posted on January 30, 2005 03:00:35 PM new
dblfugger - I hope I haven't made you feel the way you stated something is wrong....that's my arena.
And I agree with what you've just posted. Women on the whole are programmed to be the move loving and nurturing gender. Just as men are more inclined to be the provider/protector of the home.
And I do believe if men had to go though pregnancy and childbirth...our population would decrease rapidly.
I think what's needed is some role reversals between men and women, if that were at all possible, to better understand what the opposite partner offers to the unit. The movie Mr. Mom and a similar one [that came out before that one] made an excellent point, in a very humorous way, to help both the female and the male understand and appreciate the 'role' they choose to live in for the benefit of the family unit. It's not that one or the other "can't" switch roles because they aren't capable....they sure can and do...but rather it's do they want to. Or do they want to respect each other's differences and appreciate that both bring what they do best, what they most enjoy doing, to the unit.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 30, 2005 03:46:58 PM new
In our marriage we divided up the chores equally. I was responsinble for the day, my husband the evening. i.e. He did dishes at night, gave our daughter a bath and helped with homework. My days were cleaning and grocery shopping. I did the wash. We both did the meals. This went on for 10 years. He worked days I worked nights. See it can be done and we had no problems.
If you want it to work then you have to give a little.
posted on January 30, 2005 04:54:51 PM new
I know it seems like I'm dissing men, but if you think about it, since women started taking on more men's jobs, they can now work, take care of a house, get married, have kids... but men have nowhere to go unless they take on a subsurviant role. That's why men are afraid of women. (Especially "men" like Twelve.)
since women started taking on more men's jobs, they can now work, take care of a house, get married, have kids... but men have nowhere to go unless they take on a subsurviant role. That's why men are afraid of women.
The changes I've seen in my lifetime are more women have the choice to decide what they want to do and are not being forced to do 'what's expected of them' and that has had many benefits to some relationships.
First, personal fulfillment whatever way they choose.
Second, with the women who choose to work...it's takes some of the stress off the men for supporting the family by themselves. That pressure's not all on his shoulders.
Thirdly, men of today's generation ARE making
and taking so much more care of their children than went on in my childrearing days. They've decided they want to spend more time educating, enjoying and playing with their children...and that the 'job' is not what's the MOST important part of their life...their family is. I see that with my own sons, and the sons of many of my friends. And they're loving it.
But I don't think men
are afraid of women...they just want to be respected by them, appreciated by them....as women do from them.
If there are any who are 'afraid' of women....maybe it's because they feel like those women are trying to control them, change them...or neuter them.
(Especially "men" like Twelve.) Hey...that's between you and twelve.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 30, 2005 06:05 PM ]
posted on January 30, 2005 06:51:28 PM new
Making these sweeping stereotypes about men and women is silly. Any man who is afraid of a woman's success is a fool. Any successful marriage is a partnership. I should know, I've had two of them. That's right, both my ex and I consider our marriage to have been successful. My ex is an attorney...fact is, she's my lawyer to this day. She handles big cases. She makes lots of money. She also vacuums, and cooks, and puts the raising of our two daughters before anything else. She can also gut an elk far better than I can, and doesn't get the heeby jeebies when it's time to slaughter the excess rams each year. She takes the same pride in making heavenly tortillas that she takes in winning a case..She, as I, feel that there is nothing more sacred than motherhood, and that only a woman can be a mother, as only a man can be a father. My wife, who is my ex's best friend, is of the same mind. She's a successful landscape painter, and manages her own business and gallery shows. She's also, first and foremost, in her heart as well as mine, my son's mother. We both cook, we both do dishes, we both clean, as time permits. Those are just chores, who cares who does it as long as it gets done.We could do just fine without her, or my income, but not both, I'm sad to say. As neither of us defines ourself by our jobs, personal fulfillment is not a function of what we do. We're defined by those we come from, those who come from us, and those to whom we cleave.
I feel precious little sympathy for those who have to blame somebody else for the state they're in.
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on January 31, 2005 05:14:53 AM new
Profe, that is the makings of a great sitcom... you should submit that... and you're an exception, not the rule.
posted on January 31, 2005 07:46:09 AM newTruth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.
