A woman's place is in the home...

Where did I say anything about me being the only one who did or didn't do anything.

The reason we keep going though this, is because you keep choosing to misinterpret my words.

As for me being woman... it is sad that you feel that to look at people equally regardless of gender or gender identities, one must be a woman...

 

Women are naturally and traditionally, the homemaker.

This does not mean that women that don't want to be homemakers are broken. Human society is more complex than a beehive -- everyone can find their place - or make it.

But women are naturally suited to be the homemaker. Women have better faculties for home tending, women have better faculties for child raising.
This does not mean that women are child-bearers or home tenders -- anymore than men having better physical strength makes all men warriors.


I don't get how anyone could say that women are not the natural home makers.
I don't get how anyone could dent that not all women fit that default setting though.

 

and thats where it all started to go wrong

 

Some women are not natural home makers... in fact some make the absolute worst homemakers in the world... Some make really good warriors as well...

Are people individuals or not is what it all comes down to.

Is there a set path for you based on the random factors of your birth?

Any individual can choose to fill any role they want. Each has strengths and weakness compared to others around them, but any gender bias is soley based on societal values or the rejections of the same...

 

You didn't Tom, I was letting you know, that i think you're really special.

No, i was just having a go at your stereo type of a powerful dominant woman. How is it equality if a woman must be dominant?

You don't know my great grand mother, but she was renowned for loving babies and loving looking after babies, nothing wrong with that. Just as there is nothing wrong with the woman you described, but if a woman must be the opposite of the stereo type, she is still be dictated by it, and that is NOT equality Tom.

So keep sitting on your high horse telling us what is right and wrong.

 

OOoooo, im a slob and can't cook, i do clean the house though...

 

From what i learned in history, that is exactly right, but it is also worth mentioning, it wasn't just what the women were able to achieve in their work that liberated them, it was the ability to earn their own wages.

 

Explain this to me... If I say I think something is right or wrong, this means I am sitting on my high horse... how?

As for 'my stereo type of a powerful dominant woman' where did I say all women are like that? Just because I don't agree with the stereotypical view of a woman as housewife, does not mean I think they should be looked at under another stereotype, and I did not suggest that anywhere.

This is, once again, you misinterpreting my words in order to create drama.

 

It's a joke thread, you don't need to say what you think is right, the fact it is a joke means the OP and others already agree with you about women (generally speaking). And my problem isn't you stating what you believe, it is the way you need to find some one to disagree with to explain your point, you are arrogant.

You just need any opportunity to be Mr. thoughtful.

You said "probably" Tom, it's close enough.

The drama is better than your whining.

 

I do agree. Particularly with the underlined statement.

But whether there is a set path based on random factors is kinda irrelevant, cause if that's the case, we have to be who we are no matter what, and this is still something that is generally-but-not-always true by nature.

 

Well, the best I can suggest for you then is to put me on ignore, becuase your constant whining about me and your little attacks are just making you look like a very petty person.

However, if it does make you feel better about yourself, please feel free.

 

I thought i said i like the drama? why would i put you on ignore?

And Tom, I don't mind if people here find my or this petty, i don't derive any of my self esteem from HF's, i assure you.

Again, i don't derive my self esteem from what people on HF's think. Although i must say, i often enjoy my writing, although you're so full of shit, arguing with you doesn't produce very intelligent results.

Having said that, I am enjoying the drama as i said, and although i wish you no harm, I do not like you.

 

We established that many threads ago. If you somehow are worried that I wasn't aware of it, rest assured, I do.

As does everyone else seems you keep hijacking threads to point it out.

 

It takes two to tango, perhaps it is time for some self reflection?

 

Yes, we have to be who we are, but who we are is not dependant on our gender. Hell, even gender isn't dependant on gender... lol

The second part of the bolded part baffles me a bit as to what you mean.

By nature, we are just animals... We have the ability to make concious choices that are not based on animal instinct... that is what seperates us from the rest of the animals. That ability to choose, is unlimited in scope.

The only thing telling us that one gender is better suited for one role over another (beyond the physical reproduction ones), is what we tell ourselves.

 

Unfortunately, you have been trying to tango with someone who has been sitting down having a discussion.

So all that has happened is that you've danced around by yourself while the actual coversation continued in spite of you.

 

Wtf, hey if a woman likes to do what the man traditionaly does thats cool...its not like life is a war and you need the everyone doing ONLY what they were meant to do. even if people have strong points there is always gonna be people who like trying new things... tradition is for people who gave up cause someone along the line beat them to the finish line...its not for the old to decide whats best its what the new have to say. being born first isnt an accomplishment.

the only thing that says you are MEANT to do something is tradition. even if its starting anew. you cant be raised to do what your supposed to do, that would make your elders "gods". and like I said being born first is no accomplishment.

 

This.....

 

It was poorly worded. I just got outta school for the semester and I am celebrating by not sleeping =P I had trouble understanding what I meant.


What I mean is that whereas there are nature-set gender roles in some animal's nature -- for humans, it's more of a rule (or role =P) of thumb. We are very individualistic creatures, and almost nothing is true for all humans - even things that are true for the general population.

There is much purpose in the role for women and men, that is very clear if you look at early man -- but there is just as much purpose for all the very many exceptions to these roles.

And this remains true whether you believe that we have the ability to carve our own paths -- or whether you believe that thought at humans' level of consciousness comes with the illusion of choice.

 

Thank you for the replies.

As most of you have figured out the thread was posted in the spirit of livening things up here.

So instead of making a thread bitching about how lame it is here, I decided to take some action.

That being said, I do believe what I posted.

If you do not believe like that, it is fine. Nothing wrong with a difference of opinion.

The idea that the gender rolls have changed is a North American and European idea. (and a short list of countries that try to blindly follow and think like the Americans and Europeans).

Most of the rest of the world knows the traditional roles are correct.


Anyone who thinks differently has not gone out into the world to see what it is like.

I have no problem being the provider and I could do that job well.

I think Men should be Men and women should be women.