U.S Women vs Foreign Women

[Green]

Why all the debate about American vs. Euro women?

 

I prefer Brazilian over any.

 

Me too but I've never been to Brazil so I didn't want the women on her with their "logic" to come an argue with me... But I only love Brazillian women for their looks... portuguese is a crappy language and they have no class even when compared to american women... but Looks wise DAMN I really like the whiter ones though.

[elaina]

Wanted to add that American men shouldn't delude themselves. Although we complain a lot about American women, I think American women could just as easily complain about American men. The culture affects both genders. I would encourage American women to date foreign dudes in return. If American women want to date sensitive guys they can date Western Europeans. If they want rugged men, they can date Eastern Europeans or Russians, or Latinos. Truth is, they can and should date all different kinds of people: Asians, Euros, Latinos, Africans -- anyone. Mix it up, people.

 

This! Totally agree, although there are many American men who are awesome too!

[SarahRose]

The examples I gave are very real. If I were a guy, there is no way in hell I would go for one of those 3rd world scammers.

 

I have a friend who is being taken by one right now. It is sickening to watch so no I am not a man hater or bitter. This guy is not rich and he keeps wondering why she doesn't go for richer easier picking and I am thinking my friend you are about as easy as it gets. She cries a few fake tears and he sends the money. I wrote a thread about it in LDR section.

 

Very few western people get what real poverty is. They think it is not having 2 cars and not having central. air That is what westerners think poverty is. He thinks because he sends her a few hundred USD a month it isn't a scam. He doesn't realize he is sending her 2 months wages over there a month! I sure wish someone would send me 2 months wages a month for some sweet talk and bs lol don't you?

 

Both my husband and I married a f@#$(ing foreigner!

[Enchanted Girl]

Me too but I've never been to Brazil so I didn't want the women on her with their "logic" to come an argue with me... But I only love Brazillian women for their looks... portuguese is a crappy language and they have no class even when compared to american women... but Looks wise DAMN I really like the whiter ones though.

 

Damn that logic and the way it fights stupidity.

[Sphere]

And we wonder why this world if filled with hatred and prejudice. People learn it at a young age.

 

The US seems to be the most prejudice and hate filled place on earth with the exception of Afghanistan.

 

I don't have an opinion of your country, it's not that important for me to have an opinion on it, I'm just looking forward to China becoming the next Global Superpower.

[Enchanted Girl]

The US seems to be the most prejudice and hate filled place on earth with the exception of Afghanistan.

 

I don't have an opinion of your country, it's not that important for me to have an opinion on it, I'm just looking forward to China becoming the next Global Superpower.

 

You don't have an opinion, yet you just stated an opinion.

 

The U.S. is prejudiced and you're definitely not prejudiced for saying that.

 

I think not. =/

[Sphere]

You don't have an opinion, yet you just stated an opinion.

 

The U.S. is prejudiced and you're definitely not prejudiced for saying that.

 

I think not. =/

 

I didn't express an opinion, I copied that from another forum. It's not my opinion. I don't acknowledge the US in my daily life really, I can't remember the last time I passed comment on your country, I usually talk about Afghanistan and how NATO is getting its backside handed to it by a bunch of goat herders, but that's for another discussion.

 

As for US women, what's wrong with US women? Is it the sense of entitlement? Because it's a mindset that is common amongst European women and men. Is it their attitudes? Because European men and women can have bad attitudes too.

 

"The grass is always greener on the otherside!"

[Enchanted Girl]

I didn't express an opinion, I copied that from another forum. It's not my opinion. I don't acknowledge the US in my daily life really, I can't remember the last time I passed comment on your country, I usually talk about Afghanistan and how NATO is getting its backside handed to it by a bunch of goat herders, but that's for another discussion.

 

As for US women, what's wrong with US women? Is it the sense of entitlement? Because it's a mindset that is common amongst European women and men. Is it their attitudes? Because European men and women can have bad attitudes too.

 

"The grass is always greener on the otherside!"

 

Okay. I'm sorry I misunderstood you then. Maybe next time put it in a quote box or quotation marks or something. I thought it was you talking.

[meerkat stew]

Meekrat, I don't think you understand that women do not look at men who have mail order brides as lost opportunities.

 

OK.

 

There were actually changes made to immigration law over the last 10 years because of the rate of domestic abuse in these relationships.