Mark Twain
posted on January 31, 2005 07:53:58 AM new
Ya, Profe, I'd like to see that cozy arrangemnet if it was two men and one woman and how the "logical", "unemotional" ()men would handle it.
posted on January 31, 2005 08:39:12 AM new
Hey Crow! Still dressing like the Pillsbury dough boy when you go outside? Still freezing up there?
I flew to Cleveland for a weekend (a party) a couple of weeks ago and just about froze my gigadees off.. It felt like all my joints ceased up and I walked stiff legged, breathing frost into the air...and my nostrils stuck together....lol.. not a pretty picture...didn't thaw out until we landed in New Orleans.. LOL....
Hardy bunch you are up there in the frozen North.. BTW.. do you speak with that Fargo accent like in the movie?
Wow! I am the 100th poster! Do I win a prize!
[ edited by maggiemuggins on Jan 31, 2005 08:40 AM ]
posted on January 31, 2005 10:34:13 AM new
Maggie, it's about 60-65 degrees warmer this week than last. And we finally have that ugly whiteshit piling up on the ground.
NO NO NO NO I do NOT talk like the actors in Fargo and I never met anyone who does. I have no accent. In this area there may be 80-90 year olds who have a Norske accent but no Fargo accent.
If you listen to national or world news anchors on the 3 major networks they sound like we do.....accentless.
posted on January 31, 2005 11:04:12 AM new
Okay.. so I don't have to put an accent on your posts when I read them..good because I am really lousy at doing accents anyway.LOL
Glad it has warmed up some up there! I guess you must be used to it by now.. at least you only have snow and the deep freeze for a few months of the year.. not like down here where we are always dodging hurricanes or tornadoes....
So tell me oh wise one, who if anybody, have you set your sights on to run in the 2008 elections? Do you feel that the Democratic Party needs to revamp and reorganize? Don't you think our message has become blurred somewhat? I would like to see someone who will run on the issues and send a strong message..of what the party stands for.. I can only hope that a charismatic, strong candidate will run.. I would like to see Hillary and Obama....
posted on January 31, 2005 11:22:50 AM new
Maggie, I think Hillary would be a great president but as you can tell from the backwards attitudes about sexual equality in here there are still too many Americans who, unlike the people of many, many other countries, would resent having a female leader.
I believe that the Democrats have to take a cue from Republicans......LIE, LIE, LIE......especially if the truth is detailed and involved. Because by the time the lie is exposed the American Public with it's short attention span believes the lie! It does get complicated when you're trying to tell the truth but Americans have a habit of forgetting they were lied to.
I believe the Democrats also just have to start making more noise! Like Senator Dayton speaking the truth about Condisleeza Rice. Or they should take out TV ads to counter the lies bush is spreading about Social Security. There are so many scandals that should be kept in the public eye....how about where $9 BILLION (for reconstruction)disappeared to in Iraq....the list is endless.....
[ edited by crowfarm on Jan 31, 2005 11:45 AM ]
posted on January 31, 2005 11:31:24 AM new
Hey, Profe, you've scoped it. With these liberal dames you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. That's why men give up on keeping them happy and go on to greener fields. Can you blame them for being bitter? They've never learned about the difference between vinegar and sugar.
posted on January 31, 2005 11:53:09 AM new
We are soooo on the same page, Crow.
Democrats need to learn how to play the game better! Unlike what the story books say.. Good doesn't alway prevail over evil..
The nice guy doesn't always win.. time to take off the gloves and play the game on the same level...
I'm afraid that you are right where Hillary is concerned.. Maggie
posted on January 31, 2005 01:52:15 PM new
12: I know my situation is the exception rather than the rule. Just proves it can happen sometimes.
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on January 31, 2005 02:10:13 PM new
Parklane, I don't think it's a conservative or liberal issue. Both my wives are dyed in the wool liberals. They make me look like Zell Miller
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on January 31, 2005 02:19:46 PM new
lol profe....so that's both of them huh...not just 'she who MUST be obeyed' then. lol
-------
I noticed that parklane...
------------
But I think if could be a con. vs lib issue. Religious women are taught to respect and honor their men, and men their wifes. I don't know if liberal women get that type of training...or if they're trained by NOW.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 31, 2005 02:26:27 PM new
Linda, you are equating religious with conservative, and unreligious with liberal.
That's just silly. Do you really, honestly believe in such simplistic stereotypes? In your heart, is it really required that to be genuinely religious, you must by definition be a political conservative?
Hogwash.
Both of my wives are devout Catholics, and also liberals.
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on January 31, 2005 02:52:22 PM new
linDUH says, "Religious women are taught to respect and honor their men, and men their wifes.(That's wives) I don't know if liberal women get that type of training...or if they're trained by NOW. "
Even if liberal women got that kind of "training" they can think for themselves, see the holes in that theory, and decide for themselves what they are going to do.
If "religious" women are brain-washed ...too bad!
The idea that liberal women don't respect PEOPLE is just sheer hatred coming through for independent women.
Remember, linduh has stated that strong, successful, intelligent, independent, assertive, strong women make her want to gag......she prefers the mousy doormats....they ARE easier to control and they never stress themselves out by THINKING!
posted on January 31, 2005 03:26:07 PM new
Saying it's hogwash...doesn't make it hogwash.
It's a fact that more of the religious vote republican...more of the secular vote democratic. Not that there are none that travel both ways...but on the whole...that's the way they vote.
In your heart, is it really required that to be genuinely religious, you must by definition be a political conservative? No not at all. But it's what I've read over and over again when they do these studies on which 'groups' vote for which party. Just like blacks, as a whole tend to vote democratic, that doesn't mean I think it's right or that no blacks vote republican...it's just the way it actually is.
You mentioned both wives are democrats. Do your ex and current wives both hold dual citizenships in the US and Mexico or not? Are they both Hispanic women? You don't need to answer..I'm just saying... If so...that would speak a lot to the 'sterotype' of why they vote democratic. Their Mexican heritage. I hear you often professing yours proudly. And I'm not saying this to piss you off. Just as most teachers are liberals. There are 'groups' of all kinds that vote, on the whole for one party or the other. Not saying some don't cross over and make the exceptions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 31, 2005 05:19:20 PM newSaying it's hogwash...doesn't make it hogwash.
Sorry, forgive my less than exact statement. In my opinion, it's Hogwash.
It's a fact that more of the religious vote republican...more of the secular vote democratic. Not that there are none that travel both ways...but on the whole...that's the way they vote.
It isn't "on the whole" at all. Depending on how you slice it, by religion, by church attendance, subgrouped by age, sex, income, etc. you get lots of different numbers. Saying "more of the religious vote republican" is another of your oversimplifications. And let's face it. None of the numbers is verifiable, because, thank god, in the US, nobody has to reveal their religious preference in order to vote.
You're speaking of only one election. As you may remember, there have been others. Previously, Catholics mostly voted Democratic. In this election, 74% of the jewish population voted Democrat. I suppose Jews aren't religious enough for you to qualify as religious voters.
You mentioned both wives are democrats. Do your ex and current wives both hold dual citizenships in the US and Mexico or not?
No, my first wife holds dual citizenship, for the same reason I do. She was born of parents who were dual citizens. My current wife is not latina.
Are they both Hispanic women?
Nope. One is, one isn't.
You don't need to answer..I'm just saying... If so...that would speak a lot to the 'sterotype' of why they vote democratic.
So much for another of your stereotypes
Just as most teachers are liberals.
More hogwash. I have had more heated disagreements with teachers than any other group of people.
The point here Linda, isn't who votes for whom. The point of my original comment is that in your mind, YOU equate liberal with non religious, and religious with conservative. If the following quote doesn't say exactly that in so many words, I'll eat my hat.:
Religious women are taught to respect and honor their men, and men their wifes. I don't know if liberal women get that type of training..
If it doesn't say that, then why didn't you say "Religious women are taught to respect and honor their men, and men their wifes. I don't know if un-religious women get that type of training.."
OR, why didn't you say "Conservative women are taught to respect and honor their men, and men their wifes. I don't know if liberal women get that type of training..."
Your bias is showing. For you, liberals can't be religious, except for maybe a few who "travel both ways". Nice try dodging the issue.
Now, you can feel free to copy past something from NewsMax or Fox that justifies your opinion, and dodges my original accusation.
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
[ edited by profe51 on Jan 31, 2005 05:21 PM ]
posted on January 31, 2005 09:02:47 PM newSaying "more of the religious vote republican" is another of your oversimplifications.
We all can't address ALL the different levels in every subject no matter how much we type.
But basically what I'm saying is that on the whole religious people, of different faiths, agree more with each other on the cultural/moral issues than they do with the secular population, who tend to support the dems. For example the blacks who usually vote democratic...many voted for Bush...why? Because they are religious people who don't support the liberal platform or gay marriage...maybe some on abortion. Maybe some on stem cell research.
And let's face it. None of the numbers is verifiable.... Some of these issues have been verified...like how many American's profess to be Christians. How many attend church weekly, bi-weekly, etc. and how many of those voted which way..dem or rep.
You're speaking of only one election. I am? lol No, really I wasn't. I was speaking to the trend that's been taking place in America....more going back to the values/morals more closely in step with the republican party AND the religious right....than they are to the left.
As you may remember, there have been others. Previously, Catholics mostly voted Democratic. In this election, 74% of the jewish population voted Democrat. I suppose Jews aren't religious enough for you to qualify as religious voters.
What you chosen not to acknowledged is that the Catholic vote as been going to the right....and especially this time with kerry and his 'pretense' to be an avid Catholic, it did even more so. Some believe it was those Catholics who tipped the scales in a couple of states that Bush won. Not sure on if more of the Jewish vote went to Bush or not...but I'd bet with the way the liberals feel about Israel...I'd be surprised to see their numbers aren't headed to the right, not the religious right, the republican party platform ...because of their support for Israel.
Just as most teachers are liberals. More hogwash. I have had more heated disagreements with teachers than any other group of people. LOL...doesn't change the results of studies that have shown the higher the education level they teach...the more liberal they are. And I've previously posted links that showed how difficult a time conservative professors have at getting into the colleges and universities.
The point of my original comment is that in your mind, YOU equate liberal with non religious, and religious with conservative.
Not totally I don't. I equate ultra-liberals/progressive with being more permissive...more socialistic in thought...and less religious, yes. And I have thought that a couple of posters here who have professed to be Christians don't post like it or support what I believe are religious conservatives morals/values.
But...I believe bunni is an Independent and I've never thought of her as a 'liberal' because of the posts she's made against the Bush administration...I don't agree with them..but that doesn't lead me to believe she's a libera...and I know she's an atheist. Fenix has always appeared to be a more moderate dem to me. I've never thought of her as a liberal - nor am I aware if she practices any religion or not.
Normally when we are discussing moral issues yes, I equate the liberal mind think as NOT being in sync with the general population...religion wise nor policy wise. I do not see them as being a large group of people of faith. Nor on most value/moral issues, do I see their postions coming from any faith based background.
Religion has little to do with say foreign policy. I also believe there are non-religious who also support some of the conservative platform - because they see their values as being closer to the right than those from the left.
Then take Lieberman. He's Jewish...and he supported sending our troops to war and supports them still being there. That's not a religious conservative position and because he agree with this one issue doesn't make him a religious conservative either...like we'll all called when we profess to be supporters of this administrations position on defense. Heck I supported clinton when he bombed Iraq...that didn't make me a liberal democrat nor a moderate one. It's not about religion at all..it's where one stands on National defense.
And I'll remind you that many here who bash the 'religious right' and go around here calling everyone 'neonazi's' or 'neo-cons' or they're automatically assumed to be from the 'religious right' just because they have conservative views and suppport tradition. That's THEIR sterotypes, showing THEIR own bias, imo. When it's not true in each case either.
Religious women are taught to respect and honor their men, and men their wifes. I don't know if liberal women get that type of training..
If it doesn't say that, then why didn't you say "Religious women are taught to respect and honor their men, and men their wifes. I don't know if un-religious women get that type of training.."
Well....LOL let's see. First, because they are taught that. Second, because I was making a dig on NOW and those who support much of their platform...because I don't feel some of their platforms are in the best interests of traditional marriage nor family. That's allowed isn't it? lol I'm allowed to form my own opinions, aren't I? lol. And also to those women who go on and on about being held down my men. That's no longer the reality of the situation.
