Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy

Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you.

You cant legislate us ignoring you.

Women cannot make Men love them.

They cannot shame us into doing what is contrary to our Biology and hard wiring.

Change and be happy, or remain as you are.

Message Edited by leeraconteur on 10-02-2007 02:11 PM

08-29-2006 10:05 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
Termi0n
Regular Contributor
Termi0n

leeraconteur wrote:
Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you.

You cant legislate us ignoring you.

Change and be happy, or remain as you are.

Oh God dont give them any ideas.

Women want fried ice. -Arab Proverb

08-29-2006 10:06 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
Halladay
Regular Contributor
Halladay
Ladies ? you are being mighty generous with the term

08-29-2006 10:08 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
GenghisKhan
Regular Contributor
GenghisKhan
They need to make this thread a sticky.

08-29-2006 10:11 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

leeraconteur wrote:
Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you.

So who’s trying?

08-29-2006 10:56 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
zacharias
Regular Contributor
zacharias
“leeraconteur wrote:
Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you.

So who’s trying?”

Oh, I dunno, who has their bowels in such an uproar that they are attacking everyone in sight over the mere suggestion?

08-29-2006 11:04 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
Back2TheKitchen
Regular Contributor
Back2TheKitchen
There isn’t a woman in the US, born within the last 40 years, that deserves to be called a Lady.

“With women or the female mindset imparted through feminization on the vast majority of society, it will be very easy to control the Empire…I mean…the republic.” – mirrorofthesoul.blogspot.com

08-29-2006 11:08 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
GenghisKhan
Regular Contributor
GenghisKhan
So who’s trying?
____________________________________________________

Then please explain to me what the ruckus is about? I’m curious to know.

08-29-2006 11:31 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk
LOL where did you get that idea exactly?

08-30-2006 12:19 AM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

Well to work out that they are trying to force marriage, a man need look no further than the various shaming tactics women use on me who don’t have girlfriends and then in increased shaming tactics when they do have girlfriends but haven’t proposed. And when that doesn’t work they then use traps such as “forgetting to take the pill” they even poke holes in the condoms!!! If marriage is repression of women explain why they have been doing this for so long?

08-30-2006 06:00 AM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.
Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk
I have never heard of women poking holes into condoms, where did you get information about that? @_@

That still doesn’t answer my question as to where are people getting the idea that women are going to get the law to make men who don’t want to marry them to marry them. Or force them legally to stop ignoring women.

08-30-2006 07:18 AM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

Never heard of it?? You’ve got to be kidding me!!! Is their a guy how hasn’t had a similar experience?

At a friend’s 21st some of the female guests decided “it was up to them to get the real party started” and provocative produced several packs of condoms. The guys started pairing off until one of the guys (the group clown who was never going to be one of the guys who got laid) took one of the packets and yelled water fight! He darted over to the sink and immediately tried to fill one of the condoms. You can guess what happened as several of the other guys who were now holding packets went to various taps and all got the same result. As you can imagine the party soured very quickly after that.

sabotaging contraception has been a female trick for years and yes we are on to you their is no point hiding under the false pretence of female innocence! Too many of your sisterhood have tried the same trick. A small pin **bleep** through the side of each pack, if your not looking you won’t see it. A lot of guys owe their futures to that one party gag. And I noticed none of the women had any shame in trying to use the system to trap the guys. They were only sorry they got caught!!

08-30-2006 07:40 AM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
Anti_Feminist
Regular Contributor
Anti_Feminist

I cant say “pin pr1ck” ?? my god this filter is fussy @_@?

08-30-2006 07:43 AM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

GenghisKhan wrote:
So who’s trying?
____________________________________________________

Then please explain to me what the ruckus is about? I’m curious to know.

Are you really that oblivious to the REAL point?

I doubt anyone cares whether you want to get married.  The issue across the boards has been with Michael Noer’s sexist bent in his column…NOT about whether a certain group of men would prefer not to marry women who have goals that exist outside of the home.

If you can’t see the difference, the arguments you’re making are moot because they’re not addressing the real complaint.

But it seems a heck of a lot easier to rant and rave that women are “man haters” than it is to discuss (maturely) the actual issue.

08-30-2006 08:10 AM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
GenghisKhan
Regular Contributor
GenghisKhan
Are you really that oblivious to the REAL point?

I doubt anyone cares whether you want to get married. The issue across the boards has been with Michael Noer’s sexist bent in his column…NOT about whether a certain group of men would prefer not to marry women who have goals that exist outside of the home.

If you can’t see the difference, the arguments you’re making are moot because they’re not addressing the real complaint.