 

IMBRA/Violence Against Women Act -This is the exact form of stripping men's rights I broken record about here. Take a couple of high profile murder cases occuring over a long stretch of time (IMBRA) and use that or an absurdly poorly conducted study (VAWA) to justify a federal power grab masquerading as women's rights statutes. The end result: Less rights for men, greater control of all of us by the government, no measurable reduction in criminal activity, greater restraint of trade, high expense to incarcerate men who have been denied process, privacy and identity theft issues. Welcome to the -real- Washington and political manipulation using the vilification of men as a primary tool. A near perfect example, and what better name than the "Violence Against Women Act" noxious residue from the 90s that needs to go away. You see, that statute and others like it don't prevent or reduce crime, they just remove men's due process rights. It's that simple, look it up.

 

I really don't think mail order brides say anything about American women. First, the number is apparently very low for actual marriages, I've heard about 4,000 a year which in a country of 300 million is tiny.

 

That's 4000 coming from the established agencies, and another 100k-150k advertise individually on their own as seeking US husbands. There are probably many times that number of men who just go informally on their own and meet a foreign woman not from an agency and not specifically advertising. I mean why pay an agency or even read ads when you can just fly to Rio? So you were saying?

 

I think there are probably two types of men who go the mail order route.

 

It's amazing how many men turn suddenly "horrible and abusive" during a divorce isn't it? I know 0, that's right exactly 0 abusive men, yet somehow every woman seems to have all these abusive man stories. Somehow they all coincide with divorce. I wonder why that is, that the first we hear of 90% of these abusive men is in the divorce court? I wonder how many of them come off Lifetime male bashing movies or the immensely powerful female capacity to rationalize false realities, and how many are actually real? There must be some "abusive man haven" somewhere where they all are because I've lived all over the country and haven't ever seen it. Oh, but it's all hidden behind closed doors, I get that just like the satanic abuse back in the late 80s and early nineties, and all the supposed sexual abuse in preschools was all "hidden" back in the 90s where witch hunts sent people to jail all over the country wrongfully.

 

Thankfully those bogus "abuse epidemics" eventually ended, mainly because they didn't fit conveniently into anti male agitprop. Wonder when the bogus epidemic of abusive men will end? Probably not until the marriage rate goes below 10% and there just aren't any more men to accuse and imprison.

 

But a guy who goes on about how terrible American women are and only foreign women appreciate the glory that is American masculinity is not a great guy. No one is missing out by not dating him.

 

Straw man moar? You got the first part right, but the second is lacking. I don't see this thread as foreign women appreciating the glory that is American masculinity as much as foreign women not being entitled, amoral and unwilling to accept any accountability for their actions. I don't think any of these men in this thread are looking for anything other than a fair deal. And though I don't agree with the premise of this thread, I do agree that it's full of the type of male-bashing that has pretty much driven some men to look elsewhere for love, respect and decent companionship.

[BlackLovely]

This is talking about all American women. At no point do you use a qualifier like "some" or "many."

 

 

Obviously you are trying to pit American women against "foreign" women in some kind of cage match. Which is ridiculous since there are roughly 150 million women in the US from a variety of racial, ethnic, religious and geographic backgrounds. And "foreign" is an even more preposterous category, grouping together thousands of linguistic and ethnic groups on multiple continents.

 

And for all that, you don't seem like a catch at all. You talk about what women do for you, with no mention of what you bring to the table. Your spelling and grammar suggest low intelligence. You aren't looking for a long term committed relationship. You have a problem with porn. You are immoral enough to consider intentionally going after married women.

 

I think American women will be fine without you.

 

You go girl!

[meerkat stew]

The US seems to be the most prejudice and hate filled place on earth with the exception of Afghanistan.

 

That's rich coming from a Brit. The US, whatever else you think of it, is much more tolerant due to its nature as having been a MELTING POT for the entirety of its existence, as opposed to the homogenous cultures across the pond. There is no more ethnically diverse and tolerant place in the world than the U.S. Insert the ethnic and cultural diversity of the U.S. into any other country in the world, and that country would instantly explode into violent ethnic based civil war...instantly.

[BlackLovely]

At first I was going to indulge you point by point. Then I remembered I have a set of balls and I owe you nothing. Nothing. Its all here for you to read. You accused me of a false pretense, a fabrication of what I said, and then you expect me to accomodate you in your request? Not a chance.

 

You seem like you're swimming in shame right now. I suspect that you don't want to answer because you know that you don't offer much, yet expect a servant.

Ooooh, you have a set of balls? What a big, strong man you are! Of course, if you truly had balls, you could handle a tough and independent woman.

[BlackLovely]

Are the things I list too much to ask for in a woman though?

Yes Woggle, because you have been very vocal about not being able to open up to your wife, because of what happened to you before Therefore, you are not truly committed to your marriage; you are already married to your fears and past.

[nddb]

I hate the term mail-order bride. It's meant to be derogatory, equating human to a package. And catty in the context of this thread. Do people actually lick a stamp and send things airmail to another country any more?

 

Nowadays, women everywhere (I'm sure no women in the US does because US women are oh-so-special) are putting their profiles up on the internet and getting interested guys to contact them (hello eharmony!). The internet and some (but not all) men don't much care whether the pretty and sweet girl is from Sunbury, Ohio or Manila or Prague or some small town in Estonia. Emails and IMs take the same amount of time. When you log on to the internet from Ohio or from Manila, it's the same website and the same email program and the same IM system.

 

Are these women from Ohio also mail order brides? What's so magical about them putting their profiles up on the internet versus a girl in another country doing the same thing. She wants to meet and marry the best guy she can--and so do the other women.

 

People used to date only other people in their village or within their religion. The world changed since then. The internet accelerates that. No country or culture has a monopoly on sweet, loving and pretty women who want to marry for love and desire a level of comfort/protection. Geopolitical boundaries mean little on the internet or when it comes to love. Whether she's from Taillinn, Estonia or Manila, Philippines or Sunbury, Ohio, if she's pretty and nice and thin, men will clamor for her.

 

But during my year traveling the world as a single man, I got attention from some very pretty women--and some of them are super sweet and just knowing their families and the values they grew up with, I'm sure have gone on to make great wives and moms for someone else. I am no George Clooney--just an average guy doing his belated post-college graduation travel back then. But very pretty women wanted to meet me and some of them were from great, loving, and traditional families.

 

Why wouldn't I or another man looking for a pretty and sweet girl not be happy about that? Some men like US women. Some like foreign women. Choices are great, and the more choices, the better.

[nddb]

I also want to add very quickly . . .

 

I agree with you guys that not all men who marry foreign women are just trying to find a woman they can take advantage of. I think she was probably just trying to force stereotypes on you guys because you were forcing stereotypes on American women, but I hate stereotypes of all kinds.

 

All these things DO happen, but I think to generalize it and say the majority of people, even, are this way, isn't the truth.

 

That's a very fair comment. Thank you.

[zengirl]

He misworded it when he said equal. Modern day feminists want to become the new oppressors instead of making things equal.

 

Any woman who wants to oppress men is wrong. Caveat: Wanting to work how she wants, do what she wants around the house (or not), or form the kind of partnership she wants is not oppressing men.

 

If women en masse start talking about the "kinds of jobs" men shouldn't work (either "innocently" murmuring about it being for their own good or clamouring about how they don't belong there), the kinds of housework or providing they "have" to do, or the stripping away of any sort of legal rights. . . I'll gladly back you up. I don't want to "oppress" men and I don't really personally know any women that do. I'm not saying no bitter, crappy women exist -- but there are crap people of both genders looking for power plays in all kind of ways. Misogyny and misandry are driven by the same thing --- a desire for control, a bitterness, and a severe ignorance.

 

I think what turns me (and apparently other dudes) off about a lot of American women is the game that a lot of American women like to play with guys. Like when I walk past foreign women, the attractive ones often seem friendly and approachable, like they're not out to prove anything to anyone.

 

This could also be because the foreign women happen to find you attractive and the American women do not. There are many American men here in Korea who my Korean friends think are attractive who no Western girl I know would date. This happens. There are also probably some girls here that Korean men find attractive that Western men don't see as such, on average.

 

Honestly, I think Korean women are mostly lovely. I've heard Korean and Western men complain about them loads, but I think they're fantastic and can see why any fellow might say, "Wow! Korean women are better than American women for me." (on average) This does not offend me in any way shape or form. The ridiculous wording of the OP's post was silly, and some of the comments afterward were more ignorant, but I've no issue with this concept.

 

However, the dating culture, for men and women, is just different here, too. There's a lot of interesting things we could say about dating people from cultures other than our own, but that doesn't seem to be what the OP started this topic about.

