Women: Home with the kids is where they belong

[Volumnius Flush]

This is just how I see things. I wanted to share it with you PNWI and see what everyone else thinks.

Men and women were created for two separate purposes. Men were created differently from women. Men were created with more natural strength. Women were created with a womb.

Now women, they have a high priority. Her high priority is to the children. She needs to keep the best interest of the children at heart.

Women are responsible for many things. First, taking care of the children. Second, fixing dinner. Third, washing the laundry. Fourth, getting the kids up for school. The man is responsible for working, putting food on the table, paying the bills, putting a roof over the family's heads, and protecting his family (and I may have forgotten one part in this.)

I think women should be homemakers. That is just how I was raised and that's how I feel.

If the wife wants to work let her work. If she wants to stay home and you make plenty of money, stay home. If you get fired, she needs to work. It's very simple.

What do you think?

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

Men and women were created

no they evolved


sorry man i stopped reading after this.

[Virus278]

This is just how I see things. I wanted to share it with you PNWI and see what everyone else thinks.

Men and women were created for two separate purposes. Men were created differently from women. Men were created with more natural strength. Women were created with a womb.

Now women, they have a high priority. Her high priority is to the children. She needs to keep the best interest of the children at heart.

Women are responsible for many things. First, taking care of the children. Second, fixing dinner. Third, washing the laundry. Fourth, getting the kids up for school. The man is responsible for working, putting food on the table, paying the bills, putting a roof over the family's heads, and protecting his family (and I may have forgotten one part in this.)

I think women should be homemakers. That is just how I was raised and that's how I feel.

If the wife wants to work let her work. If she wants to stay home and you make plenty of money, stay home. If you get fired, she needs to work. It's very simple.

What do you think?

You do have somewhat of a point in that the world is almost too politically correct but your views are a bit rigid.

[Aaron]

I agree, to a degree; to me, the purpose of life isn't to work, it's to be part of a family. So you do whatever is most appropriate for your individual circumstances.

[Volumnius Flush]

no they evolved


sorry man i stopped reading after this.

I knew someone wouldn't like the "created" part. You think I'm such a fool that I did not foresee that coming? Trust me I did...

You do have somewhat of a point in that the world is almost too politically correct but your views are a bit rigid.

Well I think it is up to the woman to decide.

[Aaron]

Well I think it is up to the woman to decide.
No, it's up for the couple to decide. When you're part of a family, you don't get to make individual decisions like that. That's life.

[StreetlightRock]

You really got this whole trolling thing down to a fine art don't you Flush?

[Volumnius Flush]

You really got this whole trolling thing down to a fine art don't you Flush?

I'm very good at what I do. But I'm not a troll. I am a bringer of light.

No, it's up for the couple to decide. When you're part of a family, you don't get to make individual decisions like that. That's life.

Well I agree if there is a financial situation the woman should not be able to just throw in the towel and say, "I'm not working."

[Chu]

This is just how I see things. I wanted to share it with you PNWI and see what everyone else thinks.

Men and women were created for two separate purposes. Men were created differently from women. Men were created with more natural strength. Women were created with a womb.

Now women, they have a high priority. Her high priority is to the children. She needs to keep the best interest of the children at heart.

Women are responsible for many things. First, taking care of the children. Second, fixing dinner. Third, washing the laundry. Fourth, getting the kids up for school. The man is responsible for working, putting food on the table, paying the bills, putting a roof over the family's heads, and protecting his family (and I may have forgotten one part in this.)

I think women should be homemakers. That is just how I was raised and that's how I feel.

If the wife wants to work let her work. If she wants to stay home and you make plenty of money, stay home. If you get fired, she needs to work. It's very simple.

What do you think?
Damn, to be honest, if I am ever fortunate enough to find a lady who will bare my children, I would love to be the one who stays home and looks after the kids, though if she wanted me to work, I'm cool doing that, then again, if all goes planned, I will work from home, so we'll get the best of both worlds.

lol, when I think about it, I'd be incredibly pussy-whipped.

[Volumnius Flush]

Damn, to be honest, if I am ever fortunate enough to find a lady who will bare my children, I would love to be the one who stays home and looks after the kids, though if she wanted me to work, I'm cool doing that, then again, if all goes planned, I will work from home, so we'll get the best of both worlds.

lol, when I think about it, I'd be incredibly slightly confuzzled sea lion-whipped.

You're one of the few people I like here Chu. This post really won me over with you.

Okay everybody I know this thread sucks I just wanted to post a thread okay. Give me a break. Even Volumnius Flush fails once in a while.

[Against Miik!]

