_ap_ufes{"success":true,"siteUrl":"freetheanimal.com","urls":{"Home":"http://freetheanimal.com","Category":"http://freetheanimal.com/blog-admin","Archive":"http://freetheanimal.com/2014/07","Post":"http://freetheanimal.com/2014/07/freetheanimal-facebook-housekeeping.html","Page":"http://freetheanimal.com/my-california-gold-country-and-cabo-san-lucas-vacation-rentals","Nav_menu_item":"http://freetheanimal.com/2014/03/25906.html","Content_ad_widget":"http://freetheanimal.com/?content_ad_widget=widget-2-5x118"}}_ap_ufee

The Plight of the Alpha Female: Kay Hymowitz

Go figure. Males and females have different junk and it's not superficial.

Duh.

Update. Smart women should and have already begun to dominate the comment thread. Smart, accomplished women hate certain other women far more than some of the worst men. Duh, again. Quite a cool couple of posts from Judgybitch that my forever friend Ladysadie put up:

Attention middle class men: please stop inventing and producing all the useful shit we need and just die already.

I don’t care how much you like it. Get out of the kitchen, bitch!

My takeaway? My grandmothers, both, wielded amazing social power and I'll never be half the man they were, as women. They never worked a "real job" a day in their lives. Bot lived into their 80s and both were revered by all males and females alike.

Comments

  1. I have never understood why we continue to gnash-about this subject. Women are such whiners when it comes to equality, but for those women who continue to whine, it’s mainly a choice (though I have made it work) – 60-80 hours/week to work on a career (no, 40 hours a week does not cut it nor does leaving every day at 5:00pm or calling in sick when your child has the flu) or raise some kids – you rarely can have both. Telecommuting has enabled me to continue working at the pace I worked pre-kids; without that, I’d choose to stay home.

    In the end, I frankly don’t think many women want true equality – I’m guessing they just want the title and pay and call it a day.

  2. ladysadie1 says:

    We are not equal!!! What? Seriously???

    This… http://judgybitch.com/2013/02/04/attention-middle-class-men-please-stop-inventing-and-producing-all-the-useful-shit-we-need-and-just-die-already/

    and this: http://judgybitch.com/2013/01/23/i-dont-care-how-much-you-like-it-get-out-of-the-kitchen-bitch/

    The whole thing can be summed up like this: “[Men,] …You need to drag that women out of the kitchen and send her back to work, no matter how much she protests. This is about EQUALITY. Happiness? That’s for oppressed victims of the patriarchy.”

    Yeah, and I WISH some man would take on this shitty STEM job that I have and let me stay in the kitchen. I don’t really want equality. The woman in being interviewed in the video says “We wouldn’t even be having this discussion 30 or 40 years ago.” *No Shit* That’s back when women actually had a shot at staying home and caring for their families and men could find jobs that pay a family wage. Now, happy or not, women MUST be in the workplace in order for their family’s basic needs to be met.

    Why is this continuously discussed? Most of intelligent and intellectually honest people that I know are already aware that (DUH) women are happier at home caring for their children and letting their husband lead.

    • You go Sadie! We have let the feministas / government / lack of strong men / taxes, etc. take over and now all women are expected to work at the same pace and levels as men when in reality not many want it! Now they’re pushing for women in combat – brother.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Thanks, Shelley – I think those “judgybitch links I provided are right up your alley, because I am a bit of a judgy bitch and I think you might be one too, sista! xoxo

      • You’re right, though this judgy bitch has been trying to understand others who obviously do not think/feel the way we do – not in a COEXIST sticker kind of way, but more of an understanding of WHY people think the way they do; it’s very perplexing at times because things seem so logical to me…

        I tend to be quite different than a majority of women since I’d probably enjoy your shitty STEM job and generally hate baking and anything having to do with crafts. And yet even I realize that there are limits to my upward mobility in the workforce for many reasons……in particular, one like, I love the flowered wrenches on judgybitch! (as I’m sure my husband and any other worthy man would absolutely cringe and tell me to take it out of the garage – it most certainly does not belong in a garage!).

    • “The problem is was and always will be global capitalism, which largely promoted / skewed the feminist movement to benefit corporate interests.”

      That’s just another stooge, really.

      There are still plenty of 2-parent families that manage to live within the means of one income. Mine did it when we were kids, so did both of my grandparents, and my dad’s family was 7 kids, new immigrants and he was a lowly bookkeeper at an accountancy firm.

      For our part, we had a HUGE garden, chickens (eggs and the broilers once per year), rabbits that bread like rabbits. You get the drill. My mom made a fair amount of our clothes, stuff got handed down, etc. etc. Going out to eat, ever, anywhere, was quite a treat.

      At root, it’s that people have developed an appetite for lots of stuff. Corporations aren’t forcing it on them. This is a cause effect reversal. Products and services are produced when there is demand for them.

      • It’s the result of choices. Even in urban areas, people used to scrape by in tiny apartments, they’d even have extended family living in them.

        We lived just outside of town suburban area, but with larger lots, dad drove into work every day and we went to school in town. It was nothing at all like being in rural America. Still, there is quite a lot of rural America where this is possible.

        I’ve worked and had a business in personal, family, small business financial consulting for 20 years. I would have no problem showing just about any family how to cut their yearly expenses in half or more, and I could do it in 15 minutes. When you actually start accounting for everything, you find that most families, if they had to, could easy live on 30-40% of what they do now. Life is not going to be as flashy by any means. On the other hand, they’ll spend a lot more time together.

        Not saying it’s gonna happen. That cat’s out of the bag, but it is entirely possible for most people if they were to choose to live that way, or had no other choice.

      • “Likely it occurred naturally (the first scenario) and there is no grand conspiracy, we are observing natural evolution of human society and what occurs post technological/industrial revolution. Here we are.”

        Good on ya. Exactly right. There’s no wizard of oz.

        I am seeing a trend amongst the younger generation I’m exposed to of less material interests, more frugality, so on. I dunno, but perhaps once you realize there’s about 1.5 billion different widgets someone wants to sell you, you realize it’s probably all crap.

        I advocate to people that they live in houses just big enough, have cars just big enough—buy used, pay them off, drive them into the ground. Save money to travel and see the world over their lifetimes.

        Above all, don’t become a custodian for a bunch of stuff.

      • Galina L says:

        At some point I got interested to find out when the life in a Western World became more or less like it is now. It looks like the answer is – after 1914. The whole life-style started to change in a Western World with industrialization, the mass exodus began from small traditional villages to the fast growing big cities, behavioral norms became different because social pressure lessened in a big city,and the influence of church diminished. Goods became mass-produced, chipper, but the demand for factories workers grew, commercial advertising appeared, mass-culture like movies, movie-stars watching ,comics books became the entertainment industry . During World War I many women began to work outside of their homes not only like maids and midwives, but on factories, in sales, started to drive cars, first time in centuries dress-code for women got changed – much shorter skirts, short hear cuts, raincoats and rubber boots. Coco Chanel was the famous pioneer of promoting that changed dress-stile. Boy-like thin female body came into fashion probably the first time in a history.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        There is something in the news this week about France changing the laws so that women are permitted legally to wear trousers. Of course women have been wearing them for a long time, but it was outlawed 200 (approx.) years ago. So it was illegal but done anyway. Now it’ll be legal.

      • A mom at home says:

        I am a real world example. I live in NYC – one of the highest cost of living places in the US. My husband and I kept our expenses low (that would be rent mainly), saved money, didn’t go out a ton or travel every few weeks like friends did. We bought a 2 family house (one rental unit, one for us) here when we were under 30 – our best investment ever. We have 2 kids and have lived on his income alone for most of the past 11 years. We still don’t buy a ton of stuff, we don’t have cable or smart phones. At times it’s a little boring being at home but NO WAY was I paying a nanny to raise my kids while I worked a shit job in social services. We are very happy this way. I always find it amusing when friends say they can’t afford to buy a house/apt but they also go to Hawaii and Vegas every year and go to everybody’s wedding everywhere. The key for us was, that as his income increased, we did not look at that extra as spending money, we generally saved it.

      • A mom at home says:

        Oh, and we’ve had the same 14 year old car for 10 years and lived in under 1000 sf until recently. Plus enjoyed travel to Greece, Spain, France, but less than once a year.

      • Thanks, A mom at home:

        It is all about the choices we make. And people must be aware: once you get married and if you pool finances (I do not recommend that—see comment to sexy bear just posted) it becomes a more difficult problem because one may not be as financially savvy, conservative or frugal as the other. Creates conflict and conflict has an adverse effect on finances as well.

        Bea was the frugal saver. I made more than enough money to compensate for my “drunken sailor” ways ($800 was the most I ever spent on a bottle of wine, though). But I’ve come around. I really don’t want to work more to make more to spend more.

        I want to work for free or, work very efficiently for big bucks in intense project oriented things that last a few months as the most.

    • I don’t buy any of that religion social glue nonsense wooo. Look up any stats you want and atheists are almost always the most socially responsible (crime, divorce, fidelity—you name it).

      OK, here, just the fist link in a google search for divorce stats:

      http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistfamiliesmarriage/a/AtheistsDivorce.htm

      The Bible belt has the highest.

      • “This is a red herring.”

        No, it’s not. You are mis-assigning the cause (which is actually implicit in your argument—how can this be the cause of atheism is atheists are smart and educated?).

        The cause is religion itself. It’s a fantasy Mother Goose story with life as dress rehearsal with none of these so-called dire consequences people can actually see. It’s religion that has created the zombies. Sure, this worked back in the day when churches had real power. It was a primitive means of social organization that has not scaled well to more modern times.

        The church is not weak as social cohesion because of atheism. The church is weak because it has crap for ideas and more and more people recognize it. The problem is that the church won’t come clean. They potentially could: hey, folks, this man-in-sky stuff is all metaphorical, so you’re off the hook in that regard. However, we still have some time-tested good ideas for how to be and raise a good family.

        Some of the more liberal churches like the Universalist Unitarians do a fine job at that. I have a friend, Nancy, Harvard divinity that’s the minister of the Unitarian church here in San Jose, her husband, of a liberal non-denominational Christian church. They are both a pleasure to discuss religion with. Went to the funeral of a friend at the Unitarian church a year or so ago. Best funeral ever.

        This is problem that is squarely the fault of religion and their unwillingness to change with the times in order to keep their core message relevant to young people.

      • “The fact so many christians are now getting divorced only reflects what a total hilarious joke religion has become – even those who consider themselves observant of christianity or catholicism behave live and act just like godless athiests except they pretend to believe in a magic sky daddy for comfort.”

        This is a failure of region and its institutions in general. It’s not “atheism.”

  3. ladysadie1 says:

    I enjoy my job, it’s the type of thing that would usually be a “guy thing” but it’s pretty shitty in light of the fact that instead of staying home with my kids baking cupcakes and tending to the livestock I am chained to a desk for 9+ hours a day. There is no upward mobility in this position.

    As far as crafts and baking, I have to channel my “craftiness” into science experiments and I am going to bake cupcakes into a Leaning Tower of Piza for the middle kid’s classroom on Friday. (Bonnano meets Betty Crocker) Anyone who likes flowery wrenches can do the same!

    • That’s why I love friends like you, Sadie, we compliment our voids without judging our worthiness! (but I always know who to contact when I need a killer costume) And, to be honest, if money were not involved, I wouldn’t be “working,” I’d be outside running around getting dirty.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Yes, money, money, money. Same thing here. How sad for both of us…

        This topic… it goes back to the infuriating political issues involving what we do under threat of our Government Masters taking away our stuff if we don’t behave as good little slaves and do our part to pay into The System.

        Oh, and I am going to a formal dinner and dance this weekend, I couldn’t decide between the dresses I have already so I got a couple more… two lovely vintage 1950′s classy dresses, so the closet has a couple more for you to choose from if the need arises!

        Richard- Castle Anthrax, pleeeeeease???

      • “I’d be outside running around getting dirty.”

        You see that, guys? See what you’ve done?

      • ladysadie1 says:

        The men got brainwashed right along with the women. We need to reclaim our traditional gender roles. Shelley can be outside getting dirty and I can be in the kitchen getting dirty there too…

        Oh, or maybe that’s not what you meant???

      • It doesn’t matter what one thinks of dirty – it’s all fun! And, yes, a lot of guys have been thoroughly brainwashed as well or really afraid of the wrath of HR coming down on their insensitive heads.

        Time for everyone to grow up and forget all this PC nonsense and get to living!

        Strong men, though, doesn’t mean berating/beating women – it means supporting – and they will get returns so much greater than they could ever dream. :-) And that can be dirty.

      • “Oh, or maybe that’s not what you meant???”

        I mean to leave it open to wide interpretation as suits individuals and circumstance. :)

      • “Strong men, though, doesn’t mean berating/beating women”

        I contend that’s a contradiction in terms, stated generally, i.e., woman qua woman.

        The issue now, however, is that if you see an individual male as a fuckhead and call him a fuckhead, well, you’re judging him to be a fuckhead. Call a cunt a cunt, you’re a misogynist. See, that’s the cheap scam going on. Cunts are out there pretending that any insult against them as cunts somehow reflects on you.

      • “Strong men….”

        To make myself explicitly clear, strong applies more to character than it does to physical prowess or anything like that and applies to people, not genders.

        One thing a strong person never is: someone who claims to be a victim when there’s no clear and objective evidence for such.

      • So true. There are many, many individual fuckheads and cunts out there. The cunts are just more “sensitive.” The fuckheads could care less and some even relish being called a fuckhead. I try to avoid them both.

        I’m just saying generally that I love men to be stronger than me in every way, but not abuse that strength, but rather positively use that strength.

      • “One thing a strong person never is: someone who claims to be a victim when there’s no clear and objective evidence for such.”

        +1 , never, ever a victim when not warranted – absolutely agree!

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Seriously, Richard…

        “woman qua woman” …

        Here it is in its entirety:

        “For a woman qua woman, the essence of femininity is hero-worship—the desire to look up to man. “To look up” does not mean dependence, obedience or anything implying inferiority. It means an intense kind of admiration; and admiration is an emotion that can be experienced only by a person of strong character and independent value-judgments. A “clinging vine” type of woman is not an admirer, but an exploiter of men. Hero-worship is a demanding virtue: a woman has to be worthy of it and of the hero she worships. Intellectually and morally, i.e., as a human being, she has to be his equal; then the object of her worship is specifically his masculinity, not any human virtue she might lack.”

      • ladysadie1 says:

        oops, that is Ayn Rand

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Strong is being the captain of the ship and choosing a first mate that is An Asset. (Strong Man needs a Strong Partner AND can guide the course of the relationship, while simultaneously regulating behavior and respecting and regulating the behavior of his ‘first mate” through his leadership)

      • Oh Sadie – that’s it! Thanks for quoting that because that is what most women and men strive for – we have just lost our way in the feminsta-haze.

      • “oops, that is Ayn Rand”

        Like, duh. In my sleep. :)

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Yeah, like you dream that you are at Castle Anthrax!

      • “Strong Man needs a Strong Partner”

        A truly strong man accepts nothing less. It’s not a competition and I kinda hate the word “partnership,” because some things are plain dictatorial, for both. Pity the man not strong enough to accept dictates from the woman as such, no questions asked.

        Strong men know what “yes dear” means and strong men delight in the opportunity to say it to a strong woman.

      • “…but rather positively use that strength.”

        It’s food, if you know how to eat it.

      • “…you dream that you are at Castle Anthrax!”

        I would, but the peril is too perilous.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        You can handle a little bit of peril

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Reclaim what? Giving birth to 21 babies and having 15 survive? Before birth control… a feminist plot if ever there was one. I mean you can’t just pick and choose here or can you? Or do you?

        If you die giving birth to baby number 8, 9, 19, your husband, the big guy he is, will marry your younger sister to replace you. Now that’s Biblical for sure.

        Ah, old fashioned love.

        Life is tough. Fairytales are just that.

        The old saying ‘the grass is always greener….etc.’ is applicable.

        Probably most people envision a different life from the one they have. That just means that they have a concept of choice. Which appears to be more frustrating than anything else.

