U.S Women vs Foreign Women

[meerkat stew]

its not like being a black person or what ever.

 

Well this brings up another good point. The primary impetus behind the left's co-opting of "women's issues" for its own politically manipulative purposes was the immense success of the left in solidifying the African American voting bloc after the civil rights movements of the 60s. The "fight for women's rights" was just a made-up tack-on fabricated nearly completely out of thin air. Women never -fought- for any rights in the way blacks did, the claims that they did is historical absurdity.The left learned that polarization and victimization politics worked extremely well on blacks, and so adopted similar tactics in its invention of the "women's rights movement." Worked out great for them with men as the big losers, but that doesn't mean there is any parallel whatsoever between women's experiences as those who have been enslaved, despite the extremity of the propaganda employed to get to that false reality.

 

Once you can get someone to buy into the "victim" role for themselves, thoug, you can get them to believe any absurd thing said by polarizing every issue as "us victims v those oppressors." as "us v them," and once you can get someone to believe absurdities, anything becomes politically possible.

 

Similar tactics were used in Germany pre WW2. The German people were facilely convinced of their victimhood at the hands of the "Jewish oppressors." The entire essence of Marxism is of victimization. Regardless of how oversupplied labor is, and how undifferentiated, if you can get laborers to believe they are -victims- and that the polarizing statement "management v labor" actually describes the world, then you can get them to believe any brand of horse puckey along the lines of them "rising up" and ruling the world one day.

 

Couple of things, IMO any change to the laws stripping men of rights should be done WITHOUT vilifying women, without agitprop, and without polarization politics, simply as a recognized social wrong. So I'm not at all advocating a different brand of the same thing from the other side.

 

Second, I'm not a republican, and in light of the left's immense success in victimization, gender baiting politics, the right has been doing it just as much as the left recently with similar rights-stripping results for men.

[Woggle]

I actually sympathize with black rights and racism is very real. You don't hear about white women getting shot in the head because the cop thought a gun was a taser nor does the neighborhood freak out when a white woman moves in. Also black men are some of the worst victims of the misandrist family court system.

[Sphere]

I actually sympathize with black rights and racism is very real. You don't hear about white women getting shot in the head because the cop thought a gun was a taser nor does the neighborhood freak out when a white woman moves in. Also black men are some of the worst victims of the misandrist family court system.

 

Well no matter how much a black person bleats about how harsh the US was to him, I'll ignore his cries for those of Native Americans. The real victim of the United States of America.

[Woggle]

Well no matter how much a black person bleats about how harsh the US was to him, I'll ignore his cries for those of Native Americans. The real victim of the United States of America.

 

True but I see it first hand how black men get treated by society. White women in many ways are pampered. Like I said before the whole neighborhood does not move out because a white woman moved in.

[Sphere]

True but I see it first hand how black men get treated by society. White women in many ways are pampered. Like I said before the whole neighborhood does not move out because a white woman moved in.

 

And a Native American, a real American is stuck in a reservation, the US certainly seems to have a lot of racial issues, glad I don't live there.

[Woggle]

And a Native American, a real American is stuck in a reservation, the US certainly seems to have a lot of racial issues, glad I don't live there.

 

True but white women have the world at their feet and society catering to them yet still are unhappy.

[taiko]

And a Native American, a real American is stuck in a reservation, the US certainly seems to have a lot of racial issues, glad I don't live there.

Nobody is stuck on a reservation. Its not like they have to dodge the Border Patrol if they wish to live and work elsewhere.

[Sphere]

True but white women have the world at their feet and society catering to them yet still are unhappy.

 

Well you need not worry in two hundreds years there won't be a single white person on the planet.

[Enchanted Girl]

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.

 

I'm sure there was more to it than that, knowing you. Like, if you said something about women not being allowed to have certain jobs because of it, that would be offensive, but . . . .

 

You can't discredit my opinions by quoting other women. Of course men are stronger and taller on average than women are. I agree with you, so you can't discredit the women in this thread by saying those things. Men and women are physically different from one another, but so are blacks and whites, so on and so forth and I don't think because we're physically different that we should be treated different from one another.

[Enchanted Girl]

Nobody is stuck on a reservation. Its not like they have to dodge the Border Patrol if they wish to live and work elsewhere.

 

Yea, they are there so they can keep their culture and way of life.

[Enchanted Girl]

Well this brings up another good point. The primary impetus behind the left's co-opting of "women's issues" for its own politically manipulative purposes was the immense success of the left in solidifying the African American voting bloc after the civil rights movements of the 60s. The "fight for women's rights" was just a made-up tack-on fabricated nearly completely out of thin air. Women never -fought- for any rights in the way blacks did, the claims that they did is historical absurdity.The left learned that polarization and victimization politics worked extremely well on blacks, and so adopted similar tactics in its invention of the "women's rights movement." Worked out great for them with men as the big losers, but that doesn't mean there is any parallel whatsoever between women's experiences as those who have been enslaved, despite the extremity of the propaganda employed to get to that false reality.

