Posted on 07/05/2005 5:31:57 AM PDT by Bon mots
We've either got to change the system or watch other societies and cultures bury us.
If you are practicing something you are doing something. If you have a viewpoint it is because you are thinking something. But of course, I understand. To feminists, thinking is the same as doing. It makes perfect sense.
"This has led to a divergence from feminism to extreme and new perspectives."
Indeed! Here are some of your feminist leaders. Their "perspectives" are just dandy! LOL! ! !
"All men are rapists and that's all they are" -- Marilyn French, Author, "The Women's Room"
""I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." -- Robin Morgan, MS. Magazine Editor "
""I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire." -- Robin Morgan "
""No woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one." Simone de Beauvoir, author of _The Second Sex_, the book that is credited with launching the mainstream of the modern feminist movement ---"
"64 YEAR-OLD FEMINIST COLLECTS AND PUBLISHES NUDE PHOTOS OF BOYS, YOU KNOW, FOR FUN." (Germaine Greer)
Thanks sweetie :)
True, but I worked in law for 8 years in NYC and most of the women were either in an unhappy relationship, or in no relationship at all. A lot of men simply don't want to deal with a woman with a demanding career (I know I don't).
When a woman manager or physician or attorney or biologist, etc comes home from a long day at work making mega bucks, she will expect dinner and a clean house.
She can keep on waiting. Even if she finds a guy like that (and they are out there), in no time she will be sexually frustrated by him. A woman, on balance, can not be consistently sexually excited and fulfilled by a man who isn't a dominant male (that's not to say domineering, which is a negative trait).
True, but I worked in law for 8 years in NYC and most of the women were either in an unhappy relationship, or in no relationship at all. A lot of men simply don't want to deal with a woman with a demanding career (I know I don't).
When a woman manager or physician or attorney or biologist, etc comes home from a long day at work making mega bucks, she will expect dinner and a clean house.
She can keep on waiting. Even if she finds a guy like that (and they are out there), in no time she will be sexually frustrated by him. A woman, on balance, can not be consistently sexually excited and fulfilled by a man who isn't a dominant male (that's not to say domineering, which is a negative trait).
"Pretty soon women will be in the recliners watching the Browns game and men will be fetching the cold beers..."
It's been a long time since I knew a woman who would fetch cold beer. And I know I wouldn't do the fetching without proper inducements! ;)
I don't agree, I think it's plain simple moral character.
Very true.
Hee hee. This is a thread about women needing to change and the women are going ballistic! What a hoot!
Never make the case for the beta-male. There are legimiate reasons that women routinely reject them and cheat on them. I'd have it no other way.
The root of the problem is no-fault divorce, isn't it?
No-fault divorce combined with a family law system that is hopelessly corrupt and anti-child/anti-male. One sage Freeper referred to the system as one that rewards women: "wreck a marriage, earn a check." After having to spend a year's income to secure a meaningful joint custody with my two children, while watching a corrupt court bend over backwards--to the point of fabricating evidence--to repeatedly find in favor of my ex-wife with borderline personality disorder, I concluded that it was in the best interests of my children to not marry again--at least not in this liberal cesspool of a jurisdiction. To do so would put them at even greater risk of being further harmed by the elitist oligarchy.
bump for later
I know a woman who has been talking about how studies show that women marrying over 25 after completing their education have better marriages. She also thinks that arranged marriages work better than those who marry for love. When I said maybe I was an exception to her viewpoint (marrying young, and unless something drastic happens very happy), she said, "You're still young. I used to feel the same way." She's only four years older than me.
Yet some fools here say you shouldn't jettison this creep because of the wedding vow.
My wife was eight years younger and died 7 years ago. I never thought I would survive her since she did everything right and me rarely. But that didn't matter.
I don't think so. Most of the people that I know who have fallen to temptation clearly didn't set out to.
The more opportunity someone has for extramartial sex, the more likely they will have extramarital sex.
Morality has something to do with it, but not nearly as much as you think. Perfectly moral people fall to sexual temptation. Like I said, when they make that snap decision to have uncomplicated sex with that very attractive new person in their life, it really seems like a good idea at the time.
There you go! ;-)
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.