        People, (men and women) believe that they would rather believe their lives could be more creative, more meaningful, whatever. All I can say is stop kvetching. Make it happen. Have an exit strategy. If you can’t do that, stop wasting energy bitching about it and get on with the life you have. I mean this for whatever someone is doing: working, working and raising children, raising children and not working. It doesn’t matter what the combination or permutation happens to be. Start walking the walk instead of talking the talk. Invest in the life you have.

        For all the energy people use up expressing their dissatisfaction with how their lives are, they could redirect that energy to making change.

      • “Reclaim what? Giving birth to….”

        Seriously? You’re going to take one word and run on and on in a scenario as though it was her that said that? Then knock down the scenario you created for that explicit purpose?

        Amazing.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Of course. That is discourse and mitigation.

        If someone wants to stay home, live in the kitchen and this is not what they are doing now, work towards it, make it happen. Do it. Don’t write about it.

        More Gandhi: be the change you want to see in the world.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        In your universe who is the she who ‘wrote’ that?

      • That’s a nice idea, but I have one problem – I’ve yet to meet a man I can admire. I’m young, at 20, but I know men of all ages and so far none of them have inspired admiration in me. Maybe gender roles would be easier if men weren’t so weak/lazy/clingy/listless/stupid/needy/whatever other irritating traits you want to list. As a girl with looks, income, and education, along with the ability to run a household and make my own clothes, I find men redundant. It’s going to be hard for me to find a hero, when all the candidates for the job are doing less with their life, whining more, and aren’t suave enough to sweep me off my feet…

      • @Clover – “I’ve yet to meet a man I can admire.” Keep looking, they’re out there; the good ones are very smart and in order to protect themselves from all the feministas, they remain covert.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Clover, I think that you don’t find them, they find you. It’s not age, there are an abundance of ‘men’ who can essentially contribute nothing to a household. They are a product of the “equality’ culture. As Shelley points out, the good ones remain covert.

      • Good for you, Clover. Hold your standards high and never compromise. You’ll know you’re onto something when a man instinctively adores your high standards.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        And what era are you referring to for these so-called “traditional” gender roles? Victorian? Renaissance? Hunter-gatherer? You do realize that gender expectations changed during each of these eras. the idea of the quiet female would get you an upwardly-mobile husband in the Victorian or eaten by a tiger in the hunter-gatherer. A woman didn’t leave the home in ancient Greece, yet she worked alongside her husband at his (THEIR!) artisan shop during the post-Renaissance. In fact, during this time, many women owned their own businesses (usually due to a father with no sons passing or her husband passing). And then you need to add to this equation your particular culture’s expectation of what is a “traditional” gender role. Some cultures favor very involved fathers. Others not-so-much. In some cultures the men are responsible for more of the food (usually via hunting) whereas in others, it’s almost all the women. Maybe a better way to explain your idea of “traditional” is “whatever ladysadie1 says is traditional”. Otherwise, there’s no consistency outside of “chicks have babies and generally take care of them in their earliest infancy”.

    • “What I don’t get about you Sadie is you wax poetic about baking cupcakes and sitting in your house raising your kids…and you blame FEMINISM for not being able to do this, rather than putting the blame squarely where it belongs: your husband/boyfriend/whoever created these children apparently left you alone with them in your middle age.”

      Uh, not even close, but it’s for Sadie to say.

      At any rate, just as with how institutional has failed to adequately get with the times, making themselves increasingly irrelevant as social glue, social club, whatever you want to call it, the real problem with feminism is the influence it’s had on so many “men” on many levels, from “pussification” to having a “fuck-it” chip on their shoulder where they actually do become abusive (to women in general—not just as individual here and there). IOW, you’re only half right. Yep, men are largely to blame because, no excuses, right? But it’s the feminization of culture that perpetuating this.

      As to the rest of it, there has been a whole airing of different ideas and perspectives. In particular, that whole thread where it was largely you, ABD and Elenor going at it, I think I didn’t fully agree with any one of you but I found plenty to agree with from all of you, disagree as well. As to ABD, he’s honest. He has tons of women followers on his FB page that are strong enough to deal with him. He’s not out scamming women. He tells them how it’s going to be with him. They know up front.

      I suppose some prefer the sweet talker who’s true self only comes out through actions later. Apparently, increasing numbers of women don’t.

      “Women being better women is not going to make shitty men not be pieces of shit.”

      I don’t think there’s any basis to believe that applies generally, or even often. At the extreme for sure. A predator is a predator but it seems to me that there’s a mass antagonism going on in the middle and that if women weren’t stepping out of more traditional roles and behaviors trying to be men, we wouldn’t have it.

      To be clear, I think everyone ought to do what they want. So if a woman wants to go out and be a man in a “man’s world,” fine with me. I’d rather they do that with open eyes in terms of how it’s going to affect their relationships with men, what sort of men they are going to attract, how that turns in respect to raising a family. Fine. What I don’t care for is when they go off to do that thinking they’re entitled, that they’re victims, that they are owed because they are women.

      • “So if a woman wants to go out and be a man in a “man’s world,” fine with me. I’d rather they do that with open eyes in terms of how it’s going to affect their relationships with men, what sort of men they are going to attract, how that turns in respect to raising a family.”

        This is true, but takes an open-minded person to understand. I am quite ambitious and goal-oriented and love technology, so when I was in telecommunications sales, that side of my personality was amplified 100-fold. I did all the normal guy things – golfed, dinners, business trips, etc. What I realized was that the more successful I was, the more it was killing my home life; my husband felt like he was married to a female with a male mind and that wasn’t working out so well. So be it, it was my choice, give up him or give up my job. There are many jobs out there, I chose him.

      • Galina L says:

        Most of the time life is not so black and white, like if you work you are acting as a man and work-place is a necessary a man-world. Probably, if your work requires a lot of travel, long hours, then yes, it could be the case, but it is not how majority of professions look like now. Most of the time nowadays people work doing something on their computer good part of their day.
        When I was a child, many people lived in multy-generational households, or grandmas lived nearby, it was extremely rare when a mother of a child older that 3 stayed at home.

      • “What I realized was that the more successful I was, the more it was killing my home life; my husband felt like he was married to a female with a male mind and that wasn’t working out so well. So be it, it was my choice, give up him or give up my job. There are many jobs out there, I chose him.”

        You can’t fool Mother Nature…or it it Nurture?

        I think there would be a lot less antagonism if everyone simply took the attitude: “I _can_, but I choose this, instead.” Probably well justified is the nagging suspicion with many females that men think they _can’t_, so they feel a need to prove it. So I suppose it’s fair to acknowledge that women who apply themselves can or could, but relax, we won’t hold it against you if you choose a more nurturing path.

        It might also help for men to acknowledge how much they need the nurture of a good women. You know, like when you get a man cold and stuff.

        http://youtu.be/VbmbMSrsZVQ

      • Ha! I’ll try to remember how to be nurturing for a man-cold – you poor little bunnies.

      • “Probably well justified is the nagging suspicion with many females that men think they _can’t_, so they feel a need to prove it.”

        and I used to think that – so off to engineering school I went to prove a point. Now, I don’t give a shit what others think of my abilities. I only have to satisfy me.

      • Galina L says:

        I went to engineering school because my father (a brilliant engineer himself) during long conversations convinced me that my idea to be an artist(I went to an art school while going to middle and high school ) was very unpractical, and my artistic talents would be very useful in engineering field. I love mathematics and always enjoyed toys as a child that required building and assembling, so I followed his advice and never regretted it. Artistic abilities to visualize the assembled construction, to feel how forces in constructions work , an ability to draw were really helpful(it was a manual drawing back then). I am not a personality A, I have a very good ability to smooth things out, so my presence among very ambitious participants who were mostly A types helped to reach compromises. When people work as a team they function better when team members have different talents to compliment each other because no one is perfect as an individual. Engineering requires different talents, it is a plus when you can understand people who build what you designed, it is important they would listen with respect your directions without you barking orders, to be willing to cooperate. I am sure working with people helped me to be a better mother, and my experience as a mom taught me something. For example, it is much easy to achieve a cooperation from the people when you treat them with respect even when they know less than you or are very much younger. Speak with someone in ironic style – they would stop being cooperative immediately due to a resentment. I guess, many women who enjoy their profession would feel incomplete staying at home because their talents would be wasted. You can exercise your artistic side decorating your home, cakes, children costumes, but it may be not enough for everyone. Most work at home is a routine of endless cleaning, cooking, housekeeping with very little time to do something creative.
        I don’t think feminism changed life, it was different life style that created feminism. I am not a feminist myself, from my perspective, there is nothing to fight about, except, probably equal pay for an equal job. I think that life at home is often being presented in romantisized light like some idyllic existence, while it has own challenges. Of course, it would be wonderful if every person would live preferable life-style. Every choice has a down-side.

      • “You can’t fool Mother Nature…or it it Nurture?”

        This is probably why women are so frustrated/angry because they are trying to change their very nature, which makes men frustrated/angry because they try to change men’s nature as it is in the workplace, e.g., aggressive, competitive.

      • “I love mathematics”

        I love you as a commenter, Galina L.

        Now, I finally understand. Unbridled mind. Way back in the day, having grown up in religious stuff my whole life, I took a physics course and Mark 1, Mod A calculus. The latter was the most liberating. Eternally.

        I was meticulous because I loved the instructor. Even when not required, I’d construct graphs on graph paper to demonstrate my home work for a derivative or integration problem (particularly the latter where my biggest love was seeing how common equations are derived).

        I learned to understand acceleration and to understand acceleration accelerating (you know what I mean).

        I took it as fundamentals in a world where the Bible was the textbook. It mystifies my why people don’t get my rage. I’m not actually concerned for myself because that was over 20 years ago and began much sooner.

      • “Ha! I’ll try to remember how to be nurturing for a man-cold – you poor little bunnies.”

        Now, imagine a video like that making fun of women for various things—say PMS or whatever. It would be outrageous, misogynist.

        That it’s ultimately a good thing to poke fun at each other over steriotypicals never enters the picture. I think men are pretty good at coming to grips with serious malady. We’re pussies for colds and 24 hour deals.

        We’re just testing you.

      • Math – in particular, the higher maths that require spatial reasoning, along with dynamics and physics are to me what mainly defines this world and I have always had a problem reconciling this with the stories in the Bible. I don’t know of any data that specifies how many higher up mathematicians/physicists are religious in a Bible-thumping way. It would be an interesting question to pose of them.

        But higher maths teach infinite dimensions including time dimensions that always makes me think there is a possibility of other material/energy/planes out there that is way beyond our comprehension. It’s almost spiritual.

      • “…which makes men frustrated/angry because they try to change men’s nature as it is in the workplace, e.g., aggressive, competitive.”

        This was only beginning to raise its head in the early 80s, where you could come back to the dorm drunk, by]e invited up, and both get over it in the morning.

        Now, there’s still not signed waivers, but societal guilt and it goes to both parties.

        In other words, it probably rolls the same in college dorms now, as 100 years ago in terms of animal behavior. The question to contemplate is the basis of guilt, shame, etc. I preferred an impotent God to a powerful State.

      • Lute Nikoley says:

        Shelley, ever hear of Sir Isaac Newton?The Mathematician, Physicist, Economist and Theologian.

      • Yes, but I think Newton did not believe in the Trinity, which is the basis of Christianity; rather, it seems he believed in one Intelligent Being, which is what I think of often…. “infinite dimensions including time dimensions that always makes me think there is a possibility of other material/energy/planes out there that is way beyond our comprehension”

      • “I don’t know of any data that specifies how many higher up mathematicians/physicists are religious in a Bible-thumping way. It would be an interesting question to pose of them.”

        http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html

        Bottom line is that all the Bible Thumpers enjoy the privilege of thumping their bibles on their iPads, iPhones various computers and whatnot from a growing cadre of atheists.

        I don;t have the data but last I heard, professional biologists are like 96% atheist at the top, and the bottom are mathematicians in the high 70s, I believe.

      • Galina L says:

        Thank you, Richard,

        I have warm feelings to you too. Yours is the only paleo blog I continue reading.
        What I like about math is the harmony and how orderly life looks through the mathematical point of view. The chaotic world instantly feels in order, and I remember the pleasure of building graphs.

        I didn’t have any usual religious upbringing because my country was atheistic back then, but it was heavily compensated with another type of brain-washing. Since then I hate any propaganda.

        I think we are all equals in as human beings with emotions, struggles and weakness, regardless of gender . The best thing we can do for our relationship with everyone is look into other person’s eyes and think about him/her not as an object who can give us something or who we disagree with, but as a friend who could be upset by something, tired, worn-out, try to remember once he/she was a young child, or just young, in another world, it is better to make efforts to humanize people around us, instead of dehumanizing them. Such strategy served me well, because others also saw me as human being first of all. I never was mistreated by any guy during my life. I am not a defenseless doormat who never ever flays off handle, but I think that power is in a self-control .

      • ladysadie1 says:

        When I went to school for Architecture after being out of an academic setting for several years, math classes were frightening to me. I had a physics instructor that explained that math was invented by men who wanted to explain God’s design of the world. Science (and math) were not in opposition to religious doctrine as they seem to be today. Whether that is true or not, he was a very nice man and wonderful instructor. I think that many of the early mathematicians and scientists felt that they had a higher purpose.

        By learning the math and understanding it, I was able to integrate complicated ratios into my later design work and I think that my natural abilities were enhanced because of it.

        In case anyone cares, the reason I didn’t go to Architecture school when I was right out of High School… the nasty guidance counselor told me that “girls can’t do all that math… that’s really for boys”

        Despite my beliefs that it is better to stay at home and stick to tradiional gender roles, I also do anything that I can to make sure my girls have the tools to be competitive if that is what they choose for themselves.

      • “….ever hear of Sir Isaac Newton?The Mathematician, Physicist, Economist and Theologian.”

        I’ll answer for her (she’s welcome to do so as well).

        When you are trying to get real science out there, like Copernicus (published posthumously because it contradicted doctrine), Galileo who spent his last years under house arrest, Bruno who was burnt at the stake, and many others, it’s a pretty good live-saving policy to pretend to be a village idiot.

      • “I think we are all equals in as human beings with emotions, struggles and weakness, regardless of gender . The best thing we can do for our relationship with everyone is look into other person’s eyes and think about him/her not as an object who can give us something or who we disagree with, but as a friend who could be upset by something, tired, worn-out, try to remember once he/she was a young child, or just young, in another world, it is better to make efforts to humanize people around us, instead of dehumanizing them. Such strategy served me well, because others also saw me as human being first of all. I never was mistreated by any guy during my life. I am not a defenseless doormat who never ever flays off handle, but I think that power is in a self-control .”

        Free the Animal.

        Trite, but what more can I say. For all of the postulating about how bad it can get, Galina lived it in real time.

        No worries, though. She can obviously still type. She should just be thankful, right?

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Well nevermind all that… this is why mathematics are important:

        A professor of mathematics sent a fax to his wife. It read:

        “Dear wife, You must realize that you are 54 years old and I have certain needs which you are no longer able to satisfy. I am otherwise happy with you as a wife, and I sincerely hope you will not be hurt or offended to learn that by the time you receive this letter, I will be at the Grand Hotel with my 18-year-old teaching assistant. I’ll be home before midnight. – Your Husband”

        When he arrived at the hotel, there was a faxed letter waiting for him that read as follows:

        “Dear Husband. You too are 54 years old, and by the time you receive this, I will be at the Breakwater Hotel with the 18-year-old pool boy. Being the brilliant mathematician that you are, you can easily appreciate the fact that 18 goes into 54 a lot more times than 54 goes into 18. Don’t wait up.

      • “Dear Husband.”

        Unpossible. Well, improbable. A wife that would have written a fax life that would be a treasure for most men to come home to, and it would have been evident in many ways over many years.

        Good story anyway.

        Would that society get out of the way and let nature take over, 54, 18, division and multiplication.

        At any rate, 22 goes into 18 only once. Really?

      • ladysadie1 says:

        oh, FFS, Richard… my math problem her is only how many times that 29 goes into 42… but I am a single mom that was “saddles with children in middle age” (so labelled by Wooo) sigh… ;)

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        In your world, Shelley. That is your experience of the world. It is not necessarily universal.

      • What a bunch of nerds.