 

Once you can get someone to buy into the "victim" role for themselves, thoug, you can get them to believe any absurd thing said by polarizing every issue as "us victims v those oppressors." as "us v them," and once you can get someone to believe absurdities, anything becomes politically possible.

 

Similar tactics were used in Germany pre WW2. The German people were facilely convinced of their victimhood at the hands of the "Jewish oppressors." The entire essence of Marxism is of victimization. Regardless of how oversupplied labor is, and how undifferentiated, if you can get laborers to believe they are -victims- and that the polarizing statement "management v labor" actually describes the world, then you can get them to believe any brand of horse puckey along the lines of them "rising up" and ruling the world one day.

 

Couple of things, IMO any change to the laws stripping men of rights should be done WITHOUT vilifying women, without agitprop, and without polarization politics, simply as a recognized social wrong. So I'm not at all advocating a different brand of the same thing from the other side.

 

Second, I'm not a republican, and in light of the left's immense success in victimization, gender baiting politics, the right has been doing it just as much as the left recently with similar rights-stripping results for men.

 

You can't compare nazis with the people you are talking about. Women and black people do not demand that all white men (or whatever) get killed and oppressed in concentration camps. Yes, there are exceptions to this, like there are exceptions to everything. For instance, that black guy in the news who shot a bunch of people at his work over racism, but the vast majority aren't this way.

 

I agree with woggle about racism being alive. One of the things I love about my college is how it has a bunch of people from all different races taking classes together. Some of my classes have mostly only black people and I'm the only white person. My American history class was that way and when we talked about Martin Luther King Jr. and certain black issues, it was very hard for some of them to sit through. I didn't get critical of them either. I hugged them and we talked and they cried and they told me about certain types of racism they had to face in their life. It was a powerful and humbling experience for me. They never once blamed me for their pain, we were united about it.

 

Not to mention that my boyfriend's family is southern and while he isn't racist, a lot of them really, really are! They say such horrible things sometimes like that they are glad I'm not a black girl because they could never have accepted me into their family if I was. Blech.

 

I also do not think that women getting rights was the same thing as black people getting their rights. We face and faced different trials and problems in society. We also went about getting our rights in different ways. You're the one lumping them all together along with nazis.

 

Does that mean either group didn't struggle and face problems in this area? No. It was just different.

 

Just like the Native Americans struggle in American society is different than the Black struggle and has different complications and different solutions that we've tried, but they both exist.

[Enchanted Girl]

And a Native American, a real American is stuck in a reservation, the US certainly seems to have a lot of racial issues, glad I don't live there.

 

No, we're just the only ones who talk about it. There were native tribes in both Mexico and Canada. There are still reserves in Canada for them, I believe. It's not like those people only lives in the part of North America where the U.S. is and that's how we knew where to end our borders or something. XD No, they lived all over the place here.

 

You should look it up.

[Woggle]

I would not compare them to the nazis but try being in a relationship with some women and you will see that many do want to punish all men. Gender relations are just shot and for proof all you have to do is look at the divorce rate and how hard it is to have a healthy and happy relationship these days.

[zengirl]

Why this battle of "Who Had It Worse?" I just think everybody should have rights and that everybody should strive for open-mindedness.

 

In my family tree on one side, plenty of my family members/ancestors (some have passed away now) were put into American internment camps for being of Japanese descent, though living in America many, many years prior, and several on the other side were in Nazi concentration camps (as my maternal grandmother is the only last surviving in a line of Jewish folks). None of these people ever talked like this. And they saw closer to how bad you could have it. I just find this whole line of discussion ridiculous.

 

Currently, I live in a country where the older generation literally looks around, amazed, because they grew up during or post-war and they didn't have food for years and years. Most Americans and most people from Western countries have it pretty damn good. That doesn't mean that it's right when something bad happens, and it doesn't mean anyone has to pit it against each other.

 

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?

 

To me, a mail order bride is literally when a man doesn't care what kind of woman he gets, except what she looks like, and orders her from afar. That is derogatory because the whole idea is crap. (People can do what they want, but I think we should value both marriage and people more than that.) Now, this is not nearly what most marriages of people from 2 different countries are. Nor do I think the OP was seeking a mail-order bride.

 

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.

 

First of all, "attractive to you." There's no reason to believe or evidence to support women would be happier or form better relationships if they followed your "advice." And, yes, I do think that advice about racial or gender stereotypes given to a whole group of people is offensive. If I said, "Well, men shouldn't study nursing because it's unattractive" (Not true) or "Well, Random Racial Group wasn't made to go to college," I would be stating sexist or racist things. If I said, "I prefer XYZ kind of mate," that is just fine.

