Does it change when women get to their 30's?

[betamanlet]

I actually do agree that things are pretty good now for women and in some areas men are getting hard-done-by. Although, statistically women still get paid less for doing the same jobs as men. We pay more for the same products - like deodorant etc! Women still have a hard time breaking through the glass ceiling in work, which may account for the women who do make it to the top often being complete hard-line b***chs because they have to be that way, otherwise they'd be trampled over.

 

In all honesty I think that the issue of children will always make things difficult - career woman wants to keep career and have children, either finds after having children that she wants to stay home and watch them grow up and be a mom, or finds that raising children and working is all too stressful and her work suffers.

 

The abortion issue is a very tricky one. I can't imagine desperately wanting an abortion, but the father of the child wanting me to keep the child. Because he doesn't have to go through the physical things, doesn't have to carry an unwanted child for 9 months and go through the pain of giving birth, it's a difficult situation because ultimately we should all have the right to make decisions about our own bodies, and for those 9 months that child is that woman's body. I see your point totally, it must be heartbreaking for some guys to find out that they've no say in whether their child lives or dies.

 

I also think the current system where 'children should stay with their mother's' standard post-divorce is totally unfair on men.

 

You may remember this female moutain-climber who was climbing Everest or some such and died en route, as many mountaineers do. And there was an outcry, because she was a mother. She was labelled selfish for pursuing such a thing, that she'd left her children without a mother. But no one says this of men who climb mountains or enlist in the army 'how selfish of you, if you die you will leave your children without a father'. So, we all still have some ingrained thinking about women's role in society - which in fact, might not be a bad thing, again, I'm for equality, but with a balance of celebrating each sex's differences and qualities within those differences.

 

Men and women are not the same hormonally, strength-wise and even how we use our brains. Personally I don't like this homogonisation of the sexes. Men's good qualities should be celebrated as should women's without a woman trying to be a man or a man try to be a woman. I don't want a man who is essentially a woman with a penis, and yet at the same time, some of the things that have changed are good, one instance, it is good that men are stepping up to the plate a bit more with childcare and housework etc. since many households have both partners working, so that you don't have women working and doing all that stuff as well with no help from her other half.

 

I do feel things have swung perhaps too far on the other side in terms of men being de-mannified if you like, having to be more like women, which I don't think is a good thing. Also in terms of the many threads on here about how difficult the dating world is, I think a lot of that has to do with men's confusion with their place in the world right now. I think this period in history, in the western world is a difficult time for men and I'm guessing that things may swing back the other way, as there will eventually be a backlash against any disparity.

 

The rate of suicide in young men is much higher than for women, and I wonder sometimes if this confusion about what it is to be a man is part of the cause.

I agree with almost everything you say, except the wage gender gap. it is a myth. They come up with it by averaging all salaries of all people, so you are comparing a male lawyer who works 90 hours a week to a part time secretary. If anything, in large US cities, young women (30 and under) actually get paid more than young men, until the age of 30, which is when they start quitting or switiching to part time.

 

I'm not sure why the male suicide rate is higher, actually it's more the successful suicide rate, women are more likley to attempt suicide, but more of a cry out for help, whereas a guy just wants to die. I think it's because men have fewer options and choices in life. If things went horribly wrong in my career, and I had my massive student loans and was a female, at least it's an option on the table I could marry a wealthy guy. But as a guy, i don't have that option, so I have no choice but to work my butt off until I repay my loans.

Edited January 8, 2010 by betamanlet

[paddington bear]

I'm not sure why the male suicide rate is higher, actually it's more the successful suicide rate, women are more likley to attempt suicide, but more of a cry out for help, whereas a guy just wants to die. I think it's because men have fewer options and choices in life. If things went horribly wrong in my career, and I had my massive student loans and was a female, at least it's an option on the table I could marry a wealthy guy. But as a guy, i don't have that option, so I have no choice but to work my butt off until I repay my loans.

 

I think this also falls under the category of 'unfair expectations of men' made by men themselves, and women too probably. In your example if a guy is struggling financially, was in a miserable job, was say, single and lonely, stressed and his life going out of control, that man is expected to man-up, and sort himself out.

 

Whereas (outside of the marrying a rich guy option - I've been poverty-stricken for years and can't just 'find' a rich guy to marry like that, nor would I want to take that option just for the sake of financial security) women are nurtured more with emotional support when their lives go wrong and men feel like they have to sort themselves out, or be a provider and don't ask for that emotional support, or indeed mention anything sometimes about their bad situation. I think when things go wrong, men feel failure much more acutely than women do and it has a deeper impact, so it all builds up inside. In this instance, I feel the acceptance of men being the emotional, equally vulnerable creatures that they are, is a good thing.

[meerkat stew]

Thank you...

 

Yes it is unfair...because until the women's rights movement began women did not have the vote, women were second class citizens, women were not given the same education as men or the rights and knowledge to become inventors, great artists and so on.

 

Let me fix this for you, until very recently in human history, only the upper classes had the vote, 95-98% of ALL people were second class citizens due to a tiny aristocracy or monarchial feudal government, which held all the power, a tiny middle class, and a vast working or lower class. Education and literacy, for male or female, was almost strictly reserved to the tiny upper class.

 

Contrary to what you post, great artists and inventors do not become so due to "rights" or "knowledge," but due to an insatiable innate drive to create inventions or art. Historically, it just so happens that men possessed more of that drive than women, or perhaps you would like to list some great female inventors or artists of the last 40 years? The women's movement had little if anything to do with the movement of women into the workplace and politics. Technology, specifically progressive factors related to the industrial revolution did.

 

Fact is, that men and women together protected the reproductive capacity of women for most of human history due to SURVIVAL factors, not due to some made-up ongoing power struggle. The dependence on women to perpetuate a species that had a tenuous grasp on surviving the enviroment demanded they be shielded and protected from the world. I know it doesn't look like this in movies and television, but that's because media focuses exclusively on the 5% (or less) of the past that involved monarchs and aristocrats, not the 95% of the past involving the day-to-day lives of ordinary people for which survival itself was a constant struggle and lifespans were low.

 

And this still goes on today outside of the Western World...

 

and as such is completely irrelevant to the Western World where we live and thus completely irrelevant to our discussion.

 

...just look at the nightmare that Margaret Thatcher was).

 

Oh... all becomes clear :lmao:

 

Please describe some of the "atrocities" associated with the Thatcher "nightmare." I know only a little about the mass pogroms and various genocides perpetuated by Ms. Thatcher, and am vaguely aware of her collaboration with Pol Pot in Cambodia, but am some shaky on the details. Please enlighten me.

 

I am just pointing out that over the course of history when women could not, and were not allowed to hold any kind of positions of power or influence and were not educated to that same degree as men, that, much of the fall-out from history is due to the actions of men because it could not be any other way at that point in time.

 

And I am just pointing out that over the course of history, only a tiny percentage of ANYONE held any position of power or influence, that for most of history in the West, education has been reserved to the aristocracy and the priesthood, groups comprising a TINY percentage of the population. For men, the ONLY way to obtain any power if not an aristocrat was to fight and kill at war. For most men, that was the ONLY opportunity. And ironically, among the aristocracy, women WERE powerful, WERE educated, MUCH moreso than the non-aristocratic man was.

 

The perpetuation of the straw man of some centuries of women as victims is the most egregious fallacious LIE of the women's movement because during the time in question, almost EVERYONE was downtrodden, regardless of gender. That is the true nature of human history pre industrial revolution, nasty, brutish and short. In a historical context, the transition to a more egalitarian, equal way of life between the sexes has occured with lightning speed, and could likely not have occured any faster without immense social upheaval. The paradigm shift has caused crisis level upheaval as it is, and may not have been capable of moving one bit faster without collapse.

 

Ultimately, and paradoxically it was war itself that started the women's rights movement,

 

Yes, I know the women's movement likes to portray women being begrudgingly conscripted to do Rosie the Riveter jobs during WWII by men who resented the loss of patriarchal control, what hogwash, and it is...

 

Wrong, it was the post war economic boom that created enough jobs to allow women to enter the workplace without impoverishing traditional core family units in a pre Great Society welfare state environment. Until economy creates jobs, you can't just pour millions of job seekers into an economy and maintain stability, especially in a social environment without safety nets. The very historical second that the U.S. economy was large enough to support it, and social safety nets were in place, MEN pulled women into the economy with both hands, for a couple of decades in a more menial, more administrative capacity, and then the very historical second the economy could handle more, MEN pulled women into the economy thoroughly, in every capacity. The economy needed labor and the Cold War was raging, so it wasn't any kind of male altruism that caused this, but simple economic need.

 

There was no BATTLE of women to enter the U.S. workplace, it happened naurally the very second that it was economically feasible. The women's movement likes to portray a patriarchy of men standing and barring the door from women, when in actuality, the patriarchy, for reasons of the Cold War among others, banged the door in itself and then DRAGGED women into the workplace as fast as it could. You've been told many lies by the women's movement. What sounds more true, what you have heard, or what I have just described?

 

The pill allowed women to not have child after child thus keeping them tied to the home and having children, it allowed them the choice not to do that if they so wished. Without the pill and other forms of effective contraception I wonder where women would be today in terms of equality

 

Ah the pill, thank goodness for the woman who invented it, for the female owned and run company that marketed it, for the female legislature that legalized its use, and most of all for the predominately female Supreme Court that made abortion legal. Thank goodness for all those women who were instrumental in the struggle to obtain women's reproductive rights.

 

Women have technology, the industrial revolution, the post WWII economic boom, the Cold War, and capitalism, all institutions created and run by men, to thank for the equality they enjoy today. Notice the ABSENCE of the women's movement or feminism in this list. Those institutions could not have even begun to come to be or to be successful IN ANY WAY without women. So we are all responsible and liable for the progress of history. We are all in this together, contrary to the abominable politicized lies that special interests in the guise of the women's movement have told you. They want nothing other than your vote, and will stoop to any dishonest level to get it.

 

The gender wars have a lie at their very core, and that lie has been perpetuated by political interests associated with the so-called women's movement.

Edited January 9, 2010 by meerkat stew

[carhill]

Ah the pill, thank goodness for the woman who invented it, for the female owned and run company that marketed it, for the female legislature that legalized its use, and most of all for the predominately female Supreme Court that made abortion legal. Thank goodness for all those women who were instrumental in the struggle to obtain women's reproductive rights.

 

Off-topic but that paragraph sent me on fascinating trip through history. Who would have thought an Austrian male scientist working in Mexico with wild yams would come up with something that changed the reproductive world, with, later, two pivotal women, one a life-long advocate of birth control, another a wealthy heiress, coming together with other male scientists to help bring it to fruition.

 

Fascinating stuff and truly an example of men and women working together towards a common goal, one long-awaited by many women.

[meerkat stew]

Off-topic but that paragraph sent me on fascinating trip through history. Who would have thought an Austrian male scientist working in Mexico with wild yams would come up with something that changed the reproductive world, with, later, two pivotal women, one a life-long advocate of birth control, another a wealthy heiress, coming together with other male scientists to help bring it to fruition.

 

Fascinating stuff and truly an example of men and women working together towards a common goal, one long-awaited by many women.

 

I did not know that, but it does highlight the point that as far as history and human achievements... and foibles go, we are all in it together, so I will forego debating the politicized romanticizing of Sanger's role in the social progress in the interests of gender harmony.

[carhill]

I found most reports of Sanger's role to be overly-romanticized, but she was a working medical professional and did apparently gain political power of sorts over time, enough to influence people of wealth and power. Not a bad life's work. Apparently she was also a true 'bad girl', if anecdotes of her personal life can be believed. Perhaps not coincidentally, her most known work took place after 30 and she lived into her 80's.

[cognac]

I dare anyone to compare and contrast woman owned business' or fields dominated by women with male-centered business.

 

Look at how quickly and successful computers are advancing, an almost exclusively male dominated industry. Every minute that passes computers are being improved , made less expensive with more capabilities. Meanwhile most woman owned companies require heavy government assistance because they collapse under their own incompetence and stagnation.

 

That's not to say i'm a capitalist by the way, I consider myself socialist (a right wing socialist), but in this context the comparison is valid. "Equality" especially in gender, punishes excellence and rationality , and rewards retardation and stagnation, all in order to pursue some abstract, meaningless , socially constructed concept such as "Equality" . It's a testament to how pointless and feminized our society has become when in schools endless amounts of money are thrown away in "Special need" classes for kids who are simply born dumb and should be going to technical school (which by the way there is no shame in, we're all different) , while truly gifted children are either left to fend for themselves or put in classes with such duds preventing them from reaching their potential.

[cognac]

Abortion is also not a "reproductive right". Simply because the fetus is inside of your body, doesn't mean it's something you can throw away like an old rubber you find in the back of your car. The arguments for abortion, like "its my body" or "the infant can't survive on its own so it's not human" have so many loopholes that I doubt we want to get into them here on the dating forum.

 

The only case for abortion really is in cases of severe mental retardation or cases where the infants life will be so pointless (IE, severe deformities) and simply a huge burden for society. Being put up for adoption, does not fall under this category, ask an adopted kid! If a woman ever aborted my child with exception of maybe 1 or 2 situations where it may be justified, I will say this with all seriousness: I would abort her.

[burning 4 revenge]

Abortion is also not a "reproductive right". Simply because the fetus is inside of your body, doesn't mean it's something you can throw away like an old rubber you find in the back of your car. The arguments for abortion, like "its my body" or "the infant can't survive on its own so it's not human" have so many loopholes that I doubt we want to get into them here on the dating forum.

 

The only case for abortion really is in cases of severe mental retardation or cases where the infants life will be so pointless (IE, severe deformities) and simply a huge burden for society. Being put up for adoption, does not fall under this category, ask an adopted kid! If a woman ever aborted my child with exception of maybe 1 or 2 situations where it may be justified, I will say this with all seriousness: I would abort her.

Thats because you have viscera

[burning 4 revenge]

I dare anyone to compare and contrast woman owned business' or fields dominated by women with male-centered business.

 

Look at how quickly and successful computers are advancing, an almost exclusively male dominated industry. Every minute that passes computers are being improved , made less expensive with more capabilities. Meanwhile most woman owned companies require heavy government assistance because they collapse under their own incompetence and stagnation.

 

That's not to say i'm a capitalist by the way, I consider myself socialist (a right wing socialist), but in this context the comparison is valid. "Equality" especially in gender, punishes excellence and rationality , and rewards retardation and stagnation, all in order to pursue some abstract, meaningless , socially constructed concept such as "Equality" . It's a testament to how pointless and feminized our society has become when in schools endless amounts of money are thrown away in "Special need" classes for kids who are simply born dumb and should be going to technical school (which by the way there is no shame in, we're all different) , while truly gifted children are either left to fend for themselves or put in classes with such duds preventing them from reaching their potential.

 

Im seeing more and more "right wing socialists" all over the net these days. I really don't know what to make of it, but I can see the allure (provided its not racist)

[SadandConfusedWA]

I dare anyone to compare and contrast woman owned business' or fields dominated by women with male-centered business.

 

Look at how quickly and successful computers are advancing, an almost exclusively male dominated industry. Every minute that passes computers are being improved , made less expensive with more capabilities. Meanwhile most woman owned companies require heavy government assistance because they collapse under their own incompetence and stagnation.

 

That's not to say i'm a capitalist by the way, I consider myself socialist (a right wing socialist), but in this context the comparison is valid. "Equality" especially in gender, punishes excellence and rationality , and rewards retardation and stagnation, all in order to pursue some abstract, meaningless , socially constructed concept such as "Equality" . It's a testament to how pointless and feminized our society has become when in schools endless amounts of money are thrown away in "Special need" classes for kids who are simply born dumb and should be going to technical school (which by the way there is no shame in, we're all different) , while truly gifted children are either left to fend for themselves or put in classes with such duds preventing them from reaching their potential.

 

Wow, just wow

 

This post clearly displays your thought process and is enough of a reason why you are single and shall remain single forever.

[Tony]

This thread started getting wacky after about 20 or so posts. It's getting tired now, people are veering off topic, getting mean, etc. Let's say that after more than 500 responses we've handled the subject nicely and close it up. Thank you for participating.