      • “It is not necessarily universal.”

        Um, I’ve followed the comments and Shelly is not arguing for universality and I doubt she’d shy away from the horrible admission that she cares about her world and doesn’t pretend to care about the universe per se.

        That’s your scam. The only real difference is that Shelly is realistic and moral and will take her chances.

        You are afraid. That’s really all it comes down to, but you just can’t admit that you’re so afraid, you want some agent of protection to give you guarantees at the expense of others.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        What are you on about Richard? You haven’t even met me. You don’t even know me. Based on what I’ve written you think you can come to these conclusions and be convinced or assume they are valid?

      • Why else would anyone advocate theft for the sake of a safety net but not for fear?

        Seems obvious enough to me. Occam’s Razor and stuff.

        I understnd fear is completely natural. The issue is in how individuals address that fear.

      • Galina L. says:

        I hope it was not much of posturing, I just wanted to communicate a massage to other participants in the conversation that most of the time we are as strong as our situation in life requires. Right at the moment my life is easy, and I don’t feel tough at all.
        I had a chance to witness a collapse of economy and other exotic from the US point of view things, but I had never suffered in my private life.

      • Galina – I don’t take any of your comments negatively. You have gone through what most in America never, ever want to go through. For most of us, we have only lived indirectly of the fear of tyrannical governments. We are only as strong as what we are provided, and the US has had a very cushy life so far. But humans have a will to survive that is extremely strong. In fact, this is an absolutely astounding story on so many levels:

        http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/For-40-Years-This-Russian-Family-Was-Cut-Off-From-Human-Contact-Unaware-of-World-War-II-188843001.html

        I try as best I can to live free. I am mostly very passive and open to conversation, but when others continue to chip away at my freedom, at some point I come out swinging.

      • Galina L. says:

        Shelley,
        Please, don’t give me any credit for my experience, millions of people were in the same situation, every immigrant from Russia and other Eastern European countries went through at least some survival experience. People in Europe in general went through a turbulent history, just look at Richard’s father. Americans would manage too because humans have a good mobilization potential.

        The story you sent to me is absolutely unique. I remember it was all over the news in Russia.

      • But, Galina, I do you give you credit. I give my great-grandmother credit for surviving. I credit you and people like you greatly because, if you had no desire or will to survive, life would be very different for me, and for now, I am very blessed.

        We never know how we will react in any situation until that situation arises. You may think you did nothing special, but I propose that, in fact, you did. You also had the courage to come here to the states for further opportunity.

        You are one strong woman and you don’t have to recognize it, necessarily, but I admire it greatly!

      • @Galina – in fact, I would bet that you do not feel like a victim of your previous circumstances, and that to me is the difference in people. The same situation may affect each person, it matters to me who that person becomes on the other side of that situation.

      • Galina L. says:

        Thank you then. Life has challenges everywhere, we all went through difficult times during resent recession, several people I know got divorced because of bankruptcies and job losses, some neighbors lost their houses. US is still the easiest place to live.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        When the majority of recipients of Employment insurance *by far* are seasonal male labourers, it’s the women who don’t need maternity leave who are fucked over the biggest time according to your view of life.

        BTW how was your father’s latest venture into kidney stone management funded?

      • “When the majority of recipients of Employment insurance *by far* are seasonal male labourers”

        No such thing in the US.

        “BTW how was your father’s latest venture into kidney stone management funded?”

        Kaiser Permanente, a policy provided by my company for employees and their families. My mom has worked there for 20 years.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        “if women weren’t stepping out of more traditional roles and behaviors trying to be men, we wouldn’t have it”

        Yes. That is precisely the point. See the Simone de Beauvior quote I tossed down at the bottom of the thread.

        “Uh, not even close, but it’s for Sadie to say.”

        Let her think what she wants.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Okay, so let’s go back to Charles Dickens who took custody of all the children from his wife who had no say in anything. How far back do you want to go, ladysadie1?

        Traditionally men took possession of their wives assets at marriage.

        Or maybe since you didn’t have possessions at marriage, this never occurred to you as being traditional?

        Or that traditionally there had to be a person or persons identified as being the reason for infidelity and therefore the cause of the breakdown of a marriage? There was never the reason of evolving out of a relationship or whatnot as a reason for divorce.

        Women were the property of men. If that sort of tradition appeals to you, and given what you’ve written I doubt it, then go for it. Traditionally, the father of your children could remove the children from your care and custody. You wouldn’t even have rights to see them.

      • “Traditionally men took possession of their wives assets at marriage.”

        No, that would be _legally_. We’re arguing against laws in such areas, you are arguing for them. All you’re doing, then, is arguing for changing them here and there to assuage your fears.

        This always happens. The statists starts using injustice of laws against people arguing from an anarchist or at least minarchist position. Happens every time, hilarious every time.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Of all people, I would be contra the above. However, when the word ‘traditional’ comes up (not my word), it is important to elucidate what tradition consisted.

        I’m not a statist. Sorry to disappoint. Statement of facts does not imply an identification or investment with those facts. This is the weakness of most of these blogs.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        “Women were the property of men. If that sort of tradition appeals to you, and given what you’ve written I doubt it, then go for it. Traditionally, the father of your children could remove the children from your care and custody. You wouldn’t even have rights to see them.”

        Yep, sounds about right to me, and I don’t object. In my case I would still have the children along with my assets AND his. Oh, and seeing women who have custody but can only support their children “on their own” because they collect child support when they divorce is disgusting. The children should go to the person with the ability to support them.

        Easy.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        No, the person who got custody of the children was the father. Of course he had ability to support them because he took possession of his wife’s assets at marriage. So he was supporting them with her money to which she no longer had access and she had no access to the children.

        That, to me, is problematic.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        The man got custody of the children and of course he could support them with his wife’s assets. She lost control of her assets at marriage. And had not right to see her own children.

        That’s how it worked: take her money, use it however desired, breed, take the children, leave wife destitute.

        That’s the ‘fine tuning’ of the practice based on legislation. If that’s fine with you, then it’s fine with me in regards to you.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Ok, so this is more of a generalization based on all the comments (plus some past blog posts) that I’ve read. So I’m jsut going to plop it here because it seems to make the most sense here:

        History may be written by the winners , but blogs and pop-news pieces are written by the losers. Richard, you speak about how “institutions” have failed us, but they only fail certain people (I’m not talking about government. I believe you mean that institutions like modern dating and gender roles and job roles, etc). A minority whine and complain because they were more fit for the old paradigm or they went full bore into the new and it didn’t pan out. But the vast majority of us adapt quietly. We don expect much. We just make our small expectations work for balance. In modern time, most people live in the fat, (relatively) comfortable middle. Life has always changed. We’ve always adapted. When I hear the complainers out there I can’t help but think “these are the dinosaurs”. Most women AND MEN do NOT work in these high-stress, high-stakes fields that your video talks about. Most people aren’t doctors or lawyers or MBA’s or anyone on the so-called “fast track”. And I’d venture that most of us aren’t married to a jerk that wants to run off the 1st chance he gets (to address Woo) or an over-masculinzed shrew that wants her husbands balls on her mantle (to address ladysadie and Shelley and some of your repeat commenters). Sure, everyone may have 1 or 2 genderized “quirks” (maybe the wife dominates arguments; maybe the husband sneaks porn). But by-and-large they’ve crafted a life that makes the 2 of them content and — dare I say — HAPPY! I mean, it appears that this has worked for you — you seem to be happy with your wife and life. We need to remind people about THEIR RESPONSIBILITY in their actions. If men are unhappy, hey, news flash — maybe thinking that high-maintenance woman who you thought was such a “catch” was wrong for you, esp because day-in-and-day-out, you prob see tons of good-looking women who are (gasp!) NICE! But no, you made a choice because our culture says that high maintenance women are “alpha*” (hey, it takes a long time and lots of money to get your hair like that, and the manicures and the breast implants and the fashion…). And the same goes for women. Thinking that you’re going to “change” a man is insulting — how would you like it if a guy dated you because he wanted you to be something else? A cheater is always a cheater. Shit on your for not wising up. Esp because you’re prob surround by really nice guys. So guess what? The truly nice guys and girls get together. They fall in love and laugh and have great lives. They’re smart and they enter into lower-stress professions where they can have flexibility and be recognized for their talent without having to invest 80 hour/week. We don’t get magazine or blogs written about us. We soldier on with no need to complain (or, at least not on blog comments). Maybe all of you unhappy people should stop looking to NY Times or PUA sites or blogs for answers to your unhappiness and look to your neighbor who may not have a Beemer in their driveway, or an “alpha* man/woman on their arm but they have a smile on their face. Stop complaining and stop looking for others to blame. It’s not feminism or Peter Pan men. Its our own ideas of how our lives should be that don’t match with what truly makes us happy. They’re are plenty of awesome people out there. If you’re so stupid that you pick the same asshole/bitch again and again; if you think that getting that fast-paced job with all the financial strains and the stress will make up for that hole in your sould, well… natural selection shouldn’t allow you to reproduce what will sadly turn into nasty, unhappy little offspring. It’s time you went the way of the dinosaurs.

        Additionally, I’ve been following the Paleo Drama blog. At first, I was perturbed — I don’t necessarily have issues with the term “cunt”, even if a man says it. But after reading it — and seeing how Richard Nickoly (RN) reacted by digging his heels in, I have to say that I’m so glad she started that site. Really opened my eyes to (some) of the misogyny but mostly to the bad, hack science. But, I want to add that I don’t actually think that RN is misogynist. I see a big dif between someone like him and someone like AB Dada (who i do believe is misogynist). RN is someone who I think actually does respect women — or, more precisely, women in his “circle”. From what I’ve read about his childhood, I can see that it was prob the women that gave him comfort and love. However, typical of men raised by distant fathers and loving mothers, they spend their whole lives seeking the approval of men that — for a variety of their own personal reasons — they deem “masculine”. In this case, the kinda-sorta-PUA’s, and the AB Dada’s fit that role. RN wants their approval, so when these guys get out of line, he knows that the women that he cares for, intrinsically, “understand” when he appears to side with them, or at least let them be needlessly insulting or not call them out on their contradictions. So misogynist? No. Daddy and gender issues? Yep.

        * ugh — I fucking HATE that term. When I hear “alpha”, I think “douche with small dick that has mommy issues” or “bitch whose looking for a daddy”. People, wise up — it;s starting to be an insult, kinda like the term “frat-boy”

      • @sexybearfriend – Are you really sexy?

        I have to say that was an extremely boring read and I couldn’t get through it all. You must not have read Richard’s latest blog on writing an effective paragraph!

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        So sorry to hear that, Shelley. I’ve been hanging on your every word. And you’ve been so concise… um, how many comments did you feel the need to write? If you can’t get through it all then sht the fuck up — no business commenting. The End.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        @Shelley

        Why are some of the people who disagree with us so freaking hateful, vulgar and angry all the time??? Hmmm, detecting a difference between the folks who are regulars here and the ones who aren’t? Or is it something else?

      • @Sadie – “Or is it something else?” You said it earlier: when you’re getting attacked back, you are over the right target.

        I am highly paid to read and write concisely, so glad to know that others think I am living up to my salary in a place where it doesn’t really matter. :-)

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Yeah, but they are so vulgar and personal about it… (sniffle, sniffle)

        and this: “I am highly paid to read and write concisely, so glad to know that others think I am living up to my salary in a place where it doesn’t really matter.”

        Lucky you, I am only paid well-enough to do that! I will work on the “highly” part! ;)

      • @Sadie – “Lucky you” I did kind of stumble into this field, but the trick is to find something where there are very limited people – in my case, there are only about 26,000 active people in the US and for now, it’s hot.

        But I live like my favorite all-time book advises, because tomorrow it could all be different.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese%3F

      • ladysadie1 says:
      • Haven’t read that one, but seems along the same lines. These books show the difference though in people (i.e., women) responding to change by either 1) feeling like a victim; or 2) adapting and doing something positive.

        As you have noted there are several women who think change should be accomplished with coercion at the point of a gun, which is exactly how the whole feminist movement operates and expect everyone to capitulate.

        But then again, I’m reminded that maybe others feel that I have posted a few too many comments on this subject. It will return and I’ll get another go at it, because victims generally always remain victims.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Wow, I am dying to address that comment, but not here. If you want to email, ask RN I will enlightening you on that particular topic!

        Victims often don’t even realize that they are portraying that role, and thus never move on to survivor! In this context, you are correct, poor little bunnies… haha, that was probably patronizing, tsk tsk on me for being a meanie.

      • @Sadie – you are such a tease – you bitch! :-)

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Who cares if you want to stay home and bake cookies and have your husband “lead” you. That’s not anyones gripe. My gripe is you assuming because other women don’t share you’re view — that YOUR idea is the “natural” one — that they are unhappy and mean. I mean, you 2 are BFFs, yet I see significant differences in what you both believe is “natural”.
        You don’t know me, you don’t know my lifestyle. Very few people have high-powered careers — male OR female. My husband and I have found a balance that works wonderfully well for us — I take the lead in the stuff that I’m good at, he takes the lead in the stuff that he’s good at. Why does that make me a man-hating harpy?
        Shelley, you mention that you’re “highly paid”. I get a sense that you’re proud of that. Nothing wrong with that, but hmmm… that sounds downright FEMINIST of you!
        oh, and as far as discourse goes, I see several places where ladiesadie has cursed. So just because we don’t drink Cosmos together doesn’t mean that different rules should apply to me.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Just curious (and this is actually real curiousity, not fake): what do you 2 ladies think about how women are treated in the Middle East, in, say, Saudi Arabia. Or (and I know this isn’t the ME), Afghanistan?

      • @sexybear “Shelley, you mention that you’re “highly paid”. I get a sense that you’re proud of that. Nothing wrong with that, but hmmm… that sounds downright FEMINIST of you!”

        You are right about me liking money – I do. BUT, you’re very wrong about the feminist part – I work and expect to get paid, and I admit that if I wasn’t highly paid, I wouldn’t work. HOWEVER, I never expect to be paid or granted special favors because I am female. Therein lies the difference with the feministas – they expect to regulate special favors for women; they expect every boardroom to be made up of an equal amount of women and men; they expect equal pay for the same position. That is what this whole blog is about.

        I realize that everyone is different; Sadie would like a more traditional role, nothing wrong with that; I have always enjoyed high-powered roles, nothing wrong with that. It’s mainly differences in the paths we took along the way. I don’t doubt for a second that either one of us could equally switch roles and be just fine. You have chosen a suitable lifestyle that fits you and your family. That’s the way it should be.

        Did you watch the video? Did you notice that the main point is EQUALITY. Women and men are not equal; never have been, never will be. I personally am not an envious person; I never look in anyone else’s pocket to know what they’re making. I don’t want to know; it does no good. We are equal so far as our contributions and our results. If I felt slighted, I’d find a new job.

        Women want equality, but are unwilling to adapt and expect the men of the world to change for them. For instance, I work in a man’s field full of men, who smoke cigars, swear, tell dirty jokes, expect to go to titty bars, play golf, eat dinners, etc. I would participate to a point, but I never sold my soul or flexed on my morals and changed for them; here’s the BIG POINT, however, I never expected them to change for me either. What did I care if they wanted to do all that and I bow out graciously? I can promise you, however, that my career was propelled by me not caring. The really cool thing is, they eventually changed for me without my coercion. They recognized I was in the room and stopped swearing; they invited me out for a cigar smoke even though I don’t smoke; they invited my husband along to play golf and watch football games. They liked me for me and not because I cried to HR to have them change for me.

        I don’t expect or want hand-outs in any way and especially because I’m a female.

        Don’t get me wrong, I love being a female. I love everything about it. I sometimes feel sorry men that they cannot experience a child within them; that they have to be gone all day at work; that they have to come home to tired wives. But life is not equal or fair and the sooner everyone realizes that the happier they will be. It is only up to you; it is your obligation to find happiness and be satisfied with your life. Equality/fairness/happiness cannot be regulated by the law.

        And, I’m sure if there’s enough Cosmos, we’d all get along just fine – so long as politics, religion or women’s rights come into the conversation.

      • @sexy – have you read the book “A Thousand Splendid Suns”? It was one of the most powerful books I have ever read. It was extremely sad and makes me extremely thankful to be born in the US – no doubt. But you know what I felt when I read about Mariam, who is basically sold, she was forced to physically submit, but her thoughts were strong and courageous and she fought in any way she could.

        You cannot compare the US and women’s situation here with anything that goes on over there. The way I see it, the Feminist movement is a “Taliban” that has moved in. At first, everyone thinks they’re going to be their savior, change things, make them better; and then you realize that you have sold your soul and compromised all your worth to another devil.

      • “Who cares if you want to stay home and bake cookies and have your husband “lead” you. That’s not anyones gripe. My gripe is you assuming because other women don’t share you’re view — that YOUR idea is the “natural” one — that they are unhappy and mean.”

        You’re either not following, are being purposefully obtuse and disingenuous, or you just don’t get it.

        They are simply being a voice for women who hear almost nothing but the feminist power side, and are being one of an increasing many female voices, in context because they are women, that say “you actually can find fulfillment in a more traditional role if you find yourself missing something.”

        So back at you. If that’s what they’re up to, what would be your basis of complaint?

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Thank you, Richard, for clarifying. That’s the point. My job is decent, and I am actually well paid for this area. What I do, and what I want to do are different. I am only trying to get the point across that I should have a choice in the matter and I am better suited to personal happiness in a more traditional role.

      • It is important for me to differentiate between feminists and people who advocate for womens’ rights.

        I’m all about the womens’ rights, but the feminist movement has been taken over by statists who want to use the force of government to take from one group and give to another.

      • “I’m all about the womens’ rights”

        I’m for human animal rights, whatever the gender, fur color, texture, whatever.

        The very worst thing to do is ever, EVER, advocate for specific rights based on agitating classes. If women aren’t getting their natural human animal rights, then that’s a rights recognition problem, not a woman problem.

      • “I mean, you 2 are BFFs, yet I see significant differences in what you both believe is “natural”.

        And this, @sexybear, is the beauty of life. I don’t “know” Sadie, but I think we probably think a lot alike. I also don’t think we’re really that different, definitely not “significant differences”. Maybe a little here, a little there, but in all honesty, I don’t have many girl friends but I would be absolutely amazed if Sadie and I weren’t BFFs if we lived even remotely close! Dang.

        And, BTW, I had to ask my 14 year old what BFF was – I’m a little older and not quite up on the current slang.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Thanks, Shelley… I think our jobs are similar and our beliefs are too. You can be my BFF here on the interwebs

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Ok, a lot to address here. First off, these last particular comments from you gals are actually very reasonable. We’re totally on the same page on a lot of stuff. I know about the “beauty of life” and I totally mean when I say “I don’t care if you want to stay home and bake”. My best friend is a stay-at-home mom (shit, that sounds awfully close to “I have a lot of black friends”). But there’s also a lot of jumping back-and-forht from the very reasonable “let me do what I want and I’ll let you do what you want. Dif strokes for dif folks” to “ALL women are whiners and want everything handed to them, and they turn men evil, etc etc And ALL women NATURALLY want to stay at home.” I’m a woman. You’re a woman. Sadie is a woman. You may not like me, but once you get to know my thoughts, you’d realize that we’re not all that dif. I don’t believe in equality. But I do believe in fairness. And it’s not fair to paint a broad stroke on women — I actually love my job and dude-stuff like looking at cars while I also enjoy doing homey things.
        I just don’t get the finger pointing, as if women were the sole ones to blame.Instead, i see a culture of “gimme”, where everyone has to win an award and have “great” self-esteem. But I also don’t think it’s an epidemic. The jerk offs always gets the attention. The little babies get the NY Times articles and blog posts. But I think that most people still believe in meritocracy. What can I say — I’ma positive misanthrope…

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        To address Joshua and RN, until recently, I’ve identified as a feminist (small caps), but of the Wonder Woman variety — don’t give me special treatment, just accept me for my strengths; don’t complain, DO something. I took a Womens Ed course in college and HATED it. I can’t stand anyone who adheres to the “gimme me me me!!! WAH!!!” approach to life. So *that’s* Feminism. And it sounds like sadie and Shelley are feminist — a “take me for what I am, pay me what I’m worth” ( in the traditional sense of the word). And I give them that title because without feminism, women wouldn’t get paid what we’re worth. My moms generation, the women were discouraged from higher math and told to take home ec. Sadie says that she’s in STEM — that type of higher math wouldn’t have been available to her in the past. We have the old feminists to thank. Is “feminism” a relic? I believe so. Our modern consumerist culture has turned us all into wage slaves of some sort. So i no longer self-identify as a “feminist”. But if you called me one, I wouldn’t raise a tussle. On this, I totally agree with Joshua and (gasp!) RN (at last his comment in reply to Joshua).

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Sadie may wish that she were home baking cupcakes, but hey — don’t we ALL, to varying degrees? My husband — an office jockey — laments that he missed his “true” calling in construction. Office Space was all about DUDES. If you’re not happy with your job, it’s totally normal to wish for a simpler time. But my parent’s were “simpler” people. They both loved their jobs, but at times, my mom grew weary of being a stay-at-home mom (of 5 kids); and my dad had to battle working outside in the cold and heat. My mom wouldn’t talk to an adult for a week (if my dad worked late); my dad would come home with his work pants soaked through with sweat. So let’s not romanticize this as what our “true” natures are, and instead look at it as a “grass is always greener” thingie.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Shelley, I never addressed your question about my “name”. No, I most def do NOT think that I’m sexy. 2 years ago i wanted a Google account for crap like signing up for newsletters, to cut spam. I tried my name. Take. tried my name with # I could remember. Taken. My husband and I, are nicknames for each other are “bear friends” (dorky, don’t hate). TAKEN! WTF!!! I had been sick for a week and hadn’t showered, so I tried Sloppybearfriend, etc. Taken. So then I did the opposite — sexy. Available. So it’s ironic. Perfect because I’m a Gen X-er. I never expected to be using it in the Comments sections of blogs. But here we are and I’m lazy.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        And finally, Shelley — I didn’t read that book, nor was I saying that our culture and theirs are similar. But that thinking — men “lead”, women “follow” — can have disastrous consequences. Here’s shitty part — Islam was initially a very foreword thinking religion in regards to science, technology and…. women!

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Ok, Sexy… I get it. I know that there are things that I have done in my life that I couldn’t have done without the Feminist Movement stepping in. I am a licensed heavy equipment operator, for goodness sake. That wouldn’t have been possible without some sort of push for equality, and what I do now is traditionally a man’s job as well, even though a good 80% of it is being a desk jockey, I have to have some interaction with production personnel.

        Maybe I am suffering from some rebellion. I am a wage slave, and I don’t like it. I suppose that being home all day would get tremendously boring, but with the amount of things that I need to get done around my house and the number of activities the kids participate in, along with my volunteer activities and community obligations, I wouldn’t get bored for a VERY long time.

      • So @sexy there really is hope for you! :-) Good to know. There’s a big difference b/n the current legal-changing Feminists and basic human rights. And I do not broad stroke women as all Feminists, however, they are loud and obnoxious – have watched Code Pink? To quote Einstein: “The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.” These women know no limits to quell their supposed infractions placed upon their drooped shoulders. They are a most pathetic group of women and I would never associate with one, even if they’re nice in every other way – that’s the JudgyBitch in me, I guess.

        I’m sure there’s a few women who love to take the lead, but my guess is there’s a bigger majority who would love to have their man take the lead – that’s not disastrous at all.

        And I would suggest that at least in the US women are a major cause in the weakness of the male today. We don’t allow men to be men; we don’t allow boys to grow up to be men; it’s very sad because I can’t stand weeny boys.

        Afghanistan women were very advanced until the Taliban. Then the rules/laws began to force women to submit – that’s a human rights issue, not a Feminist issue.

      • “I am a licensed heavy equipment operator” My boys would love you as a mother!!

      • “I totally agree with Joshua and (gasp!) RN (at last his comment in reply to Joshua).”

        Then you’d better be on your guard. :)

      • ladysadie1 says:

        I don’t do that any more, Shelley, but here’s some of the equipment that I (sort of) work with now:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml2Q9Lzq4gk (Flip Axle)

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbrrn2NFkCk (Bush Hauler)

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I11-4srQp4U (Detach… very boring intul about 1 minute in)

        ( Not my exact division, but close. My specialty is in an area that doesn’t have flashy videos… The commercially available trailers are cooler! :)

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG!!! I HATE Code Pink! Oh ladies… all the things that we can hate together :-P
        I honestly care about gender issues — I love guys. I’ve played drums and guitar in a few bands. And they’re always guys. So I know and understand where they’re coming from and can empathize. But when I see “sides” taken, I get pissed. I’m more interested in results not just to complain. And you don’t win friends by poking them with a pointy stick. Did women make men weak? I don’t think so. There’s a lot that we can blame –what about the 60′s? As much as this pains me, we can put some blame on rock music. I watched this documentary the other night about the Rolling Stones. I never realized just how gender-bending they were! The were feminized (by the day’s standards) and they got TONS of chicks. Guys saw that and next thing you know, you’ve got Ziggie Stardust; then KISS, then so-on and so-forth. I mean, have you ever seen the young Robert Plant on stage? Holy shit! That guys looks and acts like a WOMAN! It’s not so easy to point the finger because it’s not like these behaviors just *suddenly* popped up out of nowhere. One small act begets a reaction and so on. Does 70′s feminism play a role? Sure. But is it totally to blame? Nope. I’ma spreading’ blame like my drunk uncle emptying his wallet at the bar. There’s a lot to go around. And saying it’s the fault of only 1 thing is silly. Occam’s Razor aside, we shouldn’t oversimplify what amounts to a complicated behavioral change.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        I read the Judgeybitch posts and srry, I just hated them. I prefer to find what common ground we have and build on it. But, I DO get it — I mean, we ladies go through life being cool and nice and then we see the types of chicks that Judgeybitch is complaining about and I get pissed, too. It’s like, “hey, c-words! You’re ruining it for the rest of us!”. I get it — we do a good job and we should get some credit. But I’ve hung around enough men to know that putting other chicks down boosts the guys egos, but does nothing for us. And sometimes, it reinforces their idea that “all chicks are evil, look — even chicks hate chicks!”. Ponting the figure at other women doesn’t make US look better. So why do it?If a guy gets shit on by a chick, I can still be sympathetic. But i don’t have to tar all of the XX’s to support that.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        As far as taking the lead, here’s my problems. First, I would lay money that in todays risky world, MOST people would prefer not to take the lead. People only want to take the lead for the stuff that they REALLY LIKE, but to be given carte blanch and full responsibility? Doubt it.
        Second, men are generally smartest. However, MOST men actually rank low. Women don’t usually hit those top marks, but we pool pretty tightly towards the middle, upper-middle. So there’s a higher probability that the majority of women are married/attached to men who aren’t as smart as they are. I’m technically, smarter than my husband. In the book-smart way. He has incredible gut-reaction and intuition. So he takes “command” of areas that need that type of decision-making. I take command of the areas that I’m better at. Earlier in our relationship, under the idea of being “equal”, we split decisions. And it was a disaster. We’re not equal, but now we’re fair.Also, to me, this idea that men automatically make the decisions is disastrous not just for women, but for men because then the men bear the blame when things go south, esp if they’re not qualified to make certain decisions. Manosphere sites would tout that we need to “buil” stronger men. But no matter how much positive reinforcement I give someone, it ain’t gonna bridge synapses.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        @RN, I do like you. I defended you over on Wooo and said you weren’t misogynist. I treat the guys differently (fair, but differently). You guys need to be smacked in the balls every now and then to get your shit together. Us girls, ball smacking doesn’t work. I’ll have cocktails with sadie and Shelley, and I’ll do shots with you.
        BTW, I’m trying to be more concise. In the words of Adam Sandler: “You’re right, I’m wrong; you’re big, I’m very small; you’re good looking, I’m not so much so…” I’m still failing, but I hope I’m more entertaining (nah… failed there, too)

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        You 2 ladies are my heroe — heavy equipment? Makin’ lots of moola? My mom and I would have arguments over “feminism” when I was a kid. We felt the same way, just wanted to label it differently. What nerds…

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Ok, spread some blame to men…

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4-L6cF1uc4c

        (worth the watch, and sorta kidding, but still – watch)

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Hahaha, your comment about working in the elements (your dad) made me think of working construction, coming home covered in sweat and other days, there aren’t enough clothes to wear to stay warm. The construction gig (heavy equipment operator) was physically demanding, and glad I did it, but never again!

        As for being a nerd? Thank you!

      • Ha! He agrees with me and @sexy with her Rolling Stones reference – we have a bunch of faggots wandering around with their tyrannical feministas following!

        Where are the real men?! We need AB DADA to work on them.

        I like Aurini (or is it RN in disguise?) even though he chain-smokes and I generally hate smokers more than feminists, but I’m a pretty sick kind of gal like that.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        hahahaha- don’t EVEN get me started on AB. the only thing I hate more than cry babies are posers.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Oh crap, ladiesadie, I can’t get past 3minutes of that. I keep thinking of the Kids In The Hall sketch, with “manservant Hecubus” (go to marker 1:20):

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rADdKqPNdaM

      • Galina L. says:

        Dear Ladysadie,
        you got many of us confused with your initial comments. I thought it was some dissonance in your story because you sounded like a strong and active person, but in your words you were angry about feminism and asking for help from some prince charming to come and to take your responsibilities away. You are doing just fine,you are young and attractive, doing well your cool and well-payed job, and you earn enough money to support your big family, carrying responsibility to rise your girls. You could be portrayed like a feminism icon, but you got tired at the moment and feel like getting out some builduped steam . Just look how well you are doing! Cheer-up!

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        While I’m on the Kids in the Hall, maybe this is the reason for weak men:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C4TGGtPzBU

      • Aurini – “Be a god-damn man” the solution to this problem. Love it!

        Oh, oh – talk about loving women with guns – I found out my Valentines present!!!! Ruger 10/22 carbine!!! Now if only I can find ammo. :-(

        Next post up should be how Feminists hate women with weapons.

      • JLPF — Gabriella’s “You could be portrayed like a feminism icon” — JLPF

      • “I’m technically, smarter than my husband. In the book-smart way. He has incredible gut-reaction and intuition. So he takes “command” of areas that need that type of decision-making. I take command of the areas that I’m better at.”

        I kinda dislike the “smarter than” thing altogether, perhaps unless one is dealing with a retard (sorry, I’m not PC) at one end and genius at the other. Women and men are very smart, but in different ways.

        My wife is completing her 30th year as a teacher, has a masters in counseling. I have BS, ehem, _a_ BS, but I also started a business in a bedroom with $200 to my name and grew it to 30 employees. I previously lived abroad for 8 years in Asia and Europe and spent years in the solitude of being at sea. And I grew up working for my painting contractor dad on construction sites.

        Her intelligence is far narrower, and her interests go more to conventional, whereas I’m widely read, have a philosophical bent, etc.

        She can not visualize a finished product, thus all the remodel jobs over the years that she resists me on because she couldn’t see what it looked like at the end and I can’t help but see what it looks like in the end.

        I embarrass her in typical social situations, she embarrasses me in high level conversation about philosophy or politics.

        So, how does anyone make any sense out of that? My answer? You don’t. What you do is keep your finances separate. All of our credit cards are our own, paid on our own. We have separate bank accounts, etc. In the end, this is the simplest way to keep the peace. You pay for what you want (I’ll tag along if you want me), I’ll pay for what I want (would love to have you tag along), and now & then, we split the bill when we’re both in full agreement.

        Simple. Non confrontational and neither of us ever feels like one of the other is paying for what might be perceived as the indulgences of the other.

        One way we do tend to divide up stuff is I do 99% of all the food shopping and cooking. Bea’s idea of cooking is steamed rice & steamed vegetables. Ref: my food porn. She takes care of the social calendar and just tells me where to be, and when (and when to have dinner ready, and for how many).

        “Earlier in our relationship, under the idea of being “equal”, we split decisions. And it was a disaster. We’re not equal, but now we’re fair.Also, to me, this idea that men automatically make the decisions is disastrous not just for women, but for men because then the men bear the blame when things go south, esp if they’re not qualified to make certain decisions.”

        See?

      • Galina L. says:

        I know the meaning of WTF, OMG, LOL and BTW abbreviations, but, please, somebody tell me what JLPF means even if it will piss me off!

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Yes, Galina, I am pretty angry this week… there are some things going on that aren’t suitable to bitch about here. Thanks to everyone for their patience. Still, I am not so pleased with the Feminist ideals that make it seem like all women should be happier and more fulfilled chained to their desk and not caring for their kids.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        +1 on the women with guns suggestion

        and ARRRRGH, I do not want to be their feminist icon!!!

      • Galina – I attributed that Gabriella, sorry.

        Richard’s new Internet meme – jean luc picard facepalm – JLPF

        But, I guess Sadie’s taking the feminism icon well and didn’t complain too much.

      • “@RN, I do like you.”

        I love or hate. No in-between, because I don’t give a second of time to someone I’m indifferent to.

        It cracks Bea up, embarrasses her, too. In social situations, if someone isn’t interesting me, I don’t even hear anything. It’s just lips moving and I’ll actually just walk away without really even knowing I’m potentially offending someone.

        There’s a bit in the movie Se7en I really love. When Brad and Morgan finally find Kevin’s place and they begin reading through his journals, there’s this bit about him, Kevin, being on the bus or subway, listening to some guy talk, and the banality was so intense that he vomited on the guy.

        Laf.

        So, I’m not indifferent to you. I’ll leave it to you to figure out the rest.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        No, I am just too outraged to wax eloquent on all the ways that is wrong… haha. I understand that it is true in a “just the facts, Ma’am” kind of way, it’s just not what is in my heart. I watched too many Disney movies and I wish prince charming would come rescue me. While I know that isn’t going to happen, I also do not want my story or circumstances hijacked by a bunch of Feministas who want to hold me up as an example, because truthfully, while I can do what must be done, it would be much easier if that wasn’t the case.

        It’s all forced and I function at this level out of fear, not desire.

      • “don’t EVEN get me started on AB. the only thing I hate more than cry babies are posers.”

        Things aren’t always as they seem. I have a bias towards honest people and I think ABD is honest. I would really like society to get beyond the knee-jerk admiration of smooth talkers and condemnation of those who say what people think from time-to-time but never say.

        His Facebook, all of it, is open to public view and he and all his peeps are pretty active. Judge how you like, but I think he’s an honest guy and that goes a lot farther for me than the typical liar, which is how I view 95% of people.

        Honesty is quite rare. Most people are looking to tell you what they think you want to hear because they are so insecure as to put their wanting you to like them above their own assessment of their own character.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Richard, I love the word “retard” and use it all the time. I don’t know why you’re apologizing “for not being PC”. Never complained about that.
        I don’t like saying that I’m “smarter” than my husband, either. In my original draft, I explained it more. But in the interest of being concise, figured adding “technically” would square everything. Even for the retards. I just don’t get why this has to be a “men and women are very smart, but in different ways”. There’s more difference within a gender than between. *Groups* of people (family, friends couples) are generally of the same intelligence, but in different ways.
        Dude, I didn’t feel the need to elaborate about all the amazing ways my booky-smarts make me super-dooper. I mean, did you notice how you kinda put your wife down in that comment? A laundry list of your achievements and a quickie prop for her. Just re-read it. I’m busting your balls cuz I know you lovey dovey wifey.
        So why did you end it with a “See?” We agreed, ya retard. We just don’t agree that the differences NECESSARILY fall along gender lines.
        You’re a cunt, BTW. That’s my second fave word. Don’t tell McEwan…

      • I’ve been honest and dishonest like anyone else. But as to my reputation, it’s pretty solid overall. Most of my mistakes revolve around one specific clique of people, and I screwed that entire group over pretty badly not just once but twice. I came clean on it immediately, and online, and if people still hold a grudge, I don’t begrudge that.

        The thing is, when people DO question my lifestyle, I’ve always provided the same offer: come hang out with me, any time, almost anywhere. I’ve had naysayers do this, and they always end up being friends or fans after it.

        It’s funny what people like to throw at me that I use to reframe debates to my side. I embrace the ad hominem attacks as what defines me as a person — the lower people try to portray me, the lower yet I’ll place myself in the social fabric, just to show them that those issues aren’t what makes a man a man.

        Sometimes people want to put me on a higher status level as a disparagement, saying things like “oh, he’s a rich spoiled trust fund baby”, to which I have more than enough proof that I am not wealthy by any means, that I was raised by two immigrants who didn’t speak English well (or at all, in my mom’s case), and that 100% of what I have, I have because I earned it.

        Here are the rules to winning EVERY debate:

        1. Accept your opponents disparaging comments as fact, and don’t try to defend your weaknesses; sell your weaknesses as strengths.

        2. Use your real name in every public and private debate; anonymity is an instant loss for the anonymous party. If you aren’t willing to disclose who you are and put your reputation on the line, anything you have to say is irrelevant.

        3. Don’t be afraid of endless studies that show your case is wrong — for every NIH government-funded study that proves X, there’s an equal one that proves Y, or disproves X.

        4. Understand that MOST people who attack you online are either (A) trolling, like me, or (B) projecting their own insecurities about things that they hate about their own lives.

        5. For every hour you spend in debate, spend 40 hours playing in the sun or having sex with a beautiful partner who loves you.

        Follow these 5 simple steps, and you’re bulletproof.

      • Laf. That’s funny. I make fun of chick drinks al the time. Except pina coladas. :)

      • ladysadie1 says:
      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Richard, re: AB. Bullshit — I’m honest and you don’t like me. I jsut say shit that you don’t “approve” of. But it’s all from the heart. My big, fat, ugly feminazi heart.
        Don’t care if you like him or not. If you feel he’s honest, whatev. I don’t. RN, as a man, you have compromised bullshit detectors. There’s an evolutionary reason for that (BAWUHAHAHAHA)…

      • “I mean, did you notice how you kinda put your wife down in that comment?”

        Funny, I knew it would be perceived as such.

        I just speak for myself, that’s all.

        Beatrice, to her credit, doesn’t worry about any of it. She has a fine life, is financially stable on her own merits without me…because she saves her own money that’s her money. And she’s pretty frugal.

        It’s just that we are very, very vastly different. In so many ways in terms of interests, travel being a common one. I’m not really qualified to judge, critique or even tell you what I’d assume you or anyone want to hear about how smart she is. I never engage in that sort of thing. I let people speak for themselves.

        She stands on her own, by her own accomplishments I had zero part in and I have no status to sit here and critique it. I just don’t. But I understand. It’s not the norm, because everyone lies and loves to hear lies and sweet nothings and banal bullshit.

        I can not emphasize enough how different it is for spouses that keep separate finances as we did before marriage and nothing changed afterward. We hear people talk about those kind of things and we’re both mystified.

        So consider the full context of that when you note that I don’t spew the same tired bullshit you’re expecting to hear.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        @AB: get off your fucking cross. You embrace attacks? You pop a chubby cuz you tend to start them, retard. Funny thing is, whenever people think I’m some asshole and then hang out with ME, they end of being friends or fans, too. But you know why? Because I’m NOT an asshole. I don’t write bullshit on the internet about how I have to put people down to build myself up. You say shit about how all women want to be dominated and the rest (sight unseen) are fat, used cows blah blah blah and then get all baby-eyes like “what?!!? How can anyone get pissed at lil’ ol me?!!? I’m just telling’ the truth about peole that I’ve never seen or met!” You haven’t won any debates that I’ve seen (granted, very small pool), but you’re some expert? Oh Tim Ferris, how I hate you for creating the modern “experts”. “I’m AB Dada and I one time insulted bitches on the interwebs. I’m a debate EXPERT!”. Oh, AB, could you PLEASE consult me??!!? Your fucking website is for high-priced peeps??!? Yet it has typo’s all over it. Whose you’re clientele? The blind and rich uglies?

      • Galina L. says:

        I can relate, I was in situations when fear made me very well functioning,and I remember also how burned-out I felt afterwards. Unfortunately, it is often the price. Hold on, try to take care of yourself the bast you can. I want to add a small thing – don’t add to your stress worries about your doters education funds. Taking student loans and going to in-state public university is absolutely fine option. My son took a loan without us co-signing, it didn’t cover everything , we added some money to it, but it was ok.
        I don’t want your face on the feminist placate, it was sort-of a figure of speech.

      • “I’m honest and you don’t like me.”

        I think you say what you think. I think you indulge yourself—patting yourself on the back for “honesty”—when being honest is materially relevant and you have a disingenuous attitude when confronted with honesty from others.

        Or, to put it more succinctly. You have your “honesty,” which is really merely your brash, in-your-face take on the general regurgitate you regurgitate, which you freely speak.

        That said, you’re wrong. I do like you. I’m not going to condescend. You’re fine.

        I have a question for you, to hopefully make it more clear for you and others to understand what I really mean when I say _honesty_. Give me an example or two of being dishonest by telling the truth. If you think that sounds bizarre, they that’s about right. People conflate truth and honesty al the time, and they are far from the same.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Richard, “So consider the full context of that when you note that I don’t spew the same tired bullshit you’re expecting to hear.” Don’t know what you mean. I don’t believe that I’ve attributed “tired bullshit” to you. Mr. Sexybear and I keep separate as well as a household finance. Not sure what all of this means in the thread. But ok.

      • Sadie – I thought it was the commercial I’ve been hearing about that you linked and then I realized it was just a commercial. Nevertheless, I LOVE FARMERS! and I love/miss Paul Harvey, he is irreplaceable.

        Good song – haven’t heard of them of the before, but very fitting to the conversation.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Richard “Give me an example or two of being dishonest by telling the truth.” I can’t because that’s an impossiblity. Are you referring to AB? I’ve said on Wooo’s site that I don’t think he IS a mean jerk-off to his girlfriends. I think that’s his internet persona. And that’s where I feel that he’s being dishonest.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        “I think you say what you think. I think you indulge yourself—patting yourself on the back for “honesty”—when being honest is materially relevant and you have a disingenuous attitude when confronted with honesty from others.”
        Really? I differ so much from ladysadie and Shelley (and even Wooo). But I respsect their honesty. They’re respectful and, above all else, seem to at least want to hear another side. It was a fucking lovefest towards the end of our comments to each other. And I’ve thrown you props several times, inc about being concise. So where am I being “disingenous… when confronted by others”?

      • “You say shit about how all women want to be dominated”

        I’ve never heard him say that, in fact quite to the contrary. Moreover, domination is a contextual thing: when, how, in what respect, what context?

        My take is that he prefers, and makes clear that his preference is to be with women who have an appreciation or dare I say _need_ of male domination in appropriate, limited contexts.

        There’s an example of how to deal in a more wide context, timeless and widely applicable honesty, rather than static, out-of-context truths that are convenient for one comment under one post in one blog, in response to one person in a single moment in time.

      • “I can’t because that’s an impossiblity.”

        Final answer (I’m not talking about ABD, but in life in general). You still think it’s impossible? If so, that’s great. means we’re getting somewhere because it’s very far from impossible and happens around you every day.

        Think, sexy. Think. Really. It would kill me to have to give you such simple examples when I know you can come up with them and I get to high five you.

        Please? Think gril.

      • Sexybearfriend says:

        Dishonest by telling the truth? Needle in a haystack. I’m not falling for it. That’s a broad question. It needs context. Do you mean the spacey “what IS the truth”? Do you mean “manipulative” truth, whereby you say something technically truthful but you’re intentions are not? DO you mean that you fell on your head and it’s a space-time continuum thing where 1 min it’s the truth and the next it ain’t.

        I’ll summarize many comment posts: according to ABD, women are either sweet and submissive, or angry man-hating fatties. I shorthanded by saying “all”. Either way, a woman that doesn’t want to be dominated doesn’t get any props.

      • “I don’t believe that I’ve attributed “tired bullshit” to you.”

        See there’s another form of not being fully honest. In no way have I even implied that everything you post is tired bullshit—otherwise I wouldn’t even engage. If you’re being honest, you might assume that right off the bat.

        You imply that you have given me zero tired bullshit, whereas, any honest person might say something like “what did I say that you think is tired bullshit?” That’s detente, not escalation. It’s entirely reasonable that you said something that’s absolute tired bullshit or was said in such a way that I understood it as such and there’s an opportunity to get to the bottom of that one, or those 2 or three things, rather than the typical dishonest engagement where everything I say is right and everything you say wrong, or vice versa, so we have a Big Intertubes War.

        I can get into a flame war and love it along with the next guy, but I prefer it to be about material social things and not the behavior of the parties, which is what this is about.

        “Mr. Sexybear and I keep separate as well as a household finance. Not sure what all of this means in the thread. But ok.”

        Good. Have you an ability to discern the specific form the general (now I’m being condescending). Again, operating honestly—and mistakes do happen even when operating as such—and looking at the context and style in which it was written, might give you the clue that I was speaking generally in terms of relationships, as one big element of problems.

        Since I didn’t say, “sexy, stop pooling your finances,” there was no specific assumption in my post. I doubt that upon careful reading you would assume that I made such a specific assumption I can’t possibly know about so again, operating honestly, why would you imply I did, or even imply it was non-sequitur?

        We’re getting somewhere now.

      • Since you have no real name, and have no way for anyone to verify your stories, I will assume you’re a typical Internet troll living their fantasy out in the comments section of a website.

        I don’t care for proper grammar or spelling or math except where it’s important. It isn’t on my personal blog, and it surely isn’t important in a comments section that doesn’t have an edit button.

        The people who hire me hire me because I generally have a great sense of who a person is and what they’re hiding through body language and verbal projection. It’s one of my talents. It’s near impossible to do on the Internet, and especially so with anonymous cowards. So I throw darts and hope to hit one, because I love to feed the trolls. Eventually, I hit paydirt and they end up cowering and crying, which is what all anonymous trolls end up doing eventually (usually due to their sad and insignificant lives).

        As for me, I let my reputation speak in defense most of the time. Google has me archived back to 1987 or so, under my real name, with a full history of some of my dating profile, my businesses, my contacts.

        I’m still friends with almost everyone I’ve worked with or been in love with or hung out with for any reasonable period of time. That’s reputation.

        That is why I can use my real name on here, and you can’t.

        It’s why customers of mine can Google my name, find my so-called “hate” comments, and not have one single issue retaining me or my companies.

        It’s why I am free, and you’re unfree.

        It’s sad that you have to hide beyond a fake identity, but that’s part of being part of the system. I exited it a long, long time ago.

      • SBF – I don’t know if this is what Richard’s getting at, but have you ever heard the phrase “Lies, damned lies, and statistics”?

        Essentially, true facts such as statistics can be transmitted in such a way that they convey faleshood. i.e. most of the studies about diet. Did you hear about the recent breakfast study in Spain? People who ate earlier lost more weight than people who ate later. Cool right?! Maybe, maybe not. They did NOT report body composition in that study, and similar studies have shown that early eaters lose more muscle than fat, and that late eaters lose much more fat, but less weight overall. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

      • “I like Aurini (or is it RN in disguise?)”

        Ouch. I looked him up (discovered it was the same guy as in one of @Alpha Unit’s posts on her blog, who commented here recently). I simply can’t get through more than a minute of any video I look at.

        I’m sure many could say the same thing about mine. Just goes to show how difficult it is to do really compelling video.

      • “Really? I differ so much from ladysadie and Shelley (and even Wooo). But I respsect their honesty. They’re respectful and, above all else, seem to at least want to hear another side. It was a fucking lovefest towards the end of our comments to each other. And I’ve thrown you props several times, inc about being concise. So where am I being “disingenous… when confronted by others”?”

        Well, see, now you write something that doesn’t qualify.

        For one, all dog piles are always disingenuous. That disingenuousness is only justified when you have a total troll on your hands, not when you and the GFs want to get together against someone you don’t like but who is nonetheless posting honestly.

        But it’s not like it’s a sin or anything. It’s just disingenuous, I’ve engaged in it as well, but I always try to be mindful of getting caught up in it.

        Also, being too ranty in the comments, over and over, qualifies. The rant is for the blog post, not necessarily designed to be fully cognitive (by which I mean, hype is not cognitive, it’s hype—can serve a useful purpose but is not cognitive). But the difference is that a comment rant is directed at an individual, not a general issue, so it becomes disingenuous (you’re just spewing hype at him/her, not discussing or fairly addressing his/her arguments).

        But again, hell isn’t going to swallow you up. I’m just saying you can do a little better, not to mention writing in paragraphs.

      • “Needle in a haystack.”

        Then we live in a billion haystacks. It’s all around everyone everywhere and is the essential root of _all_ manipulative language. All of it.

        But I see you’re incurious and nothing crashes my bone like that. So I’ll save it for a post soon.

      • “That is why I can use my real name on here, and you can’t.”

        I’m fortunate to have learned this early on. back in about ’94-’96. I was all over USENET as “Nicholas Rich” (get it?). But there were people, even “enemies,” who knew who I was—and the pseudonym was mainly a schtick anyway (get it?), so I just began using my real name.

        Guess what immediately happened? Well, after I got fired, people showed up at my house and shot me when I opened the door, poisoned my dogs, then threatened my parents and brothers, I’ve done just fine.

        …Nothing happened. Nothing ever and my stuff is all over Google and I’m damned easy to find. Hell, an internet security guy who watched one of my videos was able to make out the street sign outside the window and emailed me a Google street image of my house.

        At the same time, guess how many emails I get from people who used their real names in comments and want me to delete the comment because they have a job prospect? Lots. Of course, I’m not an asshole that way, so I do as they request, no questions.

        This is why I am totally uninterested in so-called “Internet privacy.” Privacy is my home, so no video cams or bugs. Otherwise, I basically have little to hide and my use of the word “cunt” in posts and comments is likely to help me more than hurt me in anything I do. Why would I want to associate or do business with anyone who can’t set that aside. My behavior is actually a good filter. People who don’t like me—a good indication I wouldn’t lim them either—leave me alone, so it’s a time saver. Except for family, I generally loath people who get offended by any “off-color” use of language. Means they’ve never been to a comedy club and I contend that anyone who hasn’t is not worth knowing.

        “It’s why I am free, and you’re unfree.”

        In the context, that’s what you call an a-priori true statement: you don’t even need to get up off the couch.

      • For a few years, I disclosed my entire tax returns (with only a few items redacted). I think those are probably still out there, since I never really turn off websites (only domains expire, but my main server subdomain for every website exists forever). ALL my addresses are public, my cell phone numbers, my home number, my businesses. It’s all out there. I do get a few random calls a week, but nothing too creepy or stalkerish.

        Every year, a handful of customers will look me up, find something subversive or contrarian, query me about why I wrote it, and usually shrug it off. Provide a great service at a competitive price and be available, and you can be dressed as Hitler at a yarmulke store and people will buy from you, hire you, work with you, even date you (I have a history of seriously dating hardcore feminist activists, if you’d believe it).

        My main home is under video surveillance (mostly inside) and only activated if I feel threatened. I’ve seen too many freedom lovers get their homes raided by the gold chest jewelry wearers, so it’s my on paranoia. Of course if I ever get raided and shot, that video is going to go viral instantly, and my heirs will make pretty good bank on the advertising income.

      • “have you ever heard the phrase “Lies, damned lies, and statistics”?”

        It’s not the main thrust of my queries, but one example. I’m more aiming at the dishonesty that pervades everyday interaction that is nonetheless truthful.

    • ladysadie1 says:

      Wow, Wooo. WOW. You don’t just hate men, you hate EVERYONE who doesn’t think and act exactly as you think they should.

      “What I don’t get about you Sadie is you wax poetic about baking cupcakes and sitting in your house raising your kids…and you blame FEMINISM for not being able to do this, rather than putting the blame squarely where it belongs: your husband/boyfriend/whoever created these children apparently left you alone with them in your middle age.”

      First of all, if you think that raising kids = “sitting in your house” then your idea of what a SAHM does proves that you are far too immature for me to even bother with the rest of your solipsistic rant, but since you’d made it personal, I am going to anyway.

      I know exactly where to place the blame for my being HOH (Head of Household), so I do not need you to “educate” me about my station in life. This post isn’t about ME, and I wonder what is wrong with you that you have decided to personalize it. (I have stated my reason for being single on this site before, go find it.)

      For the record, YES, I do view feminism as one of, if not THE, root cause of the breakdown of society and familial relationships. Your statements even support this view, “I work in an industry populated 90% women or more, and this is really isn’t uncommon amongst the americans and modern types (although it is rare amongst the foreigners, who actually have strong religious values and stay married out of a respect/observance/devotion to their tradition and culture).” There ya go. “…americans and modern types…” Yes, exactly, I believe you mean FEMINISTS.

      “…modern american men who live and play like selfish indivualists children, freely using/exploiting women…”

      “Why buy the cow when feminism has taught young women to give away the milk for free in the name of EQUALITY? I just can’t follow your train of thought. It’s feminism’s fault that your husband/men leave women saddled with a bunch of kids once they turn 35?”

      Actually, it’s the women who decide they are “unhaaaapy” and leave the men and the court system rewards these women with custody, cash and prizes like alimony and child support. Oh, by the way, I am not “saddled” with children, they are human beings that I nurture and provide for, they are not baggage.
      http://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/general/divorce.pdf According to the AARP statistics, it is women who ask for divorce 66% of the time, NOT the “see you later lady! You’re not fun anymore with these kids, and you’re kinda old, so I’m off to run away with a 20 year old” myth that you are trying to perpetuate.

      “I think it’s time you stop writing about feminism/feminists and start directing your anger toward men and this juvenile individualist culture that promotes exploiting women for sex and not taking any responsibility or concern for the products of sex, mainly that being children are born”.

      No, as we are all fond of pointing out here, people evolve. It is a natural process. I agree with that viewpoint, but in the case of feminism and how gender roles have changed, that is not a natural process. We didn’t go from women as caretakers of the family and men as breadwinners to this rampant materialism as some sort of spontaneous adaptation. The constant barrage of hyper-sexualized entertainment and the culture or entitlement and celebrity worship are not part of natural process, and it certainly isn’t “evolution” as that would imply improvement.

      “On this blog, there is just a non-stop torrent of hate directed toward women and girls for making men leave them. Sluts, whores, putting out, blah blah blah. It’s never even MENTIONED some expectation should be put on men to not be pigs, in fact, we see men constantly bragging about it (using women for sex, exploiting third world women for sex). It’s not even frowned upon. It’s not even taboo.”

      BooooHoooo. You can’t run around fucking whomever you choose. Let’s blame the Evil Patriarchy. Puh-leez. If you want to go around fucking whomever you choose with no consequences, good for you, and I get to call you a slut and a whore because your actions lower the value of ALL women. Shame on you. Yes, men like to spread their genes around. Yes, men are pigs, that’s a priori, and no, it’s not even frowned upon, file that under “It Is What It Is” and move on. You don’t get to claim that the hooha equality movement and women spreading their legs with total impunity is evolutionary progress but that men haven’t evolved as the same pace and come to embrace the slut culture at the same time.

      “At the very least, if you are going to blame women, feminism, sluts, at least a token mention of juvenile pigs is called for.”

      Holy shit, you’ve been riding the cock carousel for so long that even your logic goes in circles. ONCE AGAIN, they are not acting like juvenile pigs, they are acting like Men. If the sex is cheap and easy and constantly available with no price tag, they will take it. They like sex. Women used to be the gate keepers of their sexuality and knew it had value. Feminism removed all the inherent value of sex by making it free and encouraging women to give it away. Then, as a bonus, they taught women to treat man like dirt and doormats. How’s that working out for you?

      Once again, why do you spew hatred and vitriol at me personally? When did I become the icon for the anti-feminist movement? Is it because I can bake cupcakes from scratch AND change my own oil but yet I hate the way you cheerlead for misandry and women’s “right” to loose morals? Are you just angry because I should be a Feminist Poster Girl based on my job title, over-achieving kids, and not needing a man (not even as an ATM machine, like so many other divorcés)?

      This:

      “Rule #1 of domestic violence victim reeducation camp: You can’t make or not make a man treat you well. It is up to the man to take responsibility, be decent, and not be a piece of shit. Women being better women is not going to make shitty men not be pieces of shit.”

      No one is trying to force a man to do anything. Associating oneself with more traditional gender roles it brings out the best in the opposite sex rather than of fomenting the worst. Women who value themselves AS WOMEN, not as competitors to men have more successful and rewarding personal lives. Men who value their masculinity have happier and more loyal partners. It’s not that difficult to figure out. Moreover, Wooo, angry, pushy, hateful; ball-busters don’t make good wives and aren’t attractive to men, so I think it’s best if you leave the reeducation of DV victims to those of us with experience and proven track records.

      • Sadie – if you don’t want want to be the icon for the anti-feminist movement, I will. Maybe together we can stop this feminist bullshit. :-)

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Oh, I am fine with being the icon for the anti-feminists… Sometimes drawing fire is a little infuriating when the attacks are personal. Guess that means we are right on target…

        “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
        -Mahatma Gandhi

        PS, Shelley, judgybitch did another great post today about the genius of women. I think you’ll like it.

      • And as you know, too, Sadie, “Genius begins and ends with a loving mother. And loving mothers create daughters capable of becoming loving mothers themselves. That is our genius.” is my purpose in life. Work is a side job and since it’s my choice, it will not interfere with my greatest purpose.

        I didn’t even need to buy a stinking book and go through numerous exercises to try to work that out. Nothing makes a mom feel more powerful than watching your little one grow into a strong independent person…and truthfully, since I have boys, I sincerely hope they will not squander their talents, both of whom are relatively way smarter than me right now at their ripe young ages of 14 and 11.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Ok, Shelley, this isn’t baking cupcakes, you and your boys can do this as a bonding experience: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ldgp3Ton7R4

      • Now that, lady Sadie, is right up my alley! exploding ping pong balls!

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Oh, yes!!! I want to do it, too but the fun-hater elementary principal cancelled our science fair this year because it isn’t “fair” to all the kids. (head::: desk:::)

        I want to see video if you do it! :) Also, of note we have found that wintergreen lifesavers work as well as mentos for diet coke bombs, er, I mean science experiments… It’s not all about cupcakes and pretty dresses here!

      • “And as you know, too, Sadie, “Genius begins and ends with a loving mother. And loving mothers create daughters capable of becoming loving mothers themselves. That is our genius.””

        Uh, a word for your sons, please?

        I’m fortunate to be able to love and honor my father. He’s great, cool, everything I could ascribe. But he knows that at the very end of any given day, my mother comes first and that goes for all 4 of us boys of our mother.

        I contend that that is the natural order of things.

      • Lute Nikoley says:

        And that’s the way it should be, I’s be disappointed if it were any other way. That’s why when there’s a problem, the call comes to your mom, not me. Cool!

      • “PS, Shelley, judgybitch did another great post today about the genius of women. I think you’ll like it.”

        I want my link, bitches!

      • “http://youtu.be/Ldgp3Ton7R4″

        That should have been in Breaking Bad.

      • http://judgybitch.com/

        From one of the bitches – enjoy!

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Richard called us bitches! Bahaha, we are Free Animal Bitches, where is my t-shirt!!!???

      • Here’s the permalink and having only read half because my bitch ass has to go get dogfood, it’s pretty golden.

        http://judgybitch.com/2013/02/06/personally-flo-i-would-forgive-you-if-you-punched-that-stupid-bitch-in-the-face/

        I mean, there’s a whole kinda unexplored world out there. Everyone talks about women victims in corporate America. They haven’t even begun to cash in yet. Wait until they’re victims of their own teenage daughters.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Yeah, She is Friggin Brilliant! Glad you are following her, we could all use a little Judgybitch

      • I especially like: “Newsflash, you dumb twat: You can set boundaries WITHOUT putting down your wine glass. Trust me. I do it all the time.”

        That is so me!

      • Wooo ought to give her a look see for a while, seriously. Her hate is strong.

      • I just now finished it. I love it primarily because she doesn’t wax creative in rage because a little clever is all that’s needed and always enough.

        Wooo, go read that. Tell me that if you got paid to do it as a pro writer and set aside your biases (I contend that Alec Baldwin could and would play the best, truest Dubya ever) you couldn’t write that about word for word.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        What about people (both male and female) who did not have loving mothers but were learned to be loving parents? I’d say that is genius. Doing what you experienced being done is just doing the same. That’s actually easy.

        Just as living in an abusive home makes it easier to be an abuser. It takes thought, creativity and imagination to make it better. That is genius. (if you want to use that word.)

      • “What about people (both male and female) who did not have loving mothers but were learned to be loving parents? I’d say that is genius.”

        It’s just basic animal, unimpeded by baggage bullshit. Loving offspring is what’s natural and normal and it’s expressed throughout the mammalian animal kingdom in particular and other classes of animals too. Other than rare aberration stuff like rabbits eating their newborns (I’ve seen that 1st hand), possibly accounted for by other weird or unnatural circumstance (such as domestic captivity), animals do exactly everything necessary to bring a fully functioning offspring to self sufficiency.

        Only humans seem to have a problem and everyone looks around like the biggest mutherfucking morons in the universe wondering what new laws need to be passed to unbreak what was broken by laws in the first place.

        And this is why at root, i essentially hate all people who advocate for laws.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Of course Alec Baldwin would play Dubya truest: neither is capable of a range of facial expression. Good Choice, Richard.

      • What I mean in in spite of baldwin’s smelly commieness, he handles his acting profession with a high degree of honesty. He can play a conservative expertly, and without a tinge of his own bias showing through. Always respected him on that score.

      • ladysadie1 says:
      • OMG, Sadie, now that is funny! Women…..that’s why we’re in STEM fields!

      • That’s an interesting view, but I object to the idea that men can’t help but take sex when it’s offered. I’ve ended open relationships because the guy didn’t want to see any other girls, never the other way round. I’ve slept with people I barely knew, and then had relationships where they’re faithful…and for the record, I get laid by being intelligent and challenging, not by being a sweet female.
        Also, divorces initiated by women are, in my experience, pushed either by stay at home mothers who want their spouse’s income without the boundaries of monogamy, or by women who caught their husbands cheating. The families I know with two incomes tend to stay together (though if I were to be cynical it might just be because the house needs to jobs to pay the mortguage), and because both parties are participating fully in the household respect remains and both parties are faithful.
        …But I’m not saying women should work. I’m going to be a stay at home, ball busting, child rearing, loudmouth non-feminist. I have no doubt my man will be able to resist temptation, ’cause I don’t intend on marrying anybody who doesn’t ooze loyalty.

      • “…But I’m not saying women should work. I’m going to be a stay at home, ball busting, child rearing, loudmouth non-feminist. I have no doubt my man will be able to resist temptation, ’cause I don’t intend on marrying anybody who doesn’t ooze loyalty.”

        Excellent.

  4. …You go, girls. More, please.

  5. BTW, I’m counting the minutes until the Castle Anthrax vid gets reposted in comments for the 100th time.

  6. Lute Nikoley says:

    My grandmothers, both, wielded amazing social power and I’ll never be half the man they were, as women.” When I was 9 years old, I was stuck in communist E. Germany. It was my mother who got me out, not my father.

    • “It was my mother who got me out, not my father.”

      Indeed. The guy says, “he’ll be OK.” And you might have been, a completely different life. But it’s not the life your mother insisted upon.

  7. Gabriella Kadar says:

    I don’t understand why what women do is so polarizing but I come from a totally different background. My great grandmother was the post-mistress of a small town in Hungary. Her husband was a history professor and head of the history department of a nearby town’s high school. In those days there was no local bank and whoever had the job of postmaster/mistress had to be a trusted member of society because all the money went through the hands of this person. She was the longest serving postmistress since the post office opened. My mother is a retired hospital pharmacist. She was responsible for hyperalimentation and radiopharmacy. I’m a dentist. In my family it was never an issue as to whether women are educated or doing something more than raising children (which everyone did, with help of course from other family members or paid help). I went back to fulltime work when my younger child was 2 years old but worked part time on and off after each child was 1 year old.

    I have no prejudicial ideations in regards to women who don’t go out to work and stay home to raise their children. In fact, I think that daycare is an abomination for children under age 4 because their immune systems are immature and children get sick all the time. Children need their mothers. They don’t need socializing with their peers in infancy or toddlerhood.

    Basically as far as I’m concerned we (in Canada) live in a child unfriendly society where both women and children suffer. But at the same time, when women are abandoned by the fathers of their children, they should not be left so vulnerable that they are unable to support themselves and their children. There does not appear to be a sufficiently strong social taboo against men who leave their families and provide no support.

    In Hungary during the ‘bad times’ mothers were given 4 years full paid leave from their jobs for each child. I think that is a very good policy. I don’t know what is happening since the fall of the iron curtain.

    • “In Hungary during the ‘bad times’ mothers were given 4 years full paid leave from their jobs for each child. I think that is a very good policy. I don’t know what is happening since the fall of the iron curtain.”

      So let me get this straight. Working mothers got to have the state come in and make a 2nd class citizen of the man for 4 years for each child, and at the expense of people who had no standing in the matter.

      Yea, great “policy.” I’m sure that whole iron curtain falling thing was entirely incidental to such cohesive familial, social policies.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        In Canada we have 12 months maternity leave. Does that emasculinate men as well?

        From what I see, it’s great because babies are cared for at home by mom. Recently the maternity leave for teachers has been optionally lengthened to 18 months. Some can take longer as unpaid leave and still be able to return to the jobs.

        What is emasculating about this? Clearly I don’t get it.

        In the USA, from what little I know, there’s 6 weeks or less in some areas. Are women once they give birth not supposed to get back to the work force, so any work they did prior to giving birth was of not much value or consequence? Or are women supposed to get back to work after 6 weeks? I’ve wondered about this in the past but have no way of getting an answer unless you can provide it.

        I think the impact of very low oil prices in the mid to late 1980s was most contributory to the dissolution of the USSR. You may have more insights into this.

      • “In Canada we have 12 months maternity leave.”

        I have family in Montreal who started a business and are extremely wealthy by any standard. It’s funny to listen to their conversations when seated alongside their wives on the issue of Canada’s maternity policy.

        The men, who started the business: “We had a lady working for us and overheard her talking about getting pregnant, and we let her go to avoid the 12 month maternity pay.”

        The women, who enjoy the money: “I love our 12 month paid maternity so much that I had 4 children back-to-back and was out of work for 4 years. Now my husband makes so much it’s pointless to go back to work.”

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Marie, I don’t understand what you are on about. I am self employed and have employees in my business. If one of them gets pregnant and takes maternity leave, I do not pay out of my pocket. It’s EI.

        There are women in Canada who are not eligible for paid maternity leave: self employed small business.

      • -It’s Shelley, not Marie – and who pays into the Employment Insurance – everyone who works and wants it, I assume, but is this a mandatory insurance premium that everyone except self-employed must pay? If it’s mandatory, it sucks for all taxpayers.

        I didn’t ask to see their books, but maybe they fired the young lady because they did not want a job open for 1 year and guaranteed on her return while she was off raising a child.

      • “The men, who started the business: “We had a lady working for us and overheard her talking about getting pregnant, and we let her go to avoid the 12 month maternity pay.””

        Look at the bright side. If I had a job and my boss said: “go take 12 months off and we’ll pay you anyway,” the message I’d get unless I was a moron is that I must not be that much of a value to the company if they can just do that.

        So, in the case of this women, she must have filled a critical enough role that they couldn’t do without her or find someone with similar abilities.

        I call that a win for her.

      • the general discussion is too tedious to partake in so i’ll pass on that…

        but in terms of the maternity benefits in canada–it would probably help if people actually knew what they were talking about so they might find ways to shit on it more intelligently. maternity leave is insurance that employees pay for (not employers) and it’s administered by the fed gov’t. you don’t receive full wages.

        maternity/parental benefits are simply a form of EI benefits (there are others like sickness & compassionate care as well). pregnant women can take 15 weeks maternal benefits, and both parents can divide up another 35 weeks of parental benefits any way they want (this applies to adoptive parents as well).

        don’t like it? don’t want to be obliged to pay into it cuz you’ll never need it? then don’t work outside the home OR don’t work legally OR become self employed OR live in another country… though apparently you’ll wanna stay away from Luxembourg as well.

      • @bonita – “don’t like it? don’t want to be obliged to pay into it cuz you’ll never need it? then don’t work outside the home OR don’t work legally OR become self employed OR live in another country…”

        That’s the point I was trying to make exactly – if one chooses to work outside of the home and this EI benefit is a mandatory participation, what about the male/female who chooses to never have kids? Are they forced to pay for a benefit they will never enjoy or simply choose not to work? and then in that case, I’m sure Canada has a dole for the non-workers as well. If it is mandatory, I call that a bullshit tax.

      • And I seriously don’t buy that employers have to “pay” some portion of that maternity leave, if not monetary, then most certainly by either the lack of a valuable employee or the over-employment of workers in the event of one leaving for a year or more. Again, it’s Bullshit to force this on any employer.

      • “maternity leave is insurance that employees pay for (not employers) and it’s administered by the fed gov’t. you don’t receive full wages.”

        If this is true, then nobody in the world should have a prob with it, provided it’s self sufficient like, you know, business. Or, like, can it actually go under as a business and payments would be cut off immediately?

        …At any rate, it is comforting.

        I think in the US, as I recall from a couple of moms who cam beck to work, they got the leave, no pay.

      • http://humanservices.alberta.ca/documents/Maternity-Leave-and-Parental-Leave.pdf

        A Canadian employer is not obligated to pay their salary, but they are obligated to pay for any benefits and they are guaranteed their job back 12 months later. Similar to the US’s family leave act.

        Still Bullshit!

      • “Still Bullshit!”

        It is. I never signed up for this when I began hiring the first of 30 employees. Had I known, I would have hired only men.

        Suck it, bitches.

        I have a fucking business to run and I have my own family.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Yeah, I feel your pain. I got stuck with a management title for a night club and there is NO good help to be found!

      • “I would have hired only men” ALSO, do not hire smokers!

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Employment insurance applies to men as well. They use it just as much as anyone else. The birth rate is low so to assume that women on mat leave are the primary beneficiaries is incorrect.

      • i’m 49 and have no kids, so i have paid for many years and never collected–for giving birth. and yes, of course you pay into the EI program with the possibility that you might never benefit from it… that’s why it’s called insurance. do americans not have EI? we’ve just expanded ours to encompass more situations.

        perhaps i wasn’t clear enough. maternity/paternal leave benefits are part of the larger EI benefit program. meaning that all employees pay into a single system and can potentially draw on it for different reasons. e.g. getting laid off, having a kid, getting injured outside of work and being unable to work for weeks or months, or needing to take care of a terminally ill relative.

        i collected EI once when i left a job–i took a buyout so others could keep their jobs. i started my own small business and through a special EI program my benefits were extended an extra 6 months–making it possible for me to survive the first year and turning it into a success.

        mandatory? yes and no. if you want to work outside the home, the EI premium is only taken from EMPLOYEES…. so if you don’t want to pay, as i said previously, DON’T BE AN EMPLOYEE. self-employed people don’t pay for and can’t receive EI benefits.

        and yes, we do have a “dole” for non-workers but welfare is a very different issue that i have no desire to debate. my objective was simply to correct the misinformation that was steering this particular part of the discussion. you may still consider it to be a bullshit tax, but that i’m comfortable with.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        That’s right: everyone who is getting a paycheque (except for self employed people) benefit from Employment Insurance. Men and women. There are tens of thousands of men who do seasonal work and benefit from Employment Insurance. They far outweigh the women who go on maternity leave. If anything it is the men on seasonal work who are sponging off the rest of the workforce. If that is how you want to look at it.

      • @shelley
        you’re being a bit disingenuous. direct quote from your link: “The Code does not require an employer to make any payments to the employee, OR PAY FOR ANY BENEFITS, [emphasis added] during maternity or parental leave. However, where an employer has benefit plans such as sick leave for employees, there MAY BE [emphasis added] obligations that arise under human rights legislation.”

      • You miss the point, Gabriella.

        If someone wants employment insurance, go fucking buy it. It’s between you and the insurer. As an employer, I want no more to do with it that I want to have to do with your car or homeowners. Unless, of course, it’s part of a benefit package to attract good employees, such as healthcare (whole other subject).

        In other words, what’s in it for me, as the one signing the paycheck?

        Excuse me, but some people really need to sit at a desk in their own company and write $150k of payroll twice per month for a few years all while being told how vile they are and the root of all problems. They ought to sit there and hear all the vintage whine being made daily.

        People think I rant too much. Laf.

        BTW, you might be referring to what we call unemployment insurance. It’s a state run deal. I’m not up on what the employee/employer contribution split is but I do know that 100% of the paperwork and administrative burden is on the employer.

      • “perhaps i wasn’t clear enough. maternity/paternal leave benefits are part of the larger EI benefit program. meaning that all employees pay into a single system and can potentially draw on it for different reasons. e.g. getting laid off, having a kid, getting injured outside of work and being unable to work for weeks or months, or needing to take care of a terminally ill relative.”

        Here’s what I find odd. in early December my brother was staying overnight. His almost new F-250 For Diesel parked in front. 11PM. huge noise.

        Drunk driver hit him, drove it into Bea’s Infinity FX-35.

        His insurance paid for both with almost no probe. In fact, for us, he had the same company and they set us up with a repair shop and rental car that both actually called us before we even came in.

        Now tell me why the government must run the business of insurance if it’s not on purely political grounds, so as to buy votes from those who don’t want to pay at the expense of those who have more to lose by not paying.

        I love how suckers go to all lengths to dance around the fact they’re being suckers. Just tell me you pay because it’s worse not too, like I do. Stop telling me how great that is for everyone. It’s not.

        Theft isn’t great no matter how it’s sliced. Pragmatically submissable is the very best you can do.

      • “If anything it is the men on seasonal work who are sponging off the rest of the workforce.”

        I’ll be sure and let my Mexican gardeners know next Thursday what sponges they are, how they are bringing us down.

      • gallier2 says:

        Better to do it like in Luxembourg. 12 months maternal leave that can be evenly split between the father and the mother, if they both work in Lux. A friend of mine did that. His wife did the first 6 months, he did the other 6 months.

      • Galina L. says:

        Besides maternity live, we also had a different life-style, people were more dependent on each other. I had my son at 32, it was unusually late for Russia. Most of the time people had 1 – 2 children very early in life, like while in a college, grand-grandmas in early 60-x were often raising children, while relying on monetary help from their children and grandchildren. Even now retirement age to females in Russia 55 years old. It is so low because government knew grandmas raise grandchildren.Very often people in the pick of their carriers were helping with money to their adult but still young children and parents. They did it with knowledge that when they got older their children would do the same. Often households were multi- generational. It is not the traditional norm that everybody is totally independent from their relatives. It is the rich country standard.

    • “But at the same time, when women are abandoned by the fathers of their children, they should not be left so vulnerable that they are unable to support themselves and their children. There does not appear to be a sufficiently strong social taboo against men who leave their families and provide no support.”

      This is precisely why I have always worked even after my boys were born. I trust my husband with everything except my kids and my eternal security. Unpredictable things happen – I guess watching my father run off and leave 3 kids and a wife to starve hammers reality home. I have just decided that I will take care of myself and the loves of my life, which if others were forced to provide for would be considered a burden. Government is not the answer to this problem! As a result, we are financially stable, able to travel, buy the latest gizmo, etc., but most importantly, I have by example showed my boys that it is important to be individually responsible for your life and DO NOT count on anyone else being there.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        There you go, Shelley. You just proved my point.

      • “You just proved my point.”

        Shelly didn’t say that. You did, and without any clear justification anyone could tell.

      • @Gabriella – Fuck off. ” You just proved my point.”

        In absolutely no way did I prove your point; you are a government-lover.

        Paraphrasing, I stated that I will go against the wall to protect myself and my kids – did you get that? ME, not the government. They’re highly unreliable and only want my eternal indebtedness – sound like a familiar position for you?

        I must put up with government’s Bullshit, but in no way am I offering them a dance. (Can you tell it’s tax time?)

      • ladysadie1 says:

        “ME, not the government. They’re highly unreliable and only want my eternal indebtedness – sound like a familiar position for you?”

        As a woman who does have kids and receives no child support, AND no government assistance, BRAVO! ME, not the state, it’s hard, but I do what I have to do because they are my children. They are not just my kids sometimes, they are my kids 24/7 and without me they have nothing. No law can replace a parent. So what if I work my guts out, the alternative is to do on the dole? Screw that.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Shelley, you don’t need to use foul language. This is where you proved my point: “This is precisely why I have always worked even after my boys were born.” Probably a point I made 150 comments ago. Had nothing to do with government.

  8. ladysadie1 says:

    Daycare is an abomination? Women and children suffer? Yeah, women and children suffer because we ALL allowed the destruction of family where women happily stayed home and knew their value to the family. Fathers abandon their children because the court system rewards it and culture seduces women into thinking that they can to better without having to account to a Man… Men lose. Women replace men with “Daddy Government” and we all pay t he price… try seeing the Big picture

    • Gabriella Kadar says:

      Daycare is an abomination. Children who are schlepped to daycare early in the morning and picked up at 6 p.m. suffer. But to say that women (all women?) happily stayed at home is not accurate. That is some sort of daydream. Lots of women don’t want to stay home and I don’t mean they want to replace being home with going shopping.

      If you look back in time before there was any court system in place and before women had any sort of realistic options to support themselves or their children, men were abandoning their families.

      When families breakdown everybody loses.

      Maybe in the USA, women replace men with ‘daddy government’, but this is your opinion at your time of life and your situation.

      Possibly Richard’s post here is applicable only to American women and men and children. Maybe I’ve misinterpreted.

      So I’ll bow out here as gracefully as possible.

      • “If you look back in time before there was any court system in place and before women had any sort of realistic options to support themselves or their children, men were abandoning their families.”

        This too irritates me. The biological reality is that the woman has and raises the children (at a minimum, to weening). “If you look back in time,” people had common sense about this sort of thing and women were taught how to choose a man to bear her children that was very unlikely to suffer the shame of abandoning her.

        …Or, was this what was happening in the worker’s paradise, social mecca and family nirvana of soviet-era Hungary where women get 4 years of paid leave? I’m sure that men abandoning their families was entirely incidental to the knowledge that the state would take care of those families in his absence. Absolutely nothing to do with it. No unintended consequences there.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        The abandonment of children by fathers happens all over the world.

        Mother stays home, has no outside job, raises children and bakes cookies. Anything else is a threat to the man. Are there any restrictions on education, or age at reproduction? Or numbers of children produced? What happens after the children grow up and leave home? Sounds kind of like fundamental Muslim households except the guy has a couple more wives with children happening in the neighbourhood. Would that be even better than just being a masculine man with one wife?

        Or is it best to refer only to the American dream.

      • “Or is it best to refer only to the American dream.”

        I hate the feeling I get that I have to constantly apologize for being an American. America is full of everybody else from every other country, but yet Americans need to apologize for being the fucks of the world. So far as I can tell America started out a fiercely independent people who took care of the themselves and did not rely on the government for much. Over time, Americans have turned into every other socialistic country depending on the government. I despise our government and do not associate my values with the pols.

      • Actually to clarify, I despise politicians. I happen to like the main principle of the Constitution, which seems to be everyone’s stomping ground right now:

        Inalienable Rights (Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness) and Limited, Self-Government

        Love that!

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Shelley wrote ” Americans need to apologize for being the fucks of the world”.

        Why apologize? The important thing about the current discussion is that no one clearly outlined the parameters of geography. It has become clear that it is the homesteader type culture being cheated out of their desires.

        You wrote: “America started out a fiercely independent people who took care of the themselves ”

        Which people are you exactly referring to?

      • “Which people are you exactly referring to?”

        My great-grandparents for one who despised the communist land they came from and preferred to take their chances in a more independent land.

        And maybe I misunderstood your “Or is it best to refer only to the American dream.” comment, but since I cannot greatly influence anyone the next town away I frankly only care about my little neck of the woods.

  9. ladysadie1 says:

    FOUR YEARS leave… you mean FOUR years of the rest of society rewarding women for giving birth with or without the security of a traditional family??? Good God, that is a frightening existence that marginalizes men… WTF???