But it seems a heck of a lot easier to rant and rave that women are “man haters” than it is to discuss (maturely) the actual issue.
____________________________________________________

It seems to me that the women on this board are arguing that Noer’s article is just plain wrong. So he’s sexist because he’s calling a spade a spade? or are you saying that his article is correct but he just should have made the title of it more politically correct? If that’s what you’re arguing, then what about all the articles that have been published over the last 40 years that offend men? You don’t hear men in masses going batsh*t insane over that. In fact a few months ago, when the case of the preacher who was killed by his wife was presented to the media, I heard a woman psychologist say that she should be pardoned for her actions because she was acting on love. In her opinion, the woman loved her husband so much that she killed him. Do you here massive protests of men by this statement? I was offended but I chalked it up to one person’s opinion. I didn’t go around spewing venom, insulting women, etc. Just the other day I read an article entitled “Don’t date bad boys” By their definition I would qualify as a bad boy. Do you hear me or other masses of bad boys complaining? of course not. I think the nature of this massive retaliation by women goes to show how hard this article has hit their status as career women and the power that men have over who we choose to marry. And if women are so “offended” by it, here’s a solution – don’t read it!

Message Edited by GenghisKhan on 08-30-2006 12:58 PM

08-30-2006 11:28 AM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
PatriarchVerlch
Regular Contributor
PatriarchVerlch

Try not to capitalize it, just say lady.

Women have been proving for the last 30 years that men have been right for the last 30 centuries!
http://www.verlch.blogspot.com

08-30-2006 12:24 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

GenghisKhan wrote:
Are you really that oblivious to the REAL point?

I doubt anyone cares whether you want to get married. The issue across the boards has been with Michael Noer’s sexist bent in his column…NOT about whether a certain group of men would prefer not to marry women who have goals that exist outside of the home.

If you can’t see the difference, the arguments you’re making are moot because they’re not addressing the real complaint.

But it seems a heck of a lot easier to rant and rave that women are “man haters” than it is to discuss (maturely) the actual issue.
____________________________________________________

It seems to me that the women on this board are arguing that Noer’s article is just plain wrong. I don’t think so.  Most would probably agree that men who would prefer a woman who stays at home shouldn’t marry a career woman. I mean, it’s common sense.  It’s Noer’s reasoning that’s getting under people’s skin (“Your house will be dirtier”?  Come on.)  So he’s sexist because he’s calling a spade a spade? No – because he’s calling women housekeepers and suggests that they’ll even ruin your health if you dare marry a career woman (as if she is at fault for every trouble the marriage will encounter, when both parties…if you look at it objectively…are to blame, if “blame” must be placed) or are you saying that his article is correct but he just should have made the title of it more politically correct? If that’s what you’re arguing, then what about all the articles that have been published over the last 40 years that offend men? This is not a response.  This is a deflection.  If you want to discuss the unfair treatment of men over the past such and such years, start a new thread.   You don’t hear men in masses going batsh*t insane over that. No?  I saw quite a few posts that are evidence to the contrary.  And whose fault is it that they don’t stand up for themselves?  No one asked them to hold onto their grudges until they could use them in cases like this.  Don’t like it?  Change it!   Maybe you could take some pointers from women.  In fact a few months ago, when the case of the preacher who was killed by his wife was presented to the media, I heard a woman psychologist say that she should be pardoned for her actions because she was acting on love. In her opinion, the woman loved her husband so much that she killed him. Do you here massive protests of men by this statement? No.  They should have, though – that’s insane.  And so, because men didnit get in an uproar over that, women shouldn’t argue against what they don’t believe in?  What’s one have to do with the other?  Or are men and women the same?  Is that what you’re saying? I was offended but I chalked it up to one person’s opinion. I didn’t go around spewing venom, insulting women, etc. I guess you waited until now to do that.  When the women decided to get all “uppity.” And if women are so “offended” by it, here’s a solution – don’t read it!  One might say to you, if you’re so offended by women, lock yourself in a Turkish bath house.

Message Edited by GenghisKhan on 08-30-2006 12:52 PM

08-30-2006 01:04 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
GenghisKhan
Regular Contributor
GenghisKhan
I agree with you some women are angry at the sexist slant, others are angry at the fact that they are being dismissed as suitable marriage partners, and some are angry because the article was written by a man. In the end, you’re right everyone has any number of reasons to love or hate this article. And you’re absolutely right about the fact that men should have spoken up at certain moments in time. Consider us awakened now.

08-30-2006 01:36 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

The issue across the boards has been with Michael Noer’s sexist bent in his column.  NOT about whether a certain group of men would prefer not to marry women who have goals that exist outside of the home.

Criticising the editorial bent is expressing a desire to exert editorial control over content, which would inevitably lead to changing his recommendation that a certain group of men would prefer not to marry career oriented women.

Noer recommends that a certain group of men would prefer not to marry women who have goals that exist outside of the home, you and others find his stating and supporting such to be sexist.  There is no way to placate your demands without altering the intent of the article and thus not exposing men to the arguments and support within.

