Longest Thread Ever

[♪alt13]

In which of those statements do you see me telling women, men, or anyone which choice is most valuable? Perhaps I stated something poorly. You bolded one statement where I said that I had no objection to women choosing a conforming path, and another where I said men shouldn't be criticized for choosing a non-conforming path. Where is the hypocrisy?

No, you said that you didn't have a problem with women that "limit themselves to a cage."(sounds like chiding to me) Then you said you did not think Men who want to be homemakers should be chided for it.

 

[LogGrad98]

The cage is being limited to performing in those roles, not performing them per se. yes, when a woman agree that all she will ever do in her life is play the role of a nesting mother and spouse, she is agreeing to limit herself to that cage. If you are comfortable in it, good for you.

By this logic simply making choices puts people in cages. Unless it doesn't come across the way you meant it. If a woman chooses to be a homemaker mother and spouse, and that represents her cage, then a man (or woman) who chooses to be an accountant, let's say, chooses an accounting profession as their cage. In a way that is kind of self-evident. If I choose to go through the process to become an accountant, I will naturally close some doors, or at least make them to a greater or lesser degree hard to open, creating, in essence, a cage, outside of which are all the alternative choices I passed up in choosing to be an accountant. Not sure where this is a bad thing as opposed to a simple natural consequence.

 

[PearlWatson]

The cage is being limited to performing in those roles, not performing them per se. yes, when a woman agree that all she will ever do in her life is play the role of a nesting mother and spouse, she is agreeing to limit herself to that cage. If you are comfortable in it, good for you.

Why did you change "chooses" to "agreeing to," as though it is merely an acquiescence to be a mother and wife?

and why did you include the stipulation that is "all she will ever do?"

or call being a mother and wife "playing a role?"

 

[LogGrad98]

When I got married, my wife had a degree, an associates in business from Rick's (hey, it was still a degree!), and she was well on her way to a bachelor's in mathematics with an interest in teaching math at the high school, and later the collegiate level. She also was seriously considering accounting (CPA), and possibly finance, and working as a comptroller or the like. We got married and talked about a family, which we both wanted. I told her I had no problem taking care of the kids while she went to school, then when she was done and the kids were a bit older, I could go to school and work on my career. At first, we leaned that way, then one day she said she didn't want me to be disappointed in her, but that she really really wanted to be a mom. To stay at home, take care of the house, raise the kids, and be the mom. I told her I would support her whichever way she wanted to go with it, and that it was up to her. She thought about it some more and then became a stay at home mom, and I went to school and started my degree.

She has had to work off and on throughout the years, and even now is a contractor with the Social Security Admin, a perfect job since she gets away from the house for a while, makes very good money (upwards of $60/hour) for part time work (5 or 6 days a month), but her proudest accomplishment, by far, is raising 4 awesome kids and taking care of our home, and me. That is what she talks about, that is what she "bragged" about at her high school reunions (where she was voted most likely to succeed and was salutatorian), brushing off all the questions about why she gave up on her "dreams" to be a mom. If you ask her, she will tell you she has had a chance to live her dreams.

Not sure if that qualifies as a cage, but she certainly is the proverbial singing caged bird, and I couldn't be more proud of her if she had been a CEO.


But I wouldn't have minded having a sugar momma either.

 

[One Brow]

No, you said that you didn't have a problem with women that "limit themselves to a cage."(sounds like chiding to me) Then you said you did not think Men who want to be homemakers should be chided for it.

I see choosing to just be a homemaker as setting a limit on yourself. I see just having a career, and not helping out in the home, as limiting yourself. The "cage" was a reference society's attempt to put women in the former role, but also applies to putting men in the latter role.

However, perhaps I did express that poorly. Thank you for calling me on it.

 

[One Brow]

By this logic simply making choices puts people in cages.

Not just making choices, but agreeing that those choices will be a permanent condition.

 

[One Brow]

Why did you change "chooses" to "agreeing to," as though it is merely an acquiescence to be a mother and wife?

and why did you include the stipulation that is "all she will ever do?"

or call being a mother and wife "playing a role?"