 

But I know you, you're disingenuous innocent-eyed, "Oh, no, I'm not sexist. . . I'm just trying to help" guy. I thought this type of reasoning had long since died. Seems like you've been keeping it alive over there.

 

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.

I've never said you were taking away legal rights. I've said you were challenging the idea behind them. (BTW, I wasn't even born yet, and even I know: This happened in the workplace for years after women were given rights, by the by. The general logic of "Why do these women need to work?" And "Don't they see it's making them less attractive!" was thrown around loads, mostly disingenuously.) Generally speaking, if someone starts talking in any context about what I, because of any racial or gender biases, should do, I find it mildly offensive. It really doesn't cause me to be "sensitive" or get personally upset, but I'll counter it. If you said you thought I should take some math classes because I was Asian, I'd find that bothersome too.

 

There's no need to have a conversation about this: Today, in most Western societies, everyone can choose the career path they want, irregardless of gender. Why does this bother you? Why bring a conversation about what "women should be doing" into it? What motivates that?

 

And I'm not trying to be "What a man is" -- I'm trying to be myself as a woman and an individual. That's the point you miss and entirely why what you say is offensive and ignorant.

 

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.

 

Oy, you need to separate out these issues into their own threads if you want to really talk about them, but I'll address this one:

 

I firmly disagree with those who think men can't be excellent teachers and nurses, and I know men in both fields. (Also, none of the men IN these fields that I know have expressed that they've felt any discrimination for it from women, though some of the male nurses I know have said they've had issues with male doctors. This is just anecdotal, of course.) There are some women AND some men too that reinforce these ideas, and I firmly disagree with them. If someone ever creates a thread saying that "Male Nurses are Weaklings" or something, I'm there to say they're being asinine. (Assuming I read it and am here.) I promise.

 

As for marketing, I worked for an Advertising Agency, and while not the Don Draper days anymore, most of my co-workers were men. I was one of very few women in the office who wasn't an administrative assistant. (Not because they don't hire women or are discriminatory but because most of the applicants were men.) I'd never heard of Marketing becoming a female-dominated field, and that was my first career.

 

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

 

This does not bother me. Even if someone says "Men are physically stronger than women" but does nothing to suggest they mean ALL men are strong or stronger and that women are weak. I don't even need the "on average" specified in this case, since it could be understood. Muscle mass is biologically determined. I'm cool with that.

 

Now, did you equate it with something women couldn't do that they clearly can in today's world? That would inspire ire, I imagine. I mean, my Step-mother and Father run a construction business. They have female workers, and because most of the work is done by heavy machines, the difference between male and female strength (assuming a certain level for both) is largely irrelevant. Heck, I'm not even a physically strong female, and as a teenager, they used to make me help out lots.

 

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.

 

Just because you put it in quotes doesn't mean you don't mean it, and you went to talk about women doing things to "Act like a man" which is preposterous. Unless I'm actually altering my body and biology, I'm not trying to act like a man--- women can be most things they want. Most career women do absolutely nothing to "act like men." They act like career women. Having successful, high-powered, demanding careers does not mean they are "like men" nor does being a househusband mean a fellow is "acting like a woman."

 

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.

Yes, this is what we took umbrage to. Why shouldn't we attempt to be equal or superior, if we want, as individuals in career achievement? I don't go into the workplace thinking "I'm going to be better at this than a man" (or the same or anything). I think, "I'm going to kick ass at this and build myself a career that makes me happy and is successful." I hope any successful career male goes into the office with an attitude that doesn't consider being better than people of various races and genders too.

 

'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?'

This assumption is insulting. First of all, men and women set off to prove themselves all the time, and I agree "proving" one's self is largely stupid, whether it's proving to your Daddy that you can "make it" or proving something about your gender or race. But you have gone into this line of questioning because you assume it is a common driving factor amongst women in careers solely to prove themselves to men.

 

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.

Why doesn't it make sense? Because you don't like it. This is a half-acceptance of the state of things. Sure, you accept we are free to do what we wish, but you persist in saying it doesn't make sense.

 

I think that career achievement is only one way to be a valuable person.

True story. Which is why I respect househusbands just as much as housewives. Edited August 16, 2010 by zengirl

[wuggle]

Well you need not worry in two hundreds years there won't be a single white person on the planet.

 

Amen to that !

 

you will see that many do want to punish all men.

 

Disagree, In my experience only a very small minority of women 'want' to punish anyone, most people are just hurting and lashing out.

 

Gender relations are just shot and for proof all you have to do is look at the divorce rate and how hard it is to have a healthy and happy relationship these days.

 

It is hard to have a happy relationship, always has been, But I think this might have many causes other than 'all women are nasty and just want to make life cr*p for men'.