 

Some women, and I'm sorry to say that it's mostly women from the US culture that I experienced this with although it's not confined only to the US culture, also don't understand that just because one partner (say the man) leads doesn't mean that it's a master lording over a slave.

 

It could be a dance and she wants him to lead so they can dance.

It could be, and that's fine. I've not seen a man who phrased it in certain ways who don't have control issues. That doesn't mean I think all men who work while supporting a housewife have control issues; it's the phrasing of "Men should lead!" rahrahrah that I find unpalatable. Generally, I find there is give and take in most good dances, as in most relationships. When I was partnered in ballet, I needed a partner who could work with me and not force me into "his" way of doing things, just the same as I need from a partner in life.

 

What something looks like from the outside matters not one whit if the woman and man in question are happy with their partnership.

 

Some men are more natural at being the lead (I'm included in that group). Partnership is fine but when push comes to shove, when the bus is about to bear down on our child, when a difficult decision needs to be made, when everyone is uncertain and there needs to be a confident voice, I'm most at ease in a relationship where I am given the trust to lead and my wife will support me 100% even if it turns out I was wrong afterwards. I'm only human.

This is fine because you've phrased it as something *You* want, not something men and women should do. I couldn't dig that. I'm a perfectly competent person myself, and I need my thoughts to be taken into account most of the time. I also don't want to lead. I want a back and forth, and then the person who feels the strongest on each issue makes the decision at any given time. Every one does best in different dynamics, so that's absolutely fine. I've found men who partnered me quite well in this respect.

 

I also think men should respect it, in general, just as much if a female says, "I'm most comfortable leading." (This isn't really me, either, though I don't want to be led; I want it to be more organic than that, as it's what I've experienced.) That's not wrong either. There are all sorts of men AND women. As long as they aren't controlling and are sincerely partnering, there's no issue. Of course, nobody, of either gender, should be told they need to date a person who has any particular style in this matter. To me, leadership is not a priority in a relationship. I want neither a fellow who prioritizes it -- wanting to lead or follow -- or to prioritize it myself. I want my opinions and thoughts to matter, and, when I am more expert at something, I want that to be recognized, just as I will recognize expertise in a partner. It's all about balance for me.

 

Some female posters in this thread gives me the heebie jeebie. I can only say please don't bring the war of the sexes into a relationship.

Generally, as in this thread, it's the men who bring these wars into it on LS. Look back at who brought it in first. Some posters, like Woggle, feel the need to bring it into everything! Edited August 16, 2010 by zengirl

[nddb]

Honestly, I think Korean women are mostly lovely. I've heard Korean and Western men complain about them loads, but I think they're fantastic and can see why any fellow might say, "Wow! Korean women are better than American women for me." (on average) This does not offend me in any way shape or form. The ridiculous wording of the OP's post was silly, and some of the comments afterward were more ignorant, but I've no issue with this concept.

 

I think Korean women are on average very lovely but also because compared to other Asians, they spend a lot on their wardrobe and make up.

 

And it's easy to be lovely when genetics allow you and your peers to be all sub-110 pounds, no matter how much bul go gi you wolfe down.

 

I love the way the Korean language sounds and would whole heartedly say that Korean sounds better to my ear (mine) than Chinese (too sing-song for me) or Japanese (too harsh to my ears).

 

I had a Korean long distance girlfriend for a while (it didn't start out that way), and it ended when she said that although she will get her master degree, she dreamed of staying home and taking care of her children. Back then, the concept was scary for me and I bailed. Looking back, she was very honest about what SHE wanted and it was whispered in a moment of honesty and intimacy and I was stupid with my knee-jerk reaction. My loss because she was REALLY pretty and sweet.

 

Talk about subtle differences in cultures. She would easily say "I love you" but it took forever for her to finally say "Xa rang he." Supposedly, that's not thrown around much and she said that she never even heard her parents said it and when it's said, it's serious stuff. I was really happy that I was the first guy she said it to...and she said it with such intensity that I still wince at my stupidity in the way I handled the end of that relationship when that memory surfaces. Boy, did I screw up that one but if it weren't for that, I wouldn't have married my current wife. Thanks for a trip down memory lane, a little painful as it was.

 

Korean women rock but man, if shopping can be made into a sport, some of the Korean women I knew would be Olympians.

[Scottdmw]

If you don't think a woman should focus on her career, should her husband be the sole breadwinner?

 

And if her husband is the sole breadwinner, what happens to her and her children should be die or run off? One of my grandmothers and one of my greatgrandmothers ended up going from traditional middle class housewives to low wage workers because their husbands died at a young age. At the time there wasn't much opportunity for women.

 

Both of my parents always felt very strongly that a woman should be able to support herself fully having these situations in their families. So I never understand this idea that being a career woman somehow means you hate men or are totally unwilling to have a traditional home. Or that there isn't a benefit to having a two career family where people equally split housework.

 

Why does it have to be an either/or? To be specific, I think a woman should work on her career in order to have a livelihood. I think the problem comes when a woman thinks that she has to be equally career successful to a man to be a good person. I think that women find it very attractive when a man works hard on his career, but that men do not feel the same way about women. Thus, I think it makes sense for a man to work harder than a woman. And, I think that aspects of the traditional idea of women are very attractive to men, which is why it makes sense for women to be more like that.

 

I still find it really interesting that, just like with the other people who responded to my original post, you did not respond to the main point. Perhaps you didn't read it but only responded to my response to another person. Look, live your life however you want. I'm just trying to suggest that if you're a woman interested in being more attractive to men, you might want to figure out what men actually do want rather than trying to make them want what you think they should, or expecting them to want the same things you do.

 

Scott

[Scottdmw]

My point is -- There's no reason to question "new gender roles" if you feel I fully deserve the same rights as anybody else and have the same full capacity for intelligent personal choice. It's best for my own good that gender roles be fluid and that people have personal freedom instead of archetypal slots to fill. There's no reason to ask, "Is that best?" if you fully respect people's rights to do as they please. They'll do what's best for them. This line of questioning is condescending at best or threatening at worst. Now, that said, as I said: I've no issue with what any individual chooses to do personally, whether it seem old-fashioned or new-fangled or anything in between. But, when you bring up the line of questioning in a broad sense, you ARE challenging my rights, maybe not legally, but at least sociologically. You are challenging the mindset that I deserve to fill any darn role I please and can want any darn role I please and that any darn role in the world might just be best for me. Trying to decide what's "best for people" as a large socio group isn't respecting their rights. Now, when you talk about individuals -- like "What's best for me?" or even "What's best for my daughter?" (though each person does need to decide for themselves; things like this are natural) that's different. I'm not saying you consciously mean to do this. I'm sure many men and women who do this think they fully support a person's rights and freedoms, but you are actively questioning it by wanting to create or return to roles, as a society.

 

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you're saying that no person should ever offer another person advice. That is mostly what I'm doing here, offering my thoughts on what women could do to be more attractive. It seems to me that you are being a little sensitive on the subject, and it has long been my belief that American women of today are generally overly sensitive on this subject, to the point where it's difficult to have a useful conversation. As soon as someone brings the subject up women start throwing around these accusations of taking away rights and such.

 

Hey, if you don't want to listen to my advice you don't have to. But, how am I challenging your rights by offering criticism? I made it very clear that I respect anyone's right to do whatever they want. I don't know how I could make it more clear. If despite what I said you still want to go try to be everything a man is, go for it. I don't think it's the best decision but I wish you well.

 

Scott

[Scottdmw]

Read the parts I underlined.

 

You said, over and over again, that women should stop trying to be, IN YOUR WORDS, "equal" to men because it's unattractive.

 

 

Okay, let's read those parts again:

 

'men and women are hardwired to find certain things attractive in each other, and for men that does not include career achievement or women trying to be their “equals”.'

 

Notice the use of quotes around equals. I think it was very clear from the context that I'm talking about women trying to equal men in the sphere of career achievement. If it wasn't clear, I will say it again here. I think that women are and should be men's equals. But, I don't think that means that men and women are the same, that they should act the same, or most definitely that they have to achieve the same amount in the career sphere to be equal.

 

'Did you set out to do something in the name of proving or creating equality, rather than because it really fit you as a person?'

 

Once again, let's look at the context here. I'm not saying women are not equal in the broadest sense or that they shouldn't be. What I'm saying is that I don't think it makes sense for women to try to be the same as men in their career achievements, though they are free to do so if they want.

 

It seems like you place a lot of value on career achievement, to the point where you judge a person's worth by their career achievements. If the worth of a person is determined by their career achievements, then I guess you would be right in what you said about me. I don't think that any person's worth is determined by their career achievements though. I don't think a woman has to achieve a lot in her career to be equal with a man or to be a valuable person. If you think that a woman does have to achieve the same as a man in her career to avoid being inferior, I guess we will disagree there. But, that's exactly what I was talking about when I said that it seems like women feel like they have to prove themselves, when I don't think they do.