I used "agrees to" because for many women (even today), the decision is coerced as opposed to chosen by preference. I used "all she will ever do" to emphasize the difference between doing what's right in the present and sticking to a path even when it may not be optimal. I used "playing a role" because spouses/parents play various roles for each other, as circumstances arise.

 

[One Brow]

Not sure if that qualifies as a cage, but she certainly is the proverbial singing caged bird, and I couldn't be more proud of her if she had been a CEO.

But I wouldn't have minded having a sugar momma either.

That's not unlike what happened with me marriage.

 

[PearlWatson]

I used "agrees to" because for many women (even today), the decision is coerced as opposed to chosen by preference. I used "all she will ever do" to emphasize the difference between doing what's right in the present and sticking to a path even when it may not be optimal. I used "playing a role" because spouses/parents play various roles for each other, as circumstances arise.

When I specifically said "chooses" you still made the comment that "if [a woman] is comfortable in [the cage], that is fine by you (like it would matter if her choice is "fine by you").
If a woman is "comfortable" or "likes it" that would clearly not be an instance of coercion, yet you still consider the choice to "play" an expected role to be a cage.

A guy makes the worst kind of feminazi.

 

[babe]

The cage is being limited to performing in those roles, not performing them per se. yes, when a woman agree that all she will ever do in her life is play the role of a nesting mother and spouse, she is agreeing to limit herself to that cage. If you are comfortable in it, good for you.

you and others of like mind, in preaching this point, come across as degrading women who choose to lean into the roles of motherhood and nurturing their families. There has been a backlash recently, a trend in the feminist movement, where ideologically-liberated women are rebelling against such logic and saying "to hell with you and your whole raft of ideas about what women should be. . . . I'm going to be a mother and stay home and take care of my kids, my husband, and my home."

we've always had some women who could do anything they wanted. That comes from having character and self-respect. Probably has a lot to do with their fathers, who probably taught them to talk straight and shoot straight and don't take crap from anyone, not from ideological utopians who buy into the marxist "equality" equation.

 

[babe]

I see choosing to just be a homemaker as setting a limit on yourself. I see just having a career, and not helping out in the home, as limiting yourself. The "cage" was a reference society's attempt to put women in the former role, but also applies to putting men in the latter role.

However, perhaps I did express that poorly. Thank you for calling me on it.

A lot of folks don't appreciate the "homemaker" and "mother" professions as much as they deserve. In my book, it counts for a lot, at least as good as a BS degree from a college. Too bad more businesses don't see it that way, imo. But then, perhaps in my experience I've seen some extraordinary women at work doing those things, and maybe a lot of women just get by in some neglectful/minimal sort of way, watching the soaps and in general being couch potatos/Walmart fashion exhibits.

I do think a pragmatic woman should develop some career, like my wife did. Even if she doesn't care to get into management at the hospital, she does a great service to many people as labor/delivery nurse. She also has started businesses which have succeeded. .. . well, she helped start them and left them to her brothers to carry on when she decided to become a nurse. She is also the backbone of my business, as a matter of fact. Some of those feminine talents, communication skills and multitasking abilities.

Her father taught her to shoot a gun, straight shooter style, and to talk with the same kind of purpose and aim. Her father placed great confidence in her in many other ways. And she always did the job.

 

[One Brow]

you and others of like mind, in preaching this point, come across as degrading women who choose to lean into the roles of motherhood and nurturing their families. There has been a backlash recently, a trend in the feminist movement, where ideologically-liberated women are rebelling against such logic and saying "to hell with you and your whole raft of ideas about what women should be. . . . I'm going to be a mother and stay home and take care of my kids, my husband, and my home."

One of the most amusing parts of these discussion is when people say,"I'm such a rebel that I'm going to act in a manner that conforms to what's been expected of me for decades".

we've always had some women who could do anything they wanted. That comes from having character and self-respect. Probably has a lot to do with their fathers, who probably taught them to talk straight and shoot straight and don't take crap from anyone, not from ideological utopians who buy into the marxist "equality" equation.

So, as long as we have 1 women engineer for every nine male engineers, it doesn't matter that 8 other potential women engineers were harassed, insulted, and/or discouraged from pursuing it? It's their own fault for not being able to put up with things no man is asked to endure to be an engineer?