 

Sorry, Life aint that simple

[Woggle]

Of course it is much more complex than that but many women these are very difficult to have a relationship with. If you are one of the lucky ones I am happy for you but you and I are the exceptions to the rule.

[taiko]

No, we're just the only ones who talk about it. There were native tribes in both Mexico and Canada. There are still reserves in Canada for them, I believe. It's not like those people only lives in the part of North America where the U.S. is and that's how we knew where to end our borders or something. XD No, they lived all over the place here.

 

You should look it up.

 

 

The last uprising I heard of was the First Nations in Canada:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustafsen_Lake_Standoff

 

An armed standoff with the RCMP.

[wuggle]

but many women these are very difficult to have a relationship with.

 

I think if you changed the word 'women' to 'people' we could agree. I'm sure both you and I (and probably every other poster on here) are pretty difficult to have a relationship with, that's just the way it is these days, were all screwed up

[that girl]

I would not compare them to the nazis but try being in a relationship with some women and you will see that many do want to punish all men. Gender relations are just shot and for proof all you have to do is look at the divorce rate and how hard it is to have a healthy and happy relationship these days.

 

Says the guy with the loving and supportive wife.

 

Woggle you're a pretty good example of men who hate women despite having proof of the many good women out there.

[meerkat stew]

Oy, you need to separate out these issues into their own threads if you want to really talk about them, but I'll address this one:

 

The topic of this thread and this issue is the same root IME, as I stated in my first post to the thread.

 

"Male Nurses are Weaklings"

 

Once... more... it is a bit more sophisticated and subtle than that. If it's not that blunt, you don't want to know or think about it, I get that from what you type... very clearly. Convenient, pervasive and the standard US female attitude, which ties directly into why American men are getting sick and tired of American women.

 

If a child is endangered somewhere, spend $1 billion to save that child. If 10,000 adult men are imprisoned wrongfully, huh? How does worrying about all those men save any children or get something for me? They probably -deserve- what they got anyway... screw em.

 

As for marketing, I worked for an Advertising Agency...

 

Marketing is not an "advertising agency" and it is not "sales" either. But I suspect you know this quite well already, and are just displaying a characteristic penchant of yours for placing obviously round pegs in obviously square holes as it suits your position to do so. Marketing, as I didn't feel was necessary to type, but maybe should have, is the department in most large companies dealing with... marketing... and good luck getting an entry level job there as a man or advancing if you are a man. Please reread the Canadian substitute teacher's link in my first post to this thread.

 

and that was my first career.

 

Aren't you 25? not that it matters for anything, but if you are, in all likelihood you don't even have a first "career" yet. Jobs maybe, career probably not. Sorry if I have you confused with someone else.

[meerkat stew]

You can't compare nazis with the people you are talking about.

 

I never did, just compared the propaganda method. Knew someone would latch right onto that the minute I typed it and decided that whomever did, I just wouldn't read nor reply to the rest of their post. So thanks for putting it right up top so I didn't have to read much, and lata!

[Pyro]

Says the guy with the loving and supportive wife.

 

Woggle you're a pretty good example of men who hate women despite having proof of the many good women out there.

 

he needs to either get a divorce or start dating men. Then he will have no fears and can live his life truthfully.

[that girl]

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

 

That you think men should work harder because women care more about careers again igniores the fact that being able to support yourself is a basic life skill that benefits the entire family.

 

You personally find it more attractive when the woman is less career focused, but I don't think that is the standard. I know several couples where the man really enjoys his wife's achievements out of pride in her and the fact that it takes some of the burden off of him. If he loses his job, the kids will still have a roof over their head.

 

You can find whatever you want attractive, but that doesn't mean you speak for all men.

[that girl]

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 certainly, 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.

 

 

This simply isn't true. Early manufacturing was a woman's profession (see the Lowell girls and the Triangle factory fire). There were always a decent number of single women who needed an income because they never married or were widowed.

 

Women were paid less because employers could get away with it, but there were always in the economy. They were just shunted into low paying jobs because of discrimination. It was not because there weren't enough jobs for the men.

 

The boom in female employment also happened during WWII. The cold war actually represents a return to female discrimination in the workplace that didn't lift until the women's movement came along.

 

As for physical differences, while I don't deny them, they are overrated. The USSR put women in the most demanding jobs at equal rates as men and it wasn't a problem. Many traditionally female jobs like working in a laundry are intensely physical. Farmer's wives have traditionally participated in the harvest. Yes, men can carry more on average, but that hasn't stopped women from doing heavy physical labor at any point in history. Just because middle class and upper class women sat home and knit, that doesn't mean it was the norm.

[that girl]

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.

But why would you even start that thread? The only reason I can think of is to cause drama. So all the mean ladies will jump on you and you'll have an excuse to talk about what bitches they are.