Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nick Danger
Oh please. I'm an equal opportunity advocate for no whining. The myth presented is that there are so many women whining about not being married or not having children. And even if there are they are no better than men whining that there are no women worthy of a marriage proposal. The whiners truly deserve each other IMO but they don't have the sense to get together. Its hard to feel sympathy for either group.

The premis of your article was that women are willing to be emotionally blackmailed by this withholding of marriage proposals. Nowhere was it even attempted to butress that premis with facts.

In fact, the article was contradictory by imply that being college educated was a handicap to marriage (for women) but that men didn't want to marry women who they might end up having to support either (one would assume less educated women). He seemed to be saying men don't want a woman who can support herself because she might up and leave because she's not financially dependent ... but men don't want a woman who can't support herself as well because she might up and leave and sue for a greate amount of support. Choose your poison.

If anything THIS author (of the article you presented) was playing the classic schoolyard "girls are poison" game .... damned if you do, damned if you don't ... male vs. female game. And he was anti-marriage no matter the parameters since he didn't bother to set any.

38 posted on 05/29/2002 5:38:36 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: Lorianne
The premis of your article was that women are willing to be emotionally blackmailed by this withholding of marriage proposals.

That "premise" appears to be an artifact of some process which occurs in your mind. It does not appear in the article, or in my mind when I read it.

Such a premise would rely on the men being irrational, since women their own age are not in a position to change the laws to which the men object. Blackmailing twenty-something women would seem to be an odd way to effect legislative change about anything. It is legislators and judges, not people typically 20 to 30 years old, who will act to change these things, if in fact they change at all.

Perhaps things are merely as the article states: that a growing number of young men see the family court system as draconian and anti-male, and they are taking what steps they can to stay out of its gunsights.

Your own premise would seem to be that the 20-something women are in favor of these laws, and they are the power which keeps them in force. Otherwise you would not see emotional blackmail directed at 20-year-old women as a useful tactic either, and the thought would not have occurred to you. I think you might be on a different planet from these people. Check your star charts.

42 posted on 05/29/2002 6:27:58 PM PDT by Nick Danger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson