DexMSR said:

Jan....sit back...and read this post...read its content..and you SHOULD see that this is NOT about a women catering to, serving, or being a slave for the man...it is about how women do not nurture their man in relationships like it once was. I never said that it should not be BOTH WAYS, on the contrary all I have ever stated is that if a woman is being the inherent nurture and caregiver to her man, it should and ONLY SHOULD be under the pretenses that she is ALSO being taken care of as a woman should be....Damn girl...stop posting with your emotions and read!

Whap!

DexMSR said:

"Like it once was" That seems like an illusion to me. What time in history was this? Before the feminist movement a lot of women thought they were inferior to men

You singled out women, which is unfair. There a plenty of men who are not taking care of their women. Moreso than the other way around

I think the important thing being discussed in this thread is that people in relationships (in the U.S. at least) forget to nuture and care for one another, male and female.

The U.S. culture is so caught up in "me me me" all the time that we don't realize how self-centered we can be. I think when people look back to the 50's as "the good ole days", they are wishing for a less egotisical, more communal and caring society. The fifties ideal is much different than the fifties reality, so a solution would not involve going backwards to the reality of that time, but just using the ideal to help pinpoint what is missing from our culture today. What it comes down to is showing those you love that you love them, being conscious of doing the small things that mean a lot, and caring for other people as much as you care for yourself. As independent as people like to act in the U.S., we couldn't survive without others and it's important for us to recognize and respect that, and to honor and cherish those we love.

If you don't get it after this...you never will...and still be alone!

Whap!

DexMSR said:

That's not what you said. That's what someone else said. You singled out American women. You said "I think I will choose to not have an American woman in my midst when it is all said and done because they just are not (NOT ALL) fine tuned anymore as to what it means to nurture their man. This thread is great and has opened my eyes to alot, but I am pretty much done"

You began this singling out American women, when you really need to discuss your experiences only. You don't know every American woman or how she's like in her relationships. Are you perfect? Where's your pedestal?

and fyi, I'm not alone...

DexMSR said:

Here U go Jan...and just a testament to you not reading this thread....Carry On!

DexMSR said:

I read that too. Being the "man of the house" seems like an issue of low self-esteem. If some men stopped feeling like they needed to be in charge, there wouldn't be an issue. Utter bullshit. You said you were not attempting to objectify the woman's role, but you did just that. What's wrong with saying "American men and women." You're insinuating relationships aren't as they should be because of the American woman. You're making women the blame here. You're pointing fingers. Maybe this thread was only meant for men to read. How can you seriously expect a woman to not be offended by this?

Janfriend said:

This thread has come full circle on more than ONE occasion so if some cannot grasp its meaning or objective....I cannot apologize for there mental capacities... Nor will I.

DexMSR said:

Isn't that wonderful how you resort to insulting someone mental capacity You can't even accept that you have offended someone

Janfriend said:

I stand by my quote and if that offended your or this thread offended you, it must be that you are one of two things: 1. It doesn't apply to you..or 2. It does and you don't know how to fix it because you can't grasp it.

Ok bye!

DexMSR said:

...and you must be one of these things: 1. Too old fashioned to grasp the reality of today's world. 2. Someone who never listens to women and therefore has no cluse to what life is truly like in this society or 3. Believes that there are traditionally femal roles and females should be superwomen and maintain those roles while having a career

You actually mentioned cooking and cleaning in this thread

"And in these countries...these women were glad to do the tasks for the entire household. They cooked, cleaned, and treated us like every man wishes he could be treated. They didn't seem unhappy, I didn't see any women platforming to burn bras and champion change there. They were all more than happy to do what they did. I had a date with one woman and she brought her family over to meet me, and her "Aunt" went into the kitchen immediately and cleaned it up and made drinks for everyone in my condo! They felt comfortable doing it for "some" reason right"

They felt comfortable because they still feel the man is above them. That's the real reason
[Edited 5/18/05 16:30pm]

Janfriend, you raised some good points but it doesn't look like DexMSR wants to go any further. And even if you were 'alone' there's nothing wrong with that.

JackieBlue said:

No Worries...she's only choosing to see what she wants to see...I have addressed every angle to which see just can't grasp it....it's all good. I have no desire to change the world...just see that the world changes...be it one open mind at a time...

JackieBlue said:

Unfortunately, he is very one-sided on this subject

Rhondab said:

DexMSR said:

Like I said, I want nothing to do with females who feel the need to cater to their men, or males who feel the need protect their women. I've got no use for such strict gender roles. I don't need a man (or woman for that matter) to look after me, and I certainly will not do something a man can damn well do himself. And to address your assumption: A) No, I'm not "alone" and B) Would it really be the end of the world if I was? Anyone, male or female, who thinks they have to be in a relationship in order to be happy or complete has their own issues they need to deal with. Solitude is not always a bad thing.

And you've yet to answer my question. What's your prescription for same sex relationships? For them to function, must the couple decide who will be the "woman" and who the "man"? The strict male/female dynamic you're advocating does work for some, it's true. But there's too much variety in human beings for it to be the ideal solution for everybody.

Janfriend said:

Each individual must contribute to the relationship, taking on an equal share of the responsibilities. As an example, the person who is the better cook or enjoys it more should be the one preparing meals, or the duty should be shared, but not automatically relegated to "women's work".

meow85 said:

I "AGREE"!!

But no matter how you cut it, there "are" roles that both men and women play. Just like men do "most" major household chores (not saying a woman can't or won't) there are tasks that most women do in a relationship. And women will nurture their children and do what they must to be that matriarchal figure; all I 'm saying is men enjoy that nurturing and care-giving aspect of a woman's nature. I agree that these roles are not etched in stone. I'm simply implying men miss this aspect of a woman's nature.

As for "same-sex"....why would I examine something I have never engaged in...never will...and quite simply do not understand? I have no need to understand it, but I accept it as an exercise in "free-will" and respect any path a person walks whether I agree with it or not.

I have no man to stand behind..... HA.....



Oh wait that is kinda lame of me isn't it.....

damosbeautifulgrlndaworld said:

Whap!

DexMSR said:

DexMSR said:

Women are no more better nurturers than men. We just live in a wacked society that doesn't allow men to be the nurturers they should be

There are no such thing as "roles." They only exist in your life if you want them to exist. Most people in this world are brainwashed by their own society and buy into the bullshit that what is in between their legs determines their "place" or "role" in this world

Janfriend said:

Jan - are you one of those people who think men and women are the same?

Fleshofmyflesh said:

No better nurtures than men? Well for the simple fact that it is the woman that carries the child in her womb for those nine months and is directly responsible for that childs "early" development makes you the nurturer. The fact that breastfeeding your child in order for him/her to get those essential early nutrients makes you the nurturer and natural caregiver for that child. Unless you were a test tube baby and never ever breastfed, you may have an argument, but then when you cried as a child who did you most likely cry for....Mommy! Daddy's do have a role in this and yes it is a role whether you like it or not. And Men and Women are not the same and never can or will be.

Now if you are arguing from a career standpoint or anything not natural, then yes...they should be the same, but in any other case...we are not.

Whap!

THEY P M S TOO DAMM MUCH !!!!!

SIRTONY said:

But they all do that don't they...or is that an American thang...LOL

Fleshofmyflesh said:

In regards to what you bolded, yes. Whether it be a matter of gender or race, society makes us believe we are more different than we actually are. The reason women are seen a better nuturers is because of the lack of opportunity given to men to be the nuturer. From birth, females are given dolls to play with and cuddle (which is evil). They are implanted with the idea that they will be mothers and are encouraged to practice at an early age. They are encouraged to gather around when a new baby visits, etc. Males are not encouraged to handle or care for children. These people grow up believing they are naturally predisposed this way, when in reality, they are taught this. The male is taught to be the provider and the female is taught to be the caregiver. Anything taught can be untaught. Most women are so convinced this is their job, they won't allow the man to do it. There are natural hormonal and physical differences between men and women, being a nurturer is not one of them

To what Dex said...there are people on this very site who will argue that carrying a child for 9 months doesn't make you a nurturer, it makes you an incubator. I actually read someone equal it to being a host for a parasite. Carrying a child doesn't make you anymore proned to bonding or caring for it. Breastfeeding doesn't mean shit. There are plenty of women who can not lactate or choose not to breastfeed. It's irrelevent. I know men who are stay at home fathers. I know single fathers. I know a man who raised his child from birth because the mother was not a nurturer at all and a deadbeat. Popping out a baby doesn't mean you're naturally more capable. That's a bullshit excuse for men who don't want to nuture and were never taught to

why don't we all just settle down and have some nice, homemade cookies??

Janfriend said:

They are really looking for a good woman to nurture their cause!!

LOL....she just does not get it....

....and alone!

DexMSR said:

We're obviously coming at this from hugely different perspectives. I'm coming at it from the viewpoint of, until the day he died, my dad being the "nurturer" -a stay at home dad, and my mom being the "provider" -working full time.


As for same sex couples, being gay's no more an "exerice in free will" than being straight is, but that's for another thread. I used same-sex couples as the most obvious (of a list of many!) kinds of couple where your nurturer/provider dynamic simply will not work the way you desribe it. Even for a lot of straight couples it wouldn't work out that way.

DexMSR said:

Actually, my sister and I both cried for "Daddy" when we needed a parent. "Mommy" was always at work, and it wasn't odd or abnormal to us. We've hardly come out of our childhoods horribly scarred or traumatized because of it either.