 

I think that career achievement is only one way to be a valuable person. It is the way most often chosen by men because that is what women tend to find attractive. I don't think that men find the same thing attractive in women. Read what I said there very carefully, because you misinterpreted it the last time. I didn't say men find it unattractive or repelling when a woman is career successful. I said they do not find it attractive. It's not a negative quantity, it's just not a quantity of interest.

 

Scott

[meerkat stew]

If women en masse start talking about the "kinds of jobs" men shouldn't work (either "innocently" murmuring about it being for their own good or clamouring about how they don't belong there), the kinds of housework or providing they "have" to do, or the stripping away of any sort of legal rights. . . I'll gladly back you up. I don't want to "oppress" men and I don't really personally know any women that do. I'm not saying no bitter, crappy women exist -- but there are crap people of both genders looking for power plays in all kind of ways. Misogyny and misandry are driven by the same thing --- a desire for control, a bitterness, and a severe ignorance.

 

Do you think people who are using modern propaganda actually announce these types of intentions today? Do you think the Nazis said, "we are coming after you Jews, watch out!" right off the bat? Of course they don't currently because it is against the law to do so, despite the fact that political interests structure laws to benefit women only these days, even they couldn't pull that off with the 14th Amendment. Nursing, teaching and marketing are all large employers in the economy that I have heard many misguided people say should be reserved for women, and the difficulty many men have entering those professions bears the sentiment out.

 

Legitimate discrimination against women in the workforce during the in-between times of agriculture>> manufacturing>> service economy was there because there wasn't enough work/jobs to allow men to support families and allow women in the workforce simultaneously. The very instant this changed and the cold war economy started booming, the -very- historical instant, women were literally DRAGGED into every aspect of the economy. There was no fight, more like "get your asses in here and to work!"

 

Also, appeals that "women shouldn't do this kind of work," have often been backed by empirical fact. That male soldiers would react very negatively to women being endangered or blown apart on the battlefield, and such could threaten the chain of command is a fact, one that can change over time certailnly, but a fact nonetheless. That women simply couldn't physically do many male jobs in pre automated, pre service economy US is a fact, belied by the shorter male life expectancy and high accident rates among those doing those jobs. There was as much social pressure to keep women out of certain jobs because they were highly dangerous, extremely unpalatable or required a certain amount of physical strength. There is much made of the "Rosy the Riveter" phenomenon in WW2 as showing women can do any job, but that was post-automation.

 

Regardless of how people "talk" about it, men -are- discriminated against in divorce court, child support, domestic abuse, rape, sexual harrassment, violent crimes generally, accusations of perversion, and stripped of their due process rights at an alarming rate every day. In fact, the remedy to this will begin with open discussion that does not exist now. Currently, it is pushed to the back-burner and attempts to air it always meet with the "appeal to the lowest common denominator," that there are so many bad men out there threatening women and their children that things must be that way. So rather than the antiquated forms of prejudice you describe, the modern day campaign against men's rights is a bit more sophisticated and insidious.

[Enchanted Girl]

Notice the use of quotes around equals. I think it was very clear from the context that I'm talking about women trying to equal men in the sphere of career achievement. If it wasn't clear, I will say it again here. I think that women are and should be men's equals. But, I don't think that means that men and women are the same, that they should act the same, or most definitely that they have to achieve the same amount in the career sphere to be equal.

 

No, I do not judge people based on their career achievements. I mentioned this earlier. My Mom is a housewife and I'm not ashamed of her in any way.

 

But why are you against women achieving the same amount in the area of careers as men?

 

It's part of equality to ALLOW women to be able to achieve the same amount of success. I do not believe in forcing anyone to do anything, but that doesn't mean this isn't important that women have the freedom to do this if they want to.

 

Being able to work and things does make a woman a man's equal and is important for equality. Because a woman who is unable to work will have less power in her marriage. If her husband cheats on her, can she really leave him for instance? Because she'll be struggling financially if she does, but if she stays with him and puts up with his crap this won't happen to her. While a man will have his career and money regardless if he stays with her or not.

 

The exception being child support payments and alimony (although people who get those things are often still struggling), but those things will stop being necessary for men to pay if women are able to take care of themselves in this area more.

 

This doesn't mean all women have to work, but saying that it's not important for women to be able to work so that there can be equality is ridiculous, which is what you are saying. It's important for both men and women to be able to make their own choices (and not judged for them or considered overly competitive for chasing after them) in these areas according to what they feel is best in their lives. This includes men being allowed to stay home with the kids if that's what they want to do and being paid child support and alimony in certain cases.

 

You just hear the word feminist and make a lot of assumptions, but try to actually read the words we say next time.

[Enchanted Girl]

If despite what I said you still want to go try to be everything a man is, go for it. I don't think it's the best decision but I wish you well.

 

If you really viewed men and women as equals, then you wouldn't say that a woman who wanted to work and be successful was trying to be a man. You'd say it was a genderless quality to have and that both genders could be equally good at it, which is what I believe it is.

 

She's not trying to grow a penis. She's just trying to be a successful woman.

 

A woman doesn't need to grow a penis in order to be successful either. Women are as capable as men are and aren't trying to be anything except themselves when they try to live up to something in any area of life.

 

I also want to add that it's my personal choice not to focus on my career, but apparentally, according to you, every woman who supports the idea of women being able to work and be independent (I do expect to work some, but it will not be my focus) is very career driven and obsessed with being a guy.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Enchanted Girl

[Green]

Do you think people who are using modern propaganda actually announce these types of intentions today? Do you think the Nazis said, "we are coming after you Jews, watch out!" right off the bat? Of course they don't currently because it is against the law to do so, despite the fact that political interests structure laws to benefit women only these days, even they couldn't pull that off with the 14th Amendment. Nursing, teaching and marketing are all large employers in the economy that I have heard many misguided people say should be reserved for women, and the difficulty many men have entering those professions bears the sentiment out.

 

Legitimate discrimination against women in the workforce during the in-between times of agriculture>> manufacturing>> service economy was there because there wasn't enough work/jobs to allow men to support families and allow women in the workforce simultaneously. The very instant this changed and the cold war economy started booming, the -very- historical instant, women were literally DRAGGED into every aspect of the economy. There was no fight, more like "get your asses in here and to work!"

 

Also, appeals that "women shouldn't do this kind of work," have often been backed by empirical fact. That male soldiers would react very negatively to women being endangered or blown apart on the battlefield, and such could threaten the chain of command is a fact, one that can change over time certailnly, but a fact nonetheless. That women simply couldn't physically do many male jobs in pre automated, pre service economy US is a fact, belied by the shorter male life expectancy and high accident rates among those doing those jobs. There was as much social pressure to keep women out of certain jobs because they were highly dangerous, extremely unpalatable or required a certain amount of physical strength. There is much made of the "Rosy the Riveter" phenomenon in WW2 as showing women can do any job, but that was post-automation.

 

Regardless of how people "talk" about it, men -are- discriminated against in divorce court, child support, domestic abuse, rape, sexual harrassment, violent crimes generally, accusations of perversion, and stripped of their due process rights at an alarming rate every day. In fact, the remedy to this will begin with open discussion that does not exist now. Currently, it is pushed to the back-burner and attempts to air it always meet with the "appeal to the lowest common denominator," that there are so many bad men out there threatening women and their children that things must be that way. So rather than the antiquated forms of prejudice you describe, the modern day campaign against men's rights is a bit more sophisticated and insidious.

 

I once made a thread where I stated "men on avg are physicaly stronger then women."

 

You guessed it women on this site came in droves to argue and discredit me... even though I tried to explain that I only meant on avg... and not that every man by virtue of being a man was stronger then every woman by virtue of being a woman.

 

The fact remains that in no other time in the civilized world have jobs of the calibur and nature that exist today been available to the general public. Plus women some times like to act just as the gays do as if they are from other society... please gays and women both come from the same families rich or poor... well off or worse off that every body else comes from.... its not like being a black person or what ever.

[MrNate]

I once made a thread where I stated "men on avg are physicaly stronger then women."

 

You guessed it women on this site came in droves to argue and discredit me... even though I tried to explain that I only meant on avg... and not that every man by virtue of being a man was stronger then every woman by virtue of being a woman.

 

The fact remains that in no other time in the civilized world have jobs of the calibur and nature that exist today been available to the general public. Plus women some times like to act just as the gays do as if they are from other society... please gays and women both come from the same families rich or poor... well off or worse off that every body else comes from.... its not like being a black person or what ever.

 

 

What's that supposed to mean?