    • Gabriella Kadar says:

      No, it did not marginalize men. It acknowledged that children need their mothers more than mothers need to go out to work. I don’t know how you come up with the idea that it marginalized the men.

      Just think, you’ve got your husband going to work bringing home a paycheque and you are getting your pay for staying home and raising the children. What’s to not like about that? It’s a win-win-win formula.

      In the case of Hungary the only problem was lack of housing. What restricted most family sizes was lack of adequate housing. Mind you, I know a woman teacher who raised 4 children WITH her husband and had 16 years of maternity leave. She loved it. So did he. So did the children.

      • “I know a woman teacher who raised 4 children WITH her husband and had 16 years of maternity leave. She loved it. So did he. So did the children.”

        I’d “love” being a thief for 16 years, living off what’s taken from others by force. FREE MONEY!

        On second thought, no, I probably wouldn’t. In the end, hard to imagine it not becoming a negative incentive in doing the things that give people a sense of honor and self respect.

        What makes me laugh is when euphemisms like “maternity leave” are tossed around as though the money that went monthly to this woman, husband and family was just like picked off a tree somewhere. In actual fact, other people went to work, daily, and produced the goods and services necessary to create that wealth that they were deprived of.

        But the woman and her husband “loved it.” There’s that.

      • Richard, in a country that doesn’t have a comprehensive social security net, then yes, it’s thievery.
        Given that these countries Did have comprehensive social security nets, supporting the raising of children made economic sense, those children are the ones who would grow up to be good little workers and support that social security.
        It’s ugly and insidious manipulation by the state to encourage the production of more slaves. I don’t see how it’s thievery by those slaves, they don’t have a net gain from it.

      • “comprehensive social security net…it’s thievery”

        No matter how you phrase it, social security is thievery and at best an enforced-at-the-point-of-a-gun Ponzi scheme.

        And remember all those “life of Julia” blurbs the Obama campaign put out before the election – all you little pathetic weak women out there, line up, we’ll provide for you from cradle to grave.

        I say, NO THANKS, I’ll take my chances, but I am still forced to pay up on all my social taxes with about next to nil input on how that is spent by our lovely politicians. At this point, I question, why work so fucking hard to provide for our family when it’s taken away to pay for some woman’s “lack- of-good-judgment” baby so that one day, hopefully, that kid will be smart enough to join the workforce and contribute to my social security that politicians have already squandered. Am I saying anything at all that people don’t realize – I doubt it.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        Correct, Richard. There are countries in this world where birth rates were so low that the population was under threat. Consequently, whether successfully or not, women were encouraged to raise children. Without adequate housing, of course, it was not terribly successful. But it was not a bone of contention that people were encouraged in whatever way to create families and raise children.

        In the United States this has not been an issue, so far. Consequently I do not expect you to understand.

        Today in Germany women are being encouraged to step out of the workforce for many years in order to raise children. Same reasons: birth rate is low.

      • “Correct, Richard. There are countries in this world where birth rates were so low that the population was under threat.”

        No, not “correct.” I don’t give a fucking runny shit in the world about the machinations of birth rates and tax incentives to manipulate such for the sake of geopolitics and all that goes with that.

        I already puked my guts out living in France for two years in the early 90s listening to French Navy officers wax on about how if they have 4 kids their total tax rate (contemplating VAT) is essentially zero. It was well known that the tax code was explicitly designed to birth and raise more Frenchmen & women—in some bizarre birth rate and economic “power” Olympics.

        “Today in Germany women are being encouraged to step out of the workforce for many years in order to raise children. Same reasons: birth rate is low.”

        It is to laf. The very strongest association with overall birthrate is wealth. The wealthier, the less children on average because for poor people, children, an initial burden, are overall a source of familial survival (the base evolutionary way of things). So, as countries—especially smaller, more homogenous—become more wealthy, birthrates drop. What’s the solution? Impoverish them with the tax code so they have more kids.

        But even if it’s a “winning federal policy,” still makes no sense to me.

        Let’s have another child because it’s good for the country? Because it will save on taxes? Shame on the world for that kinda shit. The very essential beauty of wealth and comfort is to afford people the opportunity to bear offspring because they truly sincerely want to take on the challenge and joy, and hopefully do a decent job.

        Tax incentive to have kids is pretty much essentially like the whole welfare mom fiasco.

        This, and for a million other reasons, I’m solidly anarchist and always will be. The State fucks up everything. Everything and the saddest thing about it is how it fucks up the minds of its cheerleaders, who would likely otherwise be smart people.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        No worries. People believe in their wildest dreams that having children in this country is some sort of huge tax break. It’s not. At all. Not for responsible people at any rate.

        If a parent hires a full time nanny, for example, the parent is not running a business by hiring help. So the nanny’s paycheque comes out of after tax income. The amount of money for any and all child expenses (babysitters, camp fees, after school programmes, sports, music lessons, etc.) is miniscule to the point that it’s certainly not an incentive to have children. It’s maybe the amount of money to pay for catfood for one cat for one year. Not even the kitty litter. Your dogs, Richard, cost way more than that.

        I don’t write this with any resentment or hostility. These are just the facts. There are lots of people who whine and complain about it. As far as I’m concerned, I paid the bills for my children and people should do the same and not expect me to pay it for them. My position has always been that if people can’t afford children they should invest in birth control. It’s legal and it’s cheaper.

        I never qualified for Employment Insurance either. Or any other form of insurance. I had to save a whole big heap of money to take the time off that I did to stay home with my children when they were babies. It’s about fiscal responsibility.

        Now here’s where my hostility and resentment comes in: Recently there was an article in the newspaper about a woman who has 4 children: 11, 13, 2, 4. She’s just now getting some sort of subsidized work training. Why the f* didn’t she stop at the first two since clearly she’s incapable of supporting her family? I know this may sound politically incorrect but she could have had her tubes tied, learned something, earned a living to support herself and the children (two children) and f*d her brains out all she likes without bringing more children into the world. Instead my tax dollars are supporting her reproductive default.

        In a couple of years I’ll be reading about how her oldest son gets shot to death because he is such a good boy.

        It’s really funny that people who know me, face to face, call me an anarchist but somehow around here I’m viewed as a statist. The irony of the blogosphere.

    • ladysadie1, consider that maybe it’s only Potentially a frightening existence, depending on how it’s done?
      At it’s best, it is just an expansion to a larger scale of the Traditional role of extended families and small communities in raising children. At it’s worst, I agree it would be replacing the economic unit of the family with big government….but this is not a function of maternal leave policies, it’s more a function of the social norms of a country (most of the east-block countries actually were fairly conservative in terms of having kids mainly Within marriage).
      Meanwhile, in our neck of the woods…. the idealized image that women stay at home, bake cupcakes and occupy themselves with their children only was the norm ca.1950′s in the west. Before that, only the aristocracy could afford it (and those ladies didn’t quite occupy themselves that much with their children, they had nurses, nannies, governesses/tutors and boarding schools).
      Every other able-bodied woman worked both inside and outside the home, and brutally, either on the plot-share/subsistence farm, in the factories or in the store/family business (not to mention 2nd jobs as laundresses, seamstresses, wet-nurses etc)and it was mainly the grandmothers and older members of the extended family or immediate community who minded the kids. A wife was an economic asset, not only as a breeder but as skilled manual labor.
      The part that gets me (and here I think I sure agree with some of your earlier pet peeves!) is the ridiculous non-differentiation of Sexual roles that seems to have followed the attempt to equalize economic roles (and maybe remove intellectual bigotry). Of course most ‘real women’ want a hero, not because they are in any way weak but exactly because they are able to appreciate masculine strength!

    • Gabriella Kadar says:

      When the birth rate is so low that an entire nation is at danger of disappearing, yes, rewarding women to give birth makes a lot of sense. Even as it was, the birth rate didn’t increase appreciably because housing was a problem. In the United States the birth rate is not problematic. So your view is different than it is in other countries.

      In Germany women are encouraged to stay home and take care of the children. (That’s not to say that the limitations this creates in women’s lives is welcome. They want more than to just stay home to take care of their children.)

      • “When the birth rate is so low that an entire nation is at danger of disappearing, yes, rewarding women to give birth makes a lot of sense.”

        To whom? Tell me precisely how that makes sense to me, and why I ought to pay for it.

        You can’t, of course. It’s all part of the PROJEXXXNS, because the MASTA be so good at the PROJEXXXXNS.

        Holy Christ. I live amongst programmed bots.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        You live in America the land of the pursuit of happiness. Just keep pursuing. Maybe one day y’all find it.

      • “You live in America the land of the pursuit of happiness. Just keep pursuing. Maybe one day y’all find it.”

        It’s getting more difficult to find happiness here in the US where those who simply would like to live free are continually having to wage war against those who continue to threaten that very freedom.

        Don’t tread on me, sista!
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmvG2ZiPfoo
        I will never surrender!

      • Ha, had never heard that Metallica song. Not generally a metal fan, but I do appreciate them for their technical execution. Just listen to the drum line. No improvisation, total technical, and for humans, that’s an art in itself.

      • Love, love, love Metallica! I was never into any of those froo-froo 80s bands and would take Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath and Rush any day!

        My new favorite: Joe Bonomassa – now he is so sexy playing that guitar! You should listen to Beacon Theatre Live! He even has Paul Rodgers from Bad Company singing on a couple. Maybe not as good as Rush, but truly awesome.

      • Gabriella Kadar says:

        I ain’t treddin’ on ya sistah. I just know that baking cupcakes would give me type 2 diabetes ’cause I’d be eating them too.

  10. When I teach my (advice list) ladies the difference between masculine and male, feminine and female, I usually base it in the “tai chi” — that yin/Yang, black and white circle-y thing with the ‘seed’ of the other in its head? The tai chi, I point out, is not a big strong Yang (white side) with a wee tiny yin (black) side. The two sides, the complements, are EQUAL — the woman (or the yin partner, if not actually female) must be the same strength as the man (or Yang partner). A strong man does not want a wimpy, weak woman; he needs a woman with AS much strength as he has — but it’s an entirely different strength. He’s not looking for another MAN (Yang), he’s looking for a woman who matches his strength but in a complementary way (yin). So, the woman must be whole, strong in herself, not depending on him to ‘finish’ her, or “complete” her. (No matter how romantic that sounds)!

    • Elenor, +1. What a nice formalism to express the idea of different yet equally strong.

    • ladysadie1 says:

      Yes, +++1 Elenor! The point is to complement one another, not be 100% equal in all areas as some people here would like to think is ideal.

  11. From observing my high powered doctor mother and other women in her generation, it seems like you can pick two of three: career, kids, or lack of an ulcer. Got into this a bit in my recently launched blog:

    http://entwifeanonymous.com/2013/02/04/the-atlantic-monthlys-on-the-rag-again/

    Turns outs most women want to stay home once they have kids, surprise surprise. Of course, I respect the right of women with no interest in family and children (Ayn Rand, Marie Curie, etc.) to pursue intense careers, but that’s more of an outlier issue.

    • Hey Alpha Unit.

      No idea why your comment got hung up in the queue, but it’s out now.

      Interesting blog. I actually know nothing of this “manosphere,” but it’s interesting how many women seem to engage it, smart women.

      Cool blog, and I see you have listed Judgy Bitch which was just linked here a couple of days ago. At any rate, I read your whole blog, from the last post to the first. Feel entirely welcome to pop in comments and drop relevant links to your posts. Please.

    • Gabriella Kadar says:

      Amen.

  12. ladysadie1 says:

    Feminism IS to blame. Destruction of the family is The Key Precept of Feminism:

    “No woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one. It is a way of forcing women in a certain direction.”

    -Simone de Beauvoir

    • Gabriella Kadar says:

      Ideally, it provided a choice. Unfortunately, it would appear that choice has been removed from the equation by low wages and employment insecurity for men. Not to mention high real estate prices and all the gadgets that everyone seems to believe life is bereft without. That’s ‘Jonesing’ and I don’t know if it has to do with feminism or just consumerism.

  13. The problem with all “-isms” is that others hold them differently than you would, and they always will. No person should be authorized to make bets unilaterally with another person’s life (assuming the other person is sentient and something more than a tiny infant: even really small kids deserve the responsibility to do some things for themselves).

    • “No person should be authorized to make bets unilaterally with another person’s life”

      +1

  14. @ItsTheWooo

    My responses start with ******

    “Women have to work and dump their children into daycare centers not because evil feminists have ruined women and prevented them from knowing how to please/trap/keep a man… The problem is was and always will be global capitalism, which largely promoted / skewed the feminist movement to benefit corporate interests.”

    ****** You shouldn’t use capitalism in place of corporatism or fascism. We don’t have capitalism. Government regulations that benefit corporations, bail-outs, it’s corporations lobbying for government power. The definition of that is fascism. Capitalism gets a bad name even when it isn’t practiced.

    “The feminists aren’t the ones who made life what it is. It’s corporate multinational capitalism. If you have twice as many people competing to do the same work, guess what? Your profits just went up a lot, your productivity just went up a lot, and the quality of life for everyone in society just took a nose dive.”

    ****** More productivity has always meant lower prices, so I don’t know why you think that lowers quality of life. What has lowered quality of life is the Federal Reserve printing money and decreasing the value of the dollar so one dollar today buys less then one dollar 40 years ago. It’s inflation.

    ****** And the government got behind feminism to secure more votes, but also because they wanted more income taxes. Income taxes they used to expand the money supply and expand government. Women have to work now because the value of the dollar has gone down so you need two incomes to get what one was able to get. They adopted feminism to convince women that working inside the home was oppression, so they could expand their wealth while making everyone else poorer via inflation, money printing, government expansion.

    “I will also say this issue does not exist in a vaccuum, blaming/hating feminism is a lot like some “white nationalist” blaming mexicans and blacks for receiving welfare benefits for bankrupting the country. It’s a nice scapegoat to blind us of the real corruption ruining civilization.”

    ****** Feminists are similar to white nationalists. Instead of hating blacks they just hate all men. They blame men for the world’s problems, their problems, and demonize them while claiming themselves innocent victims. They started off as a hate group, and were adopted to expand government and certain private interests. Welfare, no fault divorce, child support, alimony, all are used to make a woman need a man less, and rely on government as her man. Feminists and government both wanted men and women to seperate just for different reasons.

    *When I say “feminists” I mean REAL feminists. Not the majority of women who’ve been schooled to think it’s some force for good, that freed them from “oppression.”

    • +1 MC, all the way around. Nice clear distinctions.

      • +2. There is always a hierarchy (“patriarchy”), and somebody who wants to run it inevitably tries to make you side with him (or her) against somebody else near the top who gets demonized as the source of all evil (white people, non-white people, Jews, men, women, fat cats, dictators, etc.). Since people are all more or less scumbags (some much more and others much less), the enemy is always bad. What people always miss is that his replacement is also evil (sometimes more evil). The “savior” is a scumbag, too (a would-be “patriarch” whose power resides in his/her ability to make you feel like a helpless victim of oppression that you can only escape via submission to the “new” world-order, which always promises to be more just).

        Catiline and Caesar promise to deliver the plebeian populace from the tyranny of the Republican optimates. Robespierre and Napoleon champion the small Jacquerie against the old aristocratic Estates. Don Corleone takes your money and promises to make your oppressors an offer that they cannot refuse.

        So many people live their whole lives looking for the “right” mafia boss, embracing the mafia narratives that make them eternal victims. Others prefer to go the way of Cato the Younger: if they cannot find justice without submitting to mafias, then they commit suicide (withdrawing from society rather than participate in perpetuating the cycle of oppression that all mafia narratives create). Don Corleone cannot make them an offer they will not refuse. Fuck him, and all his offers. Let him keep his favors, his jobs, his food, his business, his family, and all the rest of the shiny shit that he loves so much. I would rather cut out my own heart and die than give him the worship he demands (no matter how he demands it: he can attack me violently with weapons or seductively with words; either way, I will not bend the knee).

  15. ladysadie1 says:

    “*When I say “feminists” I mean REAL feminists. Not the majority of women who’ve been schooled to think it’s some force for good, that freed them from “oppression.””

    +1 MC