women: would you like to be proteced and kept?

[sally4sara]

Would we think it cool if we saw parents dressing their little boys in pink frilly clothing and showing them flower arranging and playing with dolls and doll houses, while dressing the girl in blues or army fatigues and showing her how to blow stuff up and build forts in mud?

 

Not sure why we would have to dress anyone any particular way. Do you apply your early life mud fort building skills to your day to day now as an adult? How often do you now blow things up? Either way, why on Earth would teaching girls and boys the same with no regard to their gender require us doing the same awful marginalizing **** typically shoved onto young girls, to boys instead? What purpose would it serve other than to reduce them to placing all their personal worth on the way they look and dress and wasting their potential as humans? Other than teaching parenting skills to boys as well as girls, the rest of it isn't something really necessary or harmful either way. My brother like dolls more than I did and no harm came of it. I like the guns more than he did and no harm came of it. And before you ask, no, neither of us are gay.

 

Did you know we use to dress baby boys in pink and girls in blue? Its a fact. Look it up. Seems color matters not at all. But the hyper pink frilly must be a dress stuff is how we start sexualizing women even as children.

[wwwjd]

I dont get some guys who have a desire for a women to NEED them and be dependent on him

 

I want a women whos with me because she loves being with me and who iam not just what i provide her

 

As you read inside this interesting social experiment, some women like it, some don't. Some men like it, some don't. Plenty of both sides to go around. I think the reasons were explained very well previously already.

 

Have you ever GIVEN someone ANYTHING and enjoyed it?

There ya go. "Tis better to give than to recieve..."

 

If I was such a guy (which I hope 15 pages have read that I am not), to be able to GIVE to someone for the rest of my life would feel pretty good. As a man I DO enjoy giving, and there is nothing wrong with that. I give by picking the restaraunt and planning the night, opening the door FOR her as a gesture of kindness, geuninely LISTENING And caring about what she wants to talk about, BUYING/providing dinner, hugging or holding her physically enjoying her enjoying being held. I see no down side to that.

 

Do I desire her to NEED me? No, I desire to GIVE her things... gifts, money, life, love, whatever.... and isn't that pretty much the basis for any attraction that leads into a relationship?

[udolipixie]

Either way, why on Earth would teaching girls and boys the same with no regard to their gender require us doing the same awful marginalizing **** typically shoved onto young girls, to boys instead?

 

I was wondering if I got the wrong message with how the user translated finding what the children have an aptitude for had to do compared to reversely applying what seems to me stereotypical gender roles.

 

Not many people will watch a group of small girls and think things like "You know Katie is so confident in herself and articulate; I bet she grows up to be a preacher or a politician." Or "Misty is always in the biology section at the library when we go and dissecting insects in the garage; I bet she grows up to be a doctor or a scientist."

I can remember many conversations like this however with parents of boys. I have a boy and I know I do it. People look for aptitudes and try to put boys in the direction of where those aptitudes would shine.

[wwwjd]

Because this whole thread is about roles.

 

Men and women will never be equal (not lower or higher than either) just different.

 

I wonder if we swap all training, make the boy a girl and a girl the boy, will the boys loose desire to provide and want to be kept? Just wondering how role definition plays into it, but we will never really know since no one experiments on people anymore

[Els]

I suspect she is an earlier poster reincarnated under a new identity. I'm sure some people remember her.

 

There are two possibilities in my head, but I'll have to wait for further info to know which one she is.

[sally4sara]

Because this whole thread is about roles.

 

Men and women will never be equal (not lower or higher than either) just different.

 

No one person is equal to another. You are not equal to some other guy any more than I am equal to some other woman. Insisting on gender roles is just plain sexist. Its not misogynistic but it is plain and simple sexist.

 

I wonder if we swap all training, make the boy a girl and a girl the boy, will the boys loose desire to provide and want to be kept? Just wondering how role definition plays into it, but we will never really know since no one experiments on people anymore

 

It would shock me not at all if a boy, growing up in a world where for centuries men had to be in the home with babies reliant on a woman to provide for them, that he would gravitate towards the only sense of security afforded him. Being in the home with the babies. Even later for his great great grandson in a society where men were able to get a job, that boy might consider more strongly the option of staying home with the kids than working outside the home.

Edited April 20, 2012 by sally4sara

[udolipixie]

Because this whole thread is about roles.

So you take something based on teaching roles and make to me an unrelated gender role reversal? .. Okay then. I would think someone would ignore an unrelated post rather than put their own spin on it to make it related.

 

Men and women will never be equal (not lower or higher than either) just different.