Well, ok, this is gonna sound bad, but lets make a case for women staying home.

Perhaps this isn't the right way of looking at things, because humans have evolved above and beyond the typical animal, but lets think of it this way anyays. Among almost all animals, there are roles played by each of the sexes. For some animals, the mother takes care of the young while the male goes out and gets food and ****. Sometimes, this is reversed, like w/ emperor penguins. Sometimes, the male abandons the female after it knocks her up, like w/ polar bears I think (I just watched the ice worlds episode of Planet Earth.) Anyways, you get the idea.

It is not so absurd a thought to think that humans are no different. There are roles that each sex must play in order to keep the species going. We are in fact NOT the same, and each sex has certain tools that make it better at doing certain things. If we assume this to be true, then it is not all that absurd to believe that women are meant to stay with the kids and be their main caretakers. While men provide for the family.

[Chu]

You're one of the few people I like here Chu. This post really won me over with you.

Okay everybody I know this thread sucks I just wanted to post a thread okay. Give me a break. Even Volumnius Flush fails once in a while.
Heh, cheers :)

I enjoy most people on MX, everyone, or at least most people bring something new to table, which is refreshing in my mind.

I realise most people don't like you, for some reason or another, but as long as you continue to post intellectually stimulating topics, I'm fine, even if sometimes I'm seated on the opposite side, it's always good to learn more!

[StreetlightRock]

There are roles that each sex must play in order to keep the species going.

The only 'role' that needs to be played is that the penis goes in the vag and nine months later baby pops out. Homemaking and gender roles are not 'needed' for the species to keep going. I can't believe this has to be explained to you. I mean, Flush is here for fun, but that YOU subscribe to it makes me sorta worried.

[Against Miik!]

I'm just playing devils advocate, as I do like 90% in PNWI

[siva_chair]

It's a free country women can do what they want.

It'd be cool if they wanted to stay home with the kids and whatnot, but it is also pretty hard for a lot of families to derive their source of income from a single provider.

[RunAmokRampant]

As long the kids get a fair share of loving, who cares who stays home and who works as long as one of them does and the other at least spend as much time with the kids as possible.

[beso negro]

You really got this whole trolling thing down to a fine art don't you Flush?

his post was actually pretty neutral and apologetic

[StreetlightRock]

fine art.

[Aaron]

It's a free country women can do what they want.
That's the type of arguement an overtired 8-year-old uses to justify not going to bed.

[Smokey D]

Miik, it's far more absurd to think that nature should shape our social behavior that extent given the massive extent to which our intellectual capacities allow us to override nature in other ways. I can admit that women often seem like better caregivers than men but how much of this can be put down to natural qualities is far less clear. The fact that women are raised from birth with the expectation to be mothers probably has a far greater influence on that fact than natural factors.

[siva_chair]

That's the type of arguement an overtired 8-year-old uses to justify not going to bed.

I don't see how that makes it any less true.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

I knew someone wouldn't like the "created" part. You think I'm such a fool that I did not foresee that coming? Trust me I did...


Well it's entirely relevant. Evolution does not go in a certain purposeful direction, it just piles up a series of small adaptations that are somehow advantageous over what came before it. Monkeys evolved in such a way that most of the most advantageous social structures involved men protecting their access to mature females and females protecting their access to resources, but we're hardly still living in the forest. What people "should" do according to their natural instincts is no longer relevant because our environment has completely changed, and the limiting factors that used to control us (access to food, protection from predators, etc) have almost all been completely replaced. Our environment is changing thousands of times faster than humans can adapt to it through natural selection.

So yes, women have evolved to take better care of youths than men have, but past the breastfeeding stage, there is absolutely no biological reason why women "should" stay home while the men go out and gather resources (ie money). The current social model that works best is that every male-female couple finds its own balance, and if our environment were to stay the same for say 50 generations, eventually the dominant model would be whichever one allows the most infants to reach maturity and reproduce. The winning model will probably be single mothers who have 5 or 6 kids by the time they're 25 and care for them on welfare.

[DBoons Ghost]

This is just how I see things. I wanted to share it with you PNWI and see what everyone else thinks.

Men and women were created for two separate purposes. Men were created differently from women. Men were created with more natural strength. Women were created with a womb.

Well, see, the problem with this is the fact that aside from having a womb, women also have a brain. They are capable of all the great things HUMAN BEINGS are responsible for. The fact women bear children means just as much as men ejaculating sperm into the women to create life.

It takes two. Everyone does their part.

Now women, they have a high priority. Her high priority is to the children. She needs to keep the best interest of the children at heart.

Well, women also keep the best interests of themselves at heart too. Women are only the way they are now because men kept them as down as they could for as long as they could. Now it's just a matter of "anything you can do I can do better".

Women are responsible for many things. First, taking care of the children. Second, fixing dinner. Third, washing the laundry. Fourth, getting the kids up for school. The man is responsible for working, putting food on the table, paying the bills, putting a roof over the family's heads, and protecting his family (and I may have forgotten one part in this.)

Women are also responsible for themselves. Since men tend to wander both sexually and emotionally which you seem to have conveniently left out. In your perfect world, what if a woman doesn't want to marry? What if she cannot bear children by some medical condition? Should she commit suicide because her usefulness in your fantasy world is non existent?

Your description leaves a lot to be desired. That you think a father should only be responsible for those things leaves out plenty a father should do to properly prepare a child for life in this world. Women are homemakers? So how can she teach her child anything more than that?

I think women should be homemakers. That is just how I was raised and that's how I feel.

If the wife wants to work let her work. If she wants to stay home and you make plenty of money, stay home. If you get fired, she needs to work. It's very simple.

What do you think?

I think you're an idiot who has no clue how life works. What idiocy is this drivel anyway?

I'm bored and therefore I am posting in this asinine thread, but also I'm curious why you feel a woman shouldn't be working?

[mph4ever]

hunter and cave dwellers is the most natural thing ever. back in the ages there were very different roles for men and women. a lot of this can be seen in the still surviving ancient tribes on the planet. men went hunting. men have vision that allows them to see well straight ahead, judge distance all that stuff that is need to kill the animal which they tried to hunt. thats why your girfirned alwsy catches you looking at other women. women, at the same time, stayed close to the cave and gathered. women have excellent peripheral vision that allows them to stand in front of a bush and see and pick all the fruit, men would just end looking at the bush. its also why we hardly ever catch our girlfriends looking at other men but, trust me, they are looking

go back any further than that and we were just apes. so you ahve to look forward to what is happening today. our instincts are being buried by society, i think that is one of the reasons we have ceased to evolve since every challenge is now met with medicine or surgery or machinery of some sort or other

and anyways, why do you think women get married in white? so that they can fit in with the rest of the kitchen appliances /jk

or why do you think men design kitchen appliances at a height where women have to bend over? /jk

[guitrguy]

This is just how I see things. I wanted to share it with you PNWI and see what everyone else thinks.

Men and women were created for two separate purposes. Men were created differently from women. Men were created with more natural strength. Women were created with a womb.

Now women, they have a high priority. Her high priority is to the children. She needs to keep the best interest of the children at heart.

Women are responsible for many things. First, taking care of the children. Second, fixing dinner. Third, washing the laundry. Fourth, getting the kids up for school. The man is responsible for working, putting food on the table, paying the bills, putting a roof over the family's heads, and protecting his family (and I may have forgotten one part in this.)

I think women should be homemakers. That is just how I was raised and that's how I feel.

If the wife wants to work let her work. If she wants to stay home and you make plenty of money, stay home. If you get fired, she needs to work. It's very simple.

What do you think?
I think thats up to the the couple, but mostly the woman who would be the one ultimately making such a decision.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

we haven't "ceased to evolve". the only time a species stops evolving is when it reaches equilibrium, which certainly isn't the case. natural selection still acts in situations where survival pressure is greatly reduced, because reproduction and number of offspring still shifts a species' way of life.

(can you tell i'm taking a course on human evolution? :p)

edit: that was to mph4ever

[mph4ever]

sure, can you tell i am taking the piss? :)

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

haha fair enough. it's a common misconception and probably needed to be said anyway.

:chug:

[mph4ever]

haha fair enough. it's a common misconception and probably needed to be said anyway.

:chug:


yup. actually, do you think the pace of evolution has increased due to developments in society? or has it slowed

[Jude]

yup. actually, do you think the pace of evolution has increased due to developments in society? or has it slowed

The "pace of evolution" can't really slow. Although I guess if people start having kids later, which they do, that might slow it.

[Amit]

This is just how I see things. I wanted to share it with you PNWI and see what everyone else thinks.

Men and women were created for two separate purposes. Men were created differently from women. Men were created with more natural strength. Women were created with a womb.

Now women, they have a high priority. Her high priority is to the children. She needs to keep the best interest of the children at heart.

Women are responsible for many things. First, taking care of the children. Second, fixing dinner. Third, washing the laundry. Fourth, getting the kids up for school. The man is responsible for working, putting food on the table, paying the bills, putting a roof over the family's heads, and protecting his family (and I may have forgotten one part in this.)

I think women should be homemakers. That is just how I was raised and that's how I feel.

If the wife wants to work let her work. If she wants to stay home and you make plenty of money, stay home. If you get fired, she needs to work. It's very simple.

What do you think?

women should be free to do whatever the **** they want

just like men

[Iscariot]

i would love it if we still had the luxury of letting the wife stay home and take care of the kids so there is at least always one parent around when the children need them and of course it could be the other way around where the husband could stay home while the wife works but tbh men often make more money so it's more practical for the husband to be the one out working

unfortunately we often end up with no parents home to taking care of the kids because it's hard to feed a family on one job unless it's a very well paying one so the kids end up being raised in day care or by a nanny

[Amit]

yeah that's the hugest problem right there

no parents home to take care of the kids :[

[Iscariot]

srsly i bet charlie manson was raised in a daycare

do we want moar charlie manson

[Surtr]

Do what you do to get by, whether your needed at home, out working or wherever.

Now close this thread and maybe ban Flush. I swear he was never this stupid before.

[Volumnius Flush]

I think you're an idiot who has no clue how life works. What idiocy is this drivel anyway?

I'm bored and therefore I am posting in this asinine thread, but also I'm curious why you feel a woman shouldn't be working?

Maybe because I'm not even 20, and am really not sure how life works. Although I will remember that line, which I am highly interested in, "What idiocy is this drivel anyway?" Classic!

But no, the couple should make the decision. If it is more convenient for the mother to stay at home, that is where she should be. Nowadays it is very expensive to have people care for your children. I know one young couple where almost all of this man's wife's money is spent between buying her lunch everyday, childcare, and gas, and it is actually costing her money to work.

It's a free country women can do what they want.

It'd be cool if they wanted to stay home with the kids and whatnot, but it is also pretty hard for a lot of families to derive their source of income from a single provider.

And that's why it is the best policy to make the decision as a couple, not as an individual saying that they won't work. If you don't work, then it is best not to have kids although most will have them anyway.

Heh, cheers :)

I enjoy most people on MX, everyone, or at least most people bring something new to table, which is refreshing in my mind.

I realise most people don't like you, for some reason or another, but as long as you continue to post intellectually stimulating topics, I'm fine, even if sometimes I'm seated on the opposite side, it's always good to learn more!

It is probably why you are one of the most liked members on the forum, and one of the most prominent.

I'm just playing devils advocate, as I do like 90% in PNWI

So now that the equivalent of a blue collar poster of the Sputnik community has come out against you supporting my assessment, you play it off and say, "Oh, I was just speculating, not drawing any certain conclusion." Whatever.

his post was actually pretty neutral and apologetic

Thank you.

That's the type of arguement an overtired 8-year-old uses to justify not going to bed.

Haha, siva chair!

[DBoons Ghost]

Maybe because I'm not even 20, and am really not sure how life works. Although I will remember that line, which I am highly interested in, "What idiocy is this drivel anyway?" Classic!

But no, the couple should make the decision. If it is more convenient for the mother to stay at home, that is where she should be. Nowadays it is very expensive to have people care for your children. I know one young couple where almost all of this man's wife's money is spent between buying her lunch everyday, childcare, and gas, and it is actually costing her money to work.

Well, it's funny you excuse yourself out of this by saying you don't know how life works, yet you say that a woman's place is at home, ironing your shirts and bakin' some pies. If you don't know either which way, how can you be sure what you think is the right way is actually the right way?

My mom was a housewife. I respect that. It made the difference in my life. However, when my pops took off, she was at a disadvantage because housewives don't really have job skills, and she relied on my douchebag father but he decided he wanted out and left her and us flat.

This is not something that happens all the time. Only half of the time.

Maybe if people accepted less in their life and lived within their means and work for their children instead of a 3000 square foot house and a BMW in the driveway, we wouldn't be in this mess.

[Volumnius Flush]

Well, it's funny you excuse yourself out of this by saying you don't know how life works, yet you say that a woman's place is at home, ironing your shirts and bakin' some pies. If you don't know either which way, how can you be sure what you think is the right way is actually the right way?

My mom was a housewife. I respect that. It made the difference in my life. However, when my pops took off, she was at a disadvantage because housewives don't really have job skills, and she relied on my douchebag father but he decided he wanted out and left her and us flat.

This is not something that happens all the time. Only half of the time.

Maybe if people accepted less in their life and lived within their means and work for their children instead of a 3000 square foot house and a BMW in the driveway, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Well I am very sorry to hear that DBoon but the best policy is to always get an education whether you work or not. Paying back the loans is an entirely different story. And thank you for, you know...

[guitrguy]

I take you like submissive women.

