Ah...I see what you are saying. Yes, sounds like we're on the same page. I've always been interested in how human mythology or spiritual thought transforms over time, and how that transformation, and how those transformations really serve to support some sort of shift in political power (or other power) in the real world.
I agree, in general terms. I don't mind this sort of thing for a very limited period, as necessary to set the playing field equal after years of discrimination, but beyond that I think such things should be entirely race and gender neutral. Having to 'ask' the father amounts to a veto power for the father. By its nature, abortion is a binary decision - it is either yes or no. If the mother and father disagree, the decision ultimately has to fall to one person. Logic dictates that the woman's decision take precedence.
definitely not in cases where the father has all the financial and social power, which is in most cases on both sides of the pond, unfortunately... and i know this from personal experience, as well as research and observation...
I'll tell you right now, I have no interest in a mate that seeks to simply be a housewife. Housewives are uninteresting, tiresome, and small. The woman that I wish to spend the rest of my life with should be out in the world persuing their dreams, meeting goals, and just generally doing something. I have no interest in coming home to suburbia to find my wife sitting on the couch watching the soap network.
Give me the most quiet, childlike, innocent, and sheltered woman you can find.. I will take her as my wife. I think. I have to think about that. And she has to be hot.
What about a hypothetical situation where the father would be willing to raise the child on his own? The mother would only give birth and wouldn't then have to ever meet the child? Kind of off-topic, but I would say the child's rights take precedence over the woman's decision. The woman had a choice to use birth control or the choice not to have sex. In most cases.
Biology has always been against women. Don't forget women often take their life in their hands when they have a child. Childbirth kills, and even in developed countries there is an element of risk. My mother lost 4 babies and nearly died with the third. My first birth nearly ended in disaster. For these reasons, I do not think the man should have any power of veto in the decision over whether or not to go ahead. Sorry. In cases of divorce--if parents love their children, I wish they would choose the best environment for their children to remain in--which may mean with the dad.
Where did you attain this limited view on the subject? And do you plan to have children? If so, who will take care of them?
Good grief. I saw this and had to comment. I'm what's considered a "stay at home wife" now because I don't receive an income from an employer, however I am currently a student. Do I believe that everyone, including women, should "work"? Yes, but "work" as in something that is challenging and fulfilling to that person. I believe everyone should have something to work towards, and that doesn't just mean a paid gig outside of the home. As long as the family isn't suffering financially and the husband is okay with it, then it's NO ONE's business what the woman chooses to do. The other way around (working wife, sahh) is fine too. Also the idea of stay at home wives/moms setting women back is getting really tired. Women's Liberation was about equal opportunity and the freedom to choose. The only people "setting women back" are the ones who are still looking down on women for the choices that we're making today. No one should be judged or looked down upon for what he or she chooses is right for his/her lifestyle and family. Stop the close-mindedness and oppression.
Everyone should do what they want. Obviously the sexes have differences - men can't have babies and women are usually physically weaker and smaller. But in 90% of circumstances none of this matters, so I see no reason why in only one half of the population it should be 'acceptable' to look after children, or work in construction, or any of those typical gender-segregated things. The whole concept is archaic and really has no place in society anymore.
Ah... another sexist stereotype rears its head. I do believe that you have some enlightened ideas about equality in the workplace and women having the right to follow their dreams and meet their goals in life, the same as men. I give you credit for that. On the other hand, the denigration of the "housewife" is a time-honored means in Western society of devaluing women and their contributions. Historically--at least in middle-class society, esp. in and after the Victorian age--women have been told their place is in the home only to be further marginalized for their confinement. A no-win situation, to be sure, that has its basis in the ideological construction of women as "the weaker sex". And whether we want to admit it or not, this attitude is alive and well. Perhaps it's submerged, modified, even changed in some minds, but it is an attitude that is deep in our culture and therefore often goes unnoticed. However well-meaning your post, Rafiki, it betrays the double-standard and our enduring cultural disrespect for women. I know you didn't mean it, but there it is.
^ I didn't read his post like that; I read it as expressing a preference for his own life. We all have those.
Yes, you're right. The post was that as well. What I was getting at was a kind of sexist stereotyping that has been around for a long time and is therefore practically invisible. I know he didn't mean to be sexist. We do these things without thinking. All of us. Some other posters took issue with that part of his post and I was both agreeing with them and also trying to put the stereotype in some kind of historical perspective (perhaps unsuccessfully! That's always a possibility!).
I found his post very ignorant. He generalizes that all housewives are "uninteresting, tiresome, and small" and says that housewives don't do anything. He also apparently thinks that housewives just sit on the couch all day watching TV while their husbands work. My mom works. She has no hobbies aside from watching TV. She goes to work (a typical day job, nothing overly ambitious) and comes home. She turns on the TV and that's all she does until bed. Then rinse, repeat. I don't work, not in the traditional sense, but I have many hobbies and goals. I'm studying accounting while I try to decide my major. I write seriously on the side, read frequently, work out daily, play video games, and I have a lot to talk about all of the time. I also don't watch TV because I don't have cable television. But my mom isn't a better person than I am just because she has a job. I am also not a better person than she is because I'm "pursuing my dreams, meeting goals, and just generally doing something" and she isn't.
Are you arguing with my points or with: And to be clear, the thing I was saying was worth pointing out was in fact your point. I agree with you, jc. Completely. But I'm also trying to give Rafiki some benefit of the doubt by pointing out the deep cultural history behind such comments (read the first comment I made, the one that VM80 was replying to). But of course, as you say, just because something is cultrually ingrained doesn't mean it should go uncorrected or be tolerated, which is why I, among others (and you), have taken issue with the comment about housewives. Just wanted you to know: you and I are on the same page!
I actually meant to quote both you and VM80. I didn't realize the Reply With Quote only quotes the second post you click and not all.
Ok. I hope, though, that you also know that the "in a nutshell" refers to your comment. I'm with you all the way! Sorry to be overly sensitive. I just hate to be misunderstood, esp. on a topic like this. I suppose it's why I try to give other people the benefit of the doubt, when I can, in this less-than-perfect mode of communication. Cheers, jc!
Topeka Sal, I'm just very tired and apologize as well if I came off as cranky. I deleted my post; if you could delete the quotation of my post in your earlier response, it would be greatly appreciated. I didn't want to create such irrelevant drama on WF but I did. Please delete it so this thread doesn't get closed.
I'm sorry you deleted your post, jc. I liked your post. Very much. It's what I've been trying to say to you. My intention was to support you. Maybe when you're less tired you'll see that. But you're right. I've probably derailed the discussion quite enough. All the best!
No, no. My brain is just fried from runnings errands all day, doing accounting homework, completely revising a draft, etc. I didn't think you were being overly sensitive or defensive at all. I actually thought you were very pleasant and reasonable and I thank you for that.