Just as humans will never be equal. Plenty of guys more handsome than other guys, more intelligent than other guys, bigger below than other guys

 

Though if you are on the different angle why do a gender role reversal on a situation of teaching gender children by looking for their aptitude (difference) and putting them in the direction it would shine rather than defining by genitals?

 

I wonder if we swap all training, make the boy a girl and a girl the boy, will the boys loose desire to provide and want to be kept? Just wondering how role definition plays into it, but we will never really know since no one experiments on people anymore

Some will and some won't.

 

Societal conformity and training does tend to influence many people.

[threebyfate]

Stockholm Syndrome!

[gotye]

yup, I would like to be successful independently but also nice to have support

[JesseJames]

Yes you can. You have to believe yourself capable and seek it out. Just like women had to do in the work force. Don't hold yourself back with these antiquated concepts. You can be more than a paycheck. If you don't try to be more though, it is you that makes you only a guy with a job and a paycheck. I have known amazing fathers. Even single fathers with sole custody. What do you think a man does if his wife dies? He steps up to the plate and discovers he can be more than just a man with a paycheck. If he doesn't it isn't because he, being a man, was not capable. It means he didn't try.

 

Okay. This is getting silly to me now and I have to say something.

 

Listen, fertile women can go straight on down to the banks and have a child for 1500 bucks.

 

A man has to find a good, healthy surrogate, pay forward the minimum 50 large, hope and pray she doesn't abort, go through a world of legal hoops and papers, get ridiculed by everyone under the sun, and still there's the dynamics with the birthing mother.

 

To tell a man that he can or cannot procreate, like you are, is lunacy. That would be like telling Mars to grow some trees or something. Although it's possible, it's far from being in the slightest control.

 

Just leave it alone. I don't see you fighting to preserve the 2 million years of sexual selection that we've had. Perhaps you help make artificial insemination illegal, along with in vitro, work to stifle biased movements, and maybe, just maybe perhaps you can give some words of encouragement or discouragement regarding men and procreation.

[udolipixie]

Okay. This is getting silly to me now and I have to say something.

What seems silly to me is that I didn't get that she was telling a man that he can or cannot procreate like women.

 

I got that she was saying he can know the connection or feeling of accomplishment or purpose that creating a life can bring. That he can be more than a provider and/or that he can have a great or just a great as role in caring for what was procreated.

 

She even underlined it in her response.

 

I can not PHYSICALLY create a life out of my own body, no. This is why we are not equal. I can NEVER KNOW the connection or feeling of accomplishment or purpose that can bring. I can only find that from a job and purpose by providing for my wife.

 

Yes you can. You have to believe yourself capable and seek it out. Just like women had to do in the work force. Don't hold yourself back with these antiquated concepts. You can be more than a paycheck. If you don't try to be more though, it is you that makes you only a guy with a job and a paycheck. I have known amazing fathers. Even single fathers with sole custody. What do you think a man does if his wife dies? He steps up to the plate and discovers he can be more than just a man with a paycheck. If he doesn't it isn't because he, being a man, was not capable. It means he didn't try.

[JesseJames]

What seems silly to me is that I didn't get that she was telling a man that he can or cannot procreate like women.

 

I got that she was saying he can know the connection or feeling of accomplishment or purpose that creating a life can bring. That he can be more than a provider and/or that he can have a great or just a great as role in caring for what was procreated.

 

She even underlined it in her response.

 

So, pray tell, where is this child that brings such purpose andaccomplishment? coming from again? LOL

 

Again, just leave it alone.

[udolipixie]

So, pray tell, where is this child that brings such purpose andaccomplishment? coming from again? LOL

 

Again, just leave it alone.

The child could come from his girlfriend, wife, surrogate, or adoption.

 

Seems like you don't want to see or be open to that she wasn't telling a man that he can or cannot procreate like women as you claimed.

 

She can clarify if she was or wasn't.

 

I got that she was saying he can know the connection or feeling of accomplishment or purpose that creating a life can bring. That he can be more than a provider and/or that he can have a great or just a great as role in caring for what was procreated.

 

She even underlined what she was responding to in her response.

I can not PHYSICALLY create a life out of my own body, no. This is why we are not equal. I can NEVER KNOW the connection or feeling of accomplishment or purpose that can bring. I can only find that from a job and purpose by providing for my wife.

[Els]

I have to say again, that this thread boggles the hell out of me. Clearly there are both men and women who want what the OP mentioned. Instead of arguing with them, why not just let them find each other, since they're compatible with each other?

[zengirl]

Not many people will watch a group of small girls and think things like "You know Katie is so confident in herself and articulate; I bet she grows up to be a preacher or a politician." Or "Misty is always in the biology section at the library when we go and dissecting insects in the garage; I bet she grows up to be a doctor or a scientist."

I can remember many conversations like this however with parents of boys. I have a boy and I know I do it. People look for aptitudes and try to put boys in the direction of where those aptitudes would shine.

 

I would say "I think this is getting better," but I don't even have to say, "I think." I know it is. Having worked in education and working with children today, I know it is. Young girls really are seen in this manner today, by many teachers (especially those in my generation), as much as young boys. We have some residual socialization issues, but it's gotten better and is still improving.

 

Honestly, when dealing with really poor communities, as I do, the young women almost get a "better" default attitude. We have a much higher success rate with getting those young women into paths leading to productive options like towards college and towards career paths, than the young men. We help both, of course, but I lose far more young men to gangs and such and go in knowing I will, as much as I try not to be biased. So, there's a flip side there. I know you're approaching it from a middle class perspective, though.

 

Would we think it cool if we saw parents dressing their little boys in pink frilly clothing and showing them flower arranging and playing with dolls and doll houses, while dressing the girl in blues or army fatigues and showing her how to blow stuff up and build forts in mud?

 

I blew up stuff and played in mud in frilly dresses. I also wore overalls and Ts. No fatigues, but I don't see many kids in army clothes, even boys. Really, boys have a little bit of a DISADVANTAGE in this way. Many girls can get "boy toys" but a boy who wants a Barbie? Are his parents usually comfortable with that? Not in Western society. In Korea, it's fine and quite common, btw. Many of my kinder boys loved Disney princesses, and their parents/friends/school/etc were fine with that! They didn't wear dresses, as that's not culturally acceptable, but even that: why not?

[zengirl]

I have to say again, that this thread boggles the hell out of me. Clearly there are both men and women who want what the OP mentioned. Instead of arguing with them, why not just let them find each other, since they're compatible with each other?

 

Of course that's totally cool. The idea that all women "secretly" want this that's embedded in some posts in this thread and that it comes from anything near the "natural order" of things is what boggles me. I'm cool with women and men who want whatever role they want, in their personal relationships, as long as it isn't thrust upon others!

[JesseJames]

The child could come from his girlfriend, wife, surrogate, or adoption.

 

Seems like you don't want to see or be open to that she wasn't telling a man that he can or cannot procreate like women as you claimed.

 

She can clarify if she was or wasn't.

 

I got that she was saying he can know the connection or feeling of accomplishment or purpose that creating a life can bring. That he can be more than a provider and/or that he can have a great or just a great as role in caring for what was procreated.

 

She even underlined what she was responding to in her response.

 

You seem to fail to understand that no man, living on this blue and green Earth today, wants to hear about how adoption is the same as creating life. He doesn't want to hear about how he can be more than just a simple provider, okay? It's extraordinarily condescending. Think about it.

[Els]

Of course that's totally cool. The idea that all women "secretly" want this that's embedded in some posts in this thread and that it comes from anything near the "natural order" of things is what boggles me. I'm cool with women and men who want whatever role they want, in their personal relationships, as long as it isn't thrust upon others!

 

Oh, I don't mean you! I understand what your issue with the OP was, and I agree with it.

 

It isn't the case for many of the other posters though. Just look at all the things that SAHMs and the men who want to provide for them have been called already, over the past few pages.

[FitChick]

If I was such a guy, to be able to GIVE to someone for the rest of my life would feel pretty good. As a man I DO enjoy giving, and there is nothing wrong with that.

 

Do I desire her to NEED me? No, I desire to GIVE her things... gifts, money, life, love, whatever.... and isn't that pretty much the basis for any attraction that leads into a relationship?

 

I think it's the result of any attraction, not the basis of it. People get more satisfaction out of giving than getting, generally speaking, whether it's material things or immaterial, like love or time. Many women don't realize that many men take it as a slap in the face if a woman refuses a gift or gesture given sincerely.

[Titania22]

When I read the OP, I got from it that you didn't have to have kids, you could pretty much do whatever you wanted and didn't have to worry about money.

 

Couple that with the fact I would never be with someone I didn't love.

 

What could be better then that? Being with a man I love, enjoying my life and not worrying about money. It sounds brilliant, I don't get the need for all the debate.

[udolipixie]

Seems you fail to understand and really don't want to see or be open to that she wasn't telling a man that he can or cannot procreate like women as you claimed.

 

You seem to fail to understand that no man, living on this blue and green Earth today, wants to hear about how adoption is the same as creating life.

 

When did I state, imply, or suggest that adoption is the same as creating life?

I listed adoption as one of the options to your question where is this child coming from.

 

When did I state, imply, or suggest that I knew what men wanted to hear about?

 

I'm wondering how to I fail to understand things I haven't stated, implied, or suggested.

 

He doesn't want to hear about how he can be more than just a simple provider, okay? It's extraordinarily condescending. Think about it.

It's extraordinarily condescending for a guy who seems to thinks he can only be a provider/paycheck or that's his role/purpose to hear he can be more than a provider/paycheck?....

[zengirl]

Oh, I don't mean you! I understand what your issue with the OP was, and I agree with it.

 

It isn't the case for many of the other posters though. Just look at all the things that SAHMs and the men who want to provide for them have been called already, over the past few pages.

 

TBH, I didn't even have an issue with the OP at first and was just answering the question. It was only after the OP's subsequent posts suggested our answers were somehow dishonest because we had hidden desires (some of us who'd answered) that I begun to see a poor assumption bias here. I think the question asked in the OP is just fine, as are many others here --- it's the assumptions we can sidestep next time, I hope --- and the questions and answers can reveal to us various things about socialization.

 

But, yes, personally I find the idea of being "kept" pretty unhappy (for myself) and don't think it's what "most" women want, but no skin off my back that some do.

[JesseJames]

When did I state, imply, or suggest that adoption is the same as creating life?

 

"I got that she was saying he can know the connection or feeling of accomplishment or purpose that creating a life can bring.

 

The child could come from his girlfriend, wife, surrogate, or adoption."

 

 

When did I state, imply, or suggest that I knew what men wanted to hear about?

 

You didn't.

 

I'm wondering how to I fail to understand things I haven't stated, implied, or suggested.

 

Wonder no more.

 

It's extraordinarily condescending telling a guy who seems to thinks he can only be a provider/paycheck or that's his role/purpose to hear he can be more than a provider/paycheck?

 

Of course it's condescending as hell. Did you ever think that maybe he might be sterile or something? What if he is? Unbelievably insensitive and condescending you guys.

[sally4sara]

You seem to fail to understand that no man, living on this blue and green Earth today, wants to hear about how adoption is the same as creating life. He doesn't want to hear about how he can be more than just a simple provider, okay? It's extraordinarily condescending. Think about it.

 

Go back and re read posts by the OP. Many times he talks about his wife. Be it that he is talking about someone he has yet to meet or someone he already knows - either way he is a marriage minded fella considering his potential as a husband and father. So yes, when and if he and his wife have a child he CAN be just as capable as his wife in care giving as he is at providing. He may even find he is better at it or enjoys it more. He can absolutely know what it is like to raise a child as any woman he has a child with. He just has to want to and try.

 

I cannot believe you're so dense and angry over someone telling a guy he can be more than he is settling for and can accomplish more than he thinks he can if he really wants to. Would you prefer I tell him "yup, you're useless except for money. Sorry buddy but that's all men can be in life".

 

Its the stupidity you've displayed here that keeps me away from this site for months at a time. I daresay I hope you're not representative of common man. That would mean so many women will have to scrape the bottom of the Brick Stupid Barrel to find a husband if they want to marry that I don't know why anyone would get hitched.

[JesseJames]

Go back and re read posts by the OP. Many times he talks about his wife. Be it that he is talking about someone he has yet to meet or someone he already knows - either way he is a marriage minded fella considering his potential as a husband and father. So yes, when and if he and his wife have a child he CAN be just as capable as his wife in care giving as he is at providing. He may even find he is better at it or enjoys it more. He can absolutely know what it is like to raise a child as any woman he has a child with. He just has to want to and try.

 

I cannot believe you're so dense and angry over someone telling a guy he can be more than he is settling for and can accomplish more than he thinks he can if he really wants to. Would you prefer I tell him "yup, you're useless except for money. Sorry buddy but that's all men can be in life".

 

Its the stupidity you've displayed here that keeps me away from this site for months at a time. I daresay I hope you're not representative of common man. That would mean so many women will have to scrape the bottom of the Brick Stupid Barrel to find a husband if they want to marry that I don't know why anyone would get hitched.

 

You know absolutely not a thing about him or his situation. To go off and tell everyone that they can create life, like pushing a button or something, is straight up lunacy and I simply cannot fathom how simple you try to make an extremely complex matter. Any idiot with a penis should decide for himself if he wants a kid or not. You seriously think that trying to sway someone into this is a good thing? And what, pray tell, will that do? Men know their options, they do not need to be talked to like a child... you're being utterly humiliating.