Author Woggle Posted December 5, 2009 Author Posted December 5, 2009 Come over to my house for dinner, you'll see it. Let's see how it is two years from now.
Lizzie60 Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Let's see how it is two years from now. Naaahh.. two years.. most people are still in the honeymoon phase.. I'd say after 5+ years... or whenever the passion is gone.. then it's another story..
allina Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Let's see how it is two years from now. Thanks for the vote of confidence, your comment is rude but I won't take it personally. It's true, 3.5 years isn't incredibly long but these years have been amazing for both me and my SO. Believe it or not (and it's looking like a not from you right now) my SO would tell you the same
ADF Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 What do you mean by "anymore?" There is this widespread idea in our culture that the past was better than the present, that there was some Golden Age when men and women truly cherished each other, when they were truly committed to marriage, blah, blah, blah. What rubbish. The reason people seldom got divorced in the past was because divorce made them into social pariahs. This was especially true for women. But even divorced men were seen as unstable. Back in the 1950s, it wasn't unusual for divorced men to lose their jobs. Even children of divorced parents were stigmatized. I had a teacher in his 70s who told me about the one kid in his home twon who lived with his divorced mother. None of the other kids were allowed to play with him or go to his house. The people in town considered his mother a fallen women and him a bad influence. Let's remember that not so long ago, when a woman got married, she became he husband's property. All her financial assets became his. Women weren't leaglly able to sue their husband for domestic battery until 1958 (Gibson vs. Gibson). Children born to unmarried mothers were classified as "illegitimate" and had no legal proetections and no rights. My point is that we shouldn't idealize the past. Thinsg weren's so much better in bygone days. High divorce rates, serial monogamy, relationship instability--these are the pirce we pay for our freedom. If we want to keep choosing our own mates, if we expect them to love us and treat us well, if we expect to be happy in our realtionships, we're going to have to accept certain risks. That's just how it is.
dazzle22 Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Love the fishing metaphor, and Woggle has been given great advice, here and on other threads, but the question is, can he take it? He's like a child with strep throat who spits out the antibiotic. No Woggle, not everyone in life is a USER, just all the guys you hang out with....
calizaggy Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Research the frankfurt school. There has been a concerted, well documented effort to destroy traditional relationships.. I feel people never were "head over heals" in love for a lifetime, but they had different ideas put into their head than they do today. To further the advance of their ‘quiet’ cultural revolution - but giving us no ideas about their plans for the future - the School recommended (among other things): 1. The creation of racism offences. 2. Continual change to create confusion 3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children 4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority 5. Huge immigration to destroy identity. 6. The promotion of excessive drinking 7. Emptying of churches 8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime 9. Dependency on the state or state benefits 10. Control and dumbing down of media 11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud’s idea of ‘pansexualism’ - the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women. To further their aims they would: • attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children. • abolish differences in the education of boys and girls • abolish all forms of male dominance - hence the presence of women in the armed forces • declare women to be an ‘oppressed class’ and men as ‘oppressors’ Munzenberg summed up the Frankfurt School’s long-term operation thus: ‘We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.' The School believed there were two types of revolution: (a) political and (b) cultural. Cultural revolution demolishes from within. ‘Modern forms of subjection are marked by mildness’. They saw it as a long-term project and kept their sights clearly focused on the family, education, media, sex and popular culture.
Recommended Posts