Thus your claim of ‘sexism’ is a thinly veiled attempt at outright censorship that results in men not being able to read the arguments, research the support, and make their own minds up based upon those points.

We have a right to an informed choice, to make that choice based upon the information and values of our own chosing.

To alter the original article is to restrict that choice.
I have been reading and hearing of complaints of sexism since I was 9 or 10.  Society has bent over backwards to accomodate the demands of feminists and women. Women receive preferential treatment in law, social custom, office hiring and academic admissions.  They represent 57% of all college enrollees.  Yet 43 years after the publication of ‘The Feminine Mystique’ it’s still NOT ENOUGH.

I have had enough.

Men have had enough.

No more.

08-30-2006 02:45 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
ftesyektsi
Regular Contributor
ftesyektsi

leeraconteur wrote:
The issue across the boards has been with Michael Noer’s sexist bent in his column.  NOT about whether a certain group of men would prefer not to marry women who have goals that exist outside of the home.

Criticising the editorial bent is expressing a desire to exert editorial control over content, how so? “criticising the editorial bent”?  wtf?  try disagreeing with his sexist slant. which would inevitably lead to changing his recommendation that a certain group of men would prefer not to marry career oriented women. I don’t see how one logically follows the other.  Advising family-oriented men to not marry career-oriented women doesn’t HAVE to be sexist.  Maybe it just so happens that that’s the only way you see it.  Having like goals is one thing; not marrying career women because they won’t have time to clean your house is another, entirely.

Noer recommends that a certain group of men would prefer not to marry women who have goals that exist outside of the home, you and others find his stating and supporting such to be sexist.  Wrong again.  See above. There is no way to placate your demands without altering the intent of the article and thus not exposing men to the arguments and support within.  What are the demands, exactly?  And how does altering the basis of the argument in any way not expose men to the arguments within?  All Noer would have to do (to be rational rather than whiny) is explain that in a household in which both parties work, men and women have a tough time dividing labor equally, which may make both parties unhappy.  What’s so hard about that?  And in what way does that keep from men the argument that family men may not want to marry career women?

Thus your claim of ‘sexism’ is a thinly veiled attempt at outright censorship No it isnt’ that results in men not being able to read the arguments, research the support, and make their own minds up based upon those points.  Riiiight…

We have a right to an informed choice, to make that choice based upon the information and values of our own chosing.

To alter the original article is to restrict that choice.
I have been reading and hearing of complaints of sexism since I was 9 or 10.  Society has bent over backwards to accomodate the demands of feminists and women. Women receive preferential treatment in law, social custom, office hiring and academic admissions.  They represent 57% of all college enrollees.  Yet 43 years after the publication of ‘The Feminine Mystique’ it’s still NOT ENOUGH.

I have had enough.

Men have had enough.

No more.  Oooh…what are you going to do?

08-30-2006 03:02 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.
Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

Criticizing the editorial bent is expressing a desire to exert editorial control over content, how so? “criticising the editorial bent”?  wtf?  try disagreeing with his sexist slant.

There is no way to remove the ‘sexist slant’ without altering ‘the editorial bent’.  Thus you call for changing the content of the article.

I do not agree that the article has a sexist slant.  It merely states something you disagree with.  This tactic has been used for 40 years:

Criticism of women==Sexism

Advising family-oriented men to not marry career-oriented women doesn’t HAVE to be sexist.  Maybe it just so happens that that’s the only way you see it.

No, it’s the only way YOU see it.  I don’t have a problem with the article – you do.

Having like goals is one thing; not marrying career women because they won’t have time to clean your house is another, entirely.

That is one of many things that a family-oriented man would want his wife to do – clean THEIR house.  You find it sexist.  I find it loving, supportive, nurturing and healthy.

How does altering the basis of the argument in any way not expose men to the arguments within?

You are joking, right?  How does fundamentally altering the basis of an argument keep the argument unchanged and the same?  Are you lucid?

If you alter the basis for the argument, you eliminate the argument itself and change it into something else entirely.

All Noer would have to do (to be rational rather than whiny) is explain that in a household in which both parties work, men and women have a tough time dividing labor equally, which may make both parties unhappy.  What’s so hard about that?  And in what way does that keep from men the argument that family men may not want to marry career women?

Because you want him to change his piece.  That’s censorship.  Because family oriented men often want the wife to take care of the kids, to cook, to clean, to make their house into a home.  This is a basic desire of many men who find career women not the best marriage material.  To eliminate that would eliminate many of the benefits that men who don’t want to marry a career women see in a women devoted to home, family, husband and children.

This is what so many of us are sick of – YOU want to change the basis of the argument because YOU find it sexist.  YOU want to vet men’s opinions so that the argument is the same, in your eyes, and meets with your approval.

