah, She’s competitive.
Yesterday my wife left for a business trip to Cologne. She had a sad face, telling our 3.5 year old daughter how much she was going to miss her. Our daughter replied: “You’ll manage” and walked back into the house.
I called my wife 15 minutes later, after she was gone, gave the phone to my daughter and told her to say: I love you.
Saw her last night on some TV show. They said she’d been taking quite a beating on the Internet for writing that she’d willingly taken on a traditional wife role in her marriage and saying that inside the family (but not in the rest of her life) she is submissive.
“You’ll manage”
lol.
So wrong.
She’s married to Laird Hamilton...very famous big wave surfer (perhaps the most famous).
I think I know: Feminism is all about manufacturing unhappy women with unrealistic views of the world. I would speculate that up until roughly 1960, most women were reasonably happy. Then they got liberated. They've been miserable, angry and resentful of men ever since.
When you reject the feminist vision of "having it all" you can be a lot happier. Sarah Palin comes to mind. If anyone has it all, it's her, and although she is a strong woman who calls herself a feminist, she certainly isn't that kind of feminist.
The Left sold women a bill of goods. And you can bet they knew what they were doing when they did it.
You’re a good Dad.
Yes but I’m still laughing.
I’ll never forget that one!
Thanks for posting this. I saw Gabrielle yesterday on The Today Show and was really impressed with her down-to earth attitude and her humility. Oh, and she is one lovely woman.
She sounds like a simpering teenager- he sounds like a male adolescent with his snowboard and cupboard slamming. Freakshow, celebrity freakshow
Re: Having it all.
In the modern feminist view, this means upper-class feminists can have everything the upper-class man traditionally had AND everything the traditional upper-class woman had.
Ignoring that the upper-class man could only get what he did because of a staff of wife, assistants and servants.
This whole controversy utterly ignores “the little people” necessary to allow either men or women to get as much as they do. Apparently nannies, secretaries and servants don’t have a right to their own lives, only to support the Master or Mistress in achieving their goals.
This whole controversy boils down to Victorian complaints about “the servant problem.” Only these folks think the government should pay for the servants.
Very well said.
I love to watch the big wave surfers, they’re amazing. To me, they’re one of the closest thing we have to the astronauts now that the space program and lunar landings by man have been stopped.
The government does pay for the servants. It pays the servants to sit at home and watch soap operas and game shows all day.
I mainly posted this because, in may modern relationships the woman seems to be in competition with the man.
Of course the result is always a train wreck.
Her point is that in order for a marriage to work and for a man be a man, the woman must be a woman.
A man will always fall short of a woman’s views, if she is in competition with him for the traditional male role.
Let the man be the man.
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.