Another thing I do believe it IS a reason for the breakdown in a lot of marriages - not teaching that marriage is a value. That's why so many live together today...have children without the benefit of marriage. It's not a value nor a moral position for them. And I believe that a lot of these values and morals aren't being taught the same way in non-religious homes...[on the whole] as they are with people of faith. To people of faith...it is not only a civil committment, but a contract they make with their church and their God. While they too fail at marriage, at least they have been supported in working for the family unit...rather than it's all about the individual. A good marriage takes work...it doesn't just happen on it's own.
OR, why didn't you say "Conservative women are taught to respect and honor their men, and men their wifes. I don't know if liberal women get that type of training..."
Your bias is showing.
My point was clear. I don't believe only conservatives are taught this....I just said they were taught that value. It's taught in most religions and not in a lot of secular homes. Respect for the mother, father, each other.
And on my bias showing...maybe be....am I not allowed to be biased? We all have our own bias'...I'm no different. But I think what you're not acknowledging is there is much difference between one who is a right-wing conservative...or a right wing religious conservative...and the same goes on the left. Different levels of political positions....with varied religious and non-religious people on MANY political issues...but not all. There is much cross over....but what I was speaking to really is the moral/value issues. And I think it's showing now more than it ever has...they lack of control over children....all the drugging of school children when dicipline is probably the major cause of their problems with self control and civil behavior not being 'taught'...the bashing of people of faith....the wanting to remove God from everything in goverment...where most has been left alone since our country was formed....taking away parental responsibilities and decided parent's don't have 'right's' to know what their children are doing. Liberals place all kinds of restrictions on our Constitutional right to practice religion. It's usually not those from the moral majority doing all these things lol..and more and more Amercicans ARE noticing which party more closely shares their values/morals...and they're voting that way.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 31, 2005 11:11 PM ]
posted on January 31, 2005 09:57:54 PM new
I also believe, profe, that the majority of American's share my 'bias'.
I believe this is why the liberals are still discussing just how in the world they lost this election. Record amounts of money they brought in...record numbers of new dem young people registered, all the money and support from all those 527's ...a military hero to some [and not to others] the dems could actually support a veteran lol...how in the world could they have still lost the election?
Why do you think they lost this election, profe?
---
Religious divide
Differences in political views based on religious involvement are "almost becoming the most identifiable marker in American politics," Carroll Doherty, editor for the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, said Wednesday.
[i]Those differences showed up strongly in exit polling conducted Tuesday, with people who frequently attend religious services voting for Bush in landslide proportions, while people who rarely or never attend religious services voted for Kerry by similarly large margins.
In a surprise to many election analysts, when voters were asked what issue mattered the most to them in deciding whom to vote for for president, "moral values" was cited by more people (22% nationally and 21% in Wisconsin) than the economy and jobs, the war in Iraq or the war against terrorism, each of which drew slightly smaller responses.
And those who put moral issues at the top of their agenda voted for Bush by a more than 4-to-1 ratio, strongly suggesting that what they had on their mind were issues such as abortion and gay rights.
----
That's why the 'dems' are trying to decide if they are going to remain with their present platform....or change it and come more to the 'center' ..as hillary appears to be beginning to do. Maybe she's on to something the liberals here are refusing to even see. The clinton's always were poll watchers and reacted to what the polls showed. lol Looks like she's doing so once again.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 31, 2005 11:20 PM ]
posted on February 1, 2005 12:07:32 AM new
:: Dblfugger - I hope I haven't made you feel the way you stated something is wrong....that's my arena::
lol, no Linda. Anyone can interpret words when & how they wish to form an opinion. To me saying something is more pronounced is not necessarily denying the greater of it; but that it shows more. Which was probably rightfully what I was trying to say to being with.
.
[ edited by dblfugger9 on Feb 1, 2005 01:26 AM ]
posted on February 1, 2005 04:19:06 AM new
Well done Linda. Two whole posts, and most of the words are actually yours.
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
)men would handle it.
[ edited by maggiemuggins on Jan 31, 2005 08:40 AM ]