But of course you are willing to ALLOW us poor, sexist men to have our argument, as long as its basis meets with YOUR approval.  As long as it doesn’t offend YOU.

Message Edited by leeraconteur on 11-06-200609:27 PM

08-30-2006 03:38 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk
Never heard of it?? You’ve got to be kidding me!!! Is their a guy how hasn’t had a similar experience?

At a friend’s 21st some of the female guests decided “it was up to them to get the real party started” and provocative produced several packs of condoms. The guys started pairing off until one of the guys (the group clown who was never going to be one of the guys who got laid) took one of the packets and yelled water fight! He darted over to the sink and immediately tried to fill one of the condoms. You can guess what happened as several of the other guys who were now holding packets went to various taps and all got the same result. As you can imagine the party soured very quickly after that.

Did those female guests actually admit that they purposely sabotaged the condoms? Did you even ask or did you just assume it was done on purpose? Condoms are not hard to accidently ruin: It used to be considered a great idea to keep condoms in one’s wallet so that they wouldn’t be forgotten or accidently left at home, until it was proved scientifically that exposing condoms to prolonged body-heat temperatures over the course of weeks or months can seriously weaken or put holes in the latex.

I appreciate that it would have been a disturbing scene, though.

sabotaging contraception has been a female trick for years and yes we are on to you their is no point hiding under the false pretence of female innocence! Too many of your sisterhood have tried the same trick. A small pin **bleep** through the side of each pack, if your not looking you won’t see it. A lot of guys owe their futures to that one party gag. And I noticed none of the women had any shame in trying to use the system to trap the guys. They were only sorry they got caught!!

Again, I’m looking for proof of this allegation: give me a study, a research paper, heck even one woman admitting to that kind of behavior would make a fantastic start. I’ve never done such a thing, none of my girlfriends have ever mentioned doing such a thing, and none of my male friends ever brought that up with me or my friends at any point. And I’m in art, we talk pretty frankly about sex, so it would have come up if someone had experience with that situation.

08-31-2006 12:25 AM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
Cassius
Regular Contributor
Cassius
He just gave you an exampel. How come women keep denying and denying and lying and lying and if they get caught they lie and deny some more. Thats why the doubel standards and anti male laws will stay and we will keep living the way god intended men to live.

08-31-2006 09:20 AM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
sunhawk
Regular Contributor
sunhawk

He just gave you an exampel. How come women keep denying and denying and lying and lying and if they get caught they lie and deny some more. Thats why the doubel standards and anti male laws will stay and we will keep living the way god intended men to live.

He gave me an ambiguous example that only proved that sometimes condoms have holes.  He has not provided proof that the holes were put there on purpose or that it was women who did it.

And I suppose you don’t have any evidence either since all you contributed was a complaint about my request for clarification on the situation.

08-31-2006 10:14 AM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
khankrumthebulg
Regular Contributor
khankrumthebulg
Last year I read a web site full of postings by Women on how to “accidentally” get pregnant. A Survey of over 1000 Women revealed that 47% would lie to their husbands or boyfriends to get pregnant dispite their “Men’s” opposition or interest in not having Children. In other Words Men’s wishes and desires don’t matter if it conflicts with what Women want. Women further who were interviewed who cheated on their Significant Other when questioned felt no guilt. Whereas the Men did feel guilt.

The societal constraints on Female Behavior are gone completely. Only Men’s behavior is being restrained. Men as a result are adapting to the changes. Violence against Women is decreasing. Violence against Men and Children by Women is increasing. And violence by Women against other Women is also increasing.

Realistic and Reasonable two words American Women are not. More compelling reasons to go Foreign, or expatriate and leave this mess. Career Women are self absorbed with what they want.

08-31-2006 12:39 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

Did those female guests actually admit that they purposely sabotaged the condoms? Did you even ask or did you just assume it was done on purpose?

Why would someone admit to such an act?

Just because a criminal doesn’t confess, doesn’t mean they didn’t do it.

Condoms are not hard to accidently ruin:

Common sense would dictate that if several men fill up condoms with water and multiple instances of pinprick holes occur, that someone did that intentionally.

The former trend of assuming women to be ‘sugar and spice and everything nice’ is passe’.  Women now are nearly just as likely as men to lie, cheat, steal, rob, murder, assault and commit domestic violence.

It is sad that women have chosen to emulate the characteristics of the 2% of the male populace that is violent, thuggish and dishonest.

08-31-2006 06:14 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

Message Edited by leeraconteur on 10-02-2007 02:35 PM

10-02-2007 02:33 PM

Re: Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you. You cant legislate us ignoring you. Change and be happy
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur
Ladies, you can’t force us to marry you.

You cant legislate us ignoring you.

Women cannot make Men love them.

They cannot shame us into doing what is contrary to our Biology and hard wiring.

Change and be happy, or remain as you are.

10-02-2007 02:36 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: