Being brought up male in a few tweets. Storified by miniver.Toxic masculinity teaches that men cannot assert their own manhood absent sex with a woman that they alone possess
Next year in Jerusalem
1 week ago
Random thoughts on the blue highways.
You never know what you will find on the blue highways. Particularly when the choice at an intersection is controlled by the roll of a die. About the only rule is that highway onramps don't count as an intersection. You don't even have to roll the die. If one road looks interesting, go for it.
Being brought up male in a few tweets. Storified by miniver.Toxic masculinity teaches that men cannot assert their own manhood absent sex with a woman that they alone possess
And you're basing this on survey and polling data, right? Not just on anectdote and making shit up? FematheistFalse dichotomy. In any event survey and polling data finds whatever the constructor of the survey or poll wants to find. See any partisan political poll. Did you ever hear of or write a "push poll?" If not why not? You claim to be a social scientist, you must have been taught about them in something like Surveys 101.
I am sorry, are you suggesting that because some companies polls do push calling that gives you the right to just make bullshit up on these boards and pass it off as reality? Is that SERIOUSLY what your argument is? Attacking bad polling instead of defending or evening acknowleding the bullshit you just MADE UP?
I would call that a fundy evasion tactic there, JC.Fematheist
I suppose it would be ironic if that is what they did. While there are probably extremists who will personify their attack on the system that supports this choice and indeed forces it on many women. But they are really mad about the system that in some influential religions conditions women from birth into the brood mare role, and justifies higher pay for men because "they have to support their brood mare."I find it ironic that feminism is supposed to be about women being able to choose their lives, yet so many actual feminists get mad when women make choices that the feminists don't like.IronLDS
Your male-nurse-counterpart, would recognize some other differences, though. [Women] have body parts which complement [which have different functions from him,] and [women] were designed for reproducing offspring. [Along with most other human activities.] Your body produces eggs, monthly, and you menstruate, monthly, and his produces sperm, continually. Your breasts were designed to suckle a baby [and women have] in a womb which he doesn't have.
The two brains differ; the types of thought processes differ; the body structures differ; the emotional reactions differ; the topics of conversation differ....
If the designs differ, why fight the roles and functions, associated with them?
[Minor edits in red].
For most of human history this was a necessary reality if the human race was to continue. When child and maternal mortality was in significant double digits women had little choice if they were to get their 2.3 replacement offspring to puberty but to provide for the man who was providing external resources to the family, keeping the home sanitary, feeding the family, and educating the children to be productive citizens of their community.A radical feminist quoted:You know what? She needs to be working on breakfast. She needs to be working on lunch. She needs to be working on dinner. She needs to be working on homeschooling the children. And teaching them, and cleaning, and that’s enough work. "Pastor Anderson"
In my opinion, preaching the innate superiority of Western European Protestant Culture as he is doing skirts very close to fascism.amcolph
You realise that you are insulting the majority of atheists who post here, amcolph? For them, morality is mere fashion, and Twenty-First Century Western Liberal Culture (which is a not-very-developed development of "Western European Protestant Culture") is the zeitgeist which molds their fashion, so it must be "superior". Thus, for example, they frown on slavery because Western Liberal Culture considers slavery to be "bad"; but in the rest of the world, slavery is the norm. Thus, again, they consider women to be full members of society, equal to men; but in the rest of the world, women are chattels of men.Lavengro
Gottlieb’s story relies heavily on a 2012 study (PDF) published in the American Sociological Review that found that when men in heterosexual marriages performed chores that are traditionally coded as feminine—like “folding laundry, cooking or vacuuming”—the couple had sex less frequently. But if the husband performed traditionally masculine chores, like mowing the lawn or taking out the trash, the couples “reported a 17.5 percent higher frequency of sexual intercourse”—and the wives were more sexually satisfied, too. The data on which the study is based was collected 20 years ago, when the husband who cooks dinner or does the dishes was still an anomaly, but Gottlieb cites one contemporary couple she’s treated in her psychotherapy practice as further evidence of the trend. The couple came to her looking for help distributing their career and household duties but found that once their responsibilities were balanced, their sex life suffered. The wife claimed that she was highly sexually attracted to her husband ”when you’re just back from the gym and you’re all sweaty and you take off your clothes to get in the shower and I see your muscles,” but that desire turns to irritation when the husband tossed his dirty clothes onto the floor, sparking an argument about his failure to vacuum the house. “So if I got out the vacuum, then you’d be turned on?” the husband asked. “Actually, probably not,” she replied. “The vacuuming would have killed the weight-lifting vibe.”
Thad Yep, J'Carlin. That's my sense of "prick", too. And I reiterate: unfortunately, any prick can be a father, too. "Father" is not some noble vocation, unfortunately, and neither is "parent". In the U.S. today, the terms seem to be increasingly confused with "unpaid juvie officer". ...
Thad J'Carlin, you're doing a lot of generalizing there and in my experience, that sort of thing doesn't work very well. "Humanism" is also a grand phrase that's devoid of any practical meaning. What does one do if one is a humanist? What does treat everyone as if they had inherent worth really mean, in practice?
As my virtual friend Stream Angel well knows, I believe that it's quite easy to make these great sweeping statements about justice and equality and human worth and what not. What I think is difficult is to actually boil those down into concrete practices.
It's all well and grand to talk about "good parenting", for example, but what does that really mean in terms of practices? Some people will tell you a good parent needs to swat their kid's rear end occasionally. Others are horrified by the very idea and feel no compulsion against dropping a dime on a parent who'd do that.
Is it "good parenting", for example, to take a child to a brothel? Be careful: the question is a hell of a lot more tricky than you might expect.
Let's continue to flog the messengers here. That will allow us to continue to avoid dealing with the real problem which has nothing to do with feminism but the fact that atheists have become so full of their Atheist BS that they can't be wrong about anything. Bad behavior? Atheists don't do that. They have the righteous Atheist TRUTH™.
J'Carlin
Your parents must have had a very good, loving relationship. You must have really valued your mother, also.
iamachildofhis