[Amit]

submissive women suck in bed and in a relationship in general tbh

[guitrguy]

submissive women suck in bed and in a relationship in general tbh

true that

[mph4ever]

submissive women suck in bed and in a relationship in general tbh

i like a bit of oral

[samariah]

wow

[Amit]

i like a bit of oral

what's that have to do with anything?

[mph4ever]

what's that have to do with anything?


well, you said they suck in bed and they suck in a relationship and i kinda like it when they suck, orally:naughty:

[Volumnius Flush]

wow

Yeah I know, this was a good thread up until just the last 5 or 6 posts.

[Oriah]

I think you're being very closed minded.

[Volumnius Flush]

I think you're being very closed minded.

No I think I only scored a 48% on the standardized close mindedness test.

[pppoe]

Volumnius Flush is a troll.

[Volumnius Flush]

Volumnius Flush is a troll.

Well with a name like that you certainly look like a bigger troll than I do. People actually pray to you?

This member was banned and has not served his sentence. The proof is right here.

http://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12881875

[BridgeToSolace]

Although I generally blame feminism for putting the morality of the of the most recent generations in the hands of television executives, I find little merit in VF's words. And I'm half kidding about the first part, btw.

I agree with him to the extent that there should be someone home while a child is developing. I haven't decided until what age, but it's important that an responsible adult is around and the kid isn't just being put in front of the television with no valuable stimulation (not that television can't be valuable. Just most of it isn't.)

I don't really care who this is, though. Sometimes the woman is better, sometimes the man is better. It depends on the couple and they should decide together. If a houseparent isn't possible, then it's understandable, I suppose. But perhaps if you aren't willing or fiscally able to make the financial sacrifice of having only one working parent, you shouldn't be having children in the first place.

And on that note, the societal expectations of the man to be removed from the family and put into a working environment is far more destructive than the opposite expectation for women. I was talking to my friend who had spoken with a high-level employee in a big company. The employee basically said that family life is next to impossible in the working situation. And women bitch that there are less CEO-level positions held by women. That's what they want? No family life? They aren't expected to make that sacrifice, as men often are, and thus aren't as likely to take the position.

But I'll take family any day. If I'm gunna have a kid, I'm spending as much time with him as possible while he still likes and respects me.

[guitrguy]

Volumnius Flush is a troll.

You forgot to put bad in front of troll.

[Volumnius Flush]

You forgot to put bad in front of troll.

I'm actually a very good poster.

http://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12882787&postcount=32

See, he was banned and he created a new account. He didn't even serve his sentence. This is outrageous. I have served years worth of bans (about half the time I've been here) behind Sputnik bars and now that I have served my time, and was let out, this is the thanks I get for starting these great new threads?

And he won't even serve his time. He just goes and creates a new account.

Now I admit this could be two different people and I'm sorry if I'm wrong. He may have stole the idea for that name.

But seriously, Medical Conditions is a great thread idea and so far is successful. You can't say that I haven't made any contribution to the Sputnik society.

[guitrguy]

I care so hard right now.

[Volumnius Flush]

I care so hard right now.

You're just mad because you haven't been here any longer than I have.

[guitrguy]

I'm furious! Rawr!!!!!1111!!!!

[guitrguy]

Was that rep sarcastic?

[Volumnius Flush]

Was that rep sarcastic?

No I was just saying how cool you are.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

yup. actually, do you think the pace of evolution has increased due to developments in society? or has it slowed

Evolution only speeds up or slows down in the presence of changing environment. Sharks haven't changed much in hundreds of millions of years because they've essentially reached a fitness peak that hasn't been surpassed by any other species, but most other species have been changing at a pretty constant rate since the end of the dinosaurs. The sudden disequilibrium caused by the (relatively) quick progression from nomads to city-dwellers probably means that the gene pool is changing much more quickly.

In the short term, this means that rates of things like myopia, which might have meant death 5000 years ago, are now harmless, but I don't think this is really leading to evolution so much as certain gene types becoming more or less common. It's sort of like how if you took a bunch of grey birds off an island (and where grey was the colour most suited to survival) and bred them to produce white only birds and only black birds, then returned them to their island, within X generations they would be grey again, and white or black birds would again be the minority. That's sort of what's happening with humans today; instead of outliers being either favoured or disadvantaged, they're surviving at roughly the same rates as everybody else. That doesn't mean these changes are going to permanently set into the gene pool, it just means that right now they aren't being selected against. If we had to return to a nomadic lifestyle, it's a good bet that in a few hundreds of thousands of years we'd be very similar to populations that were nomadic the entire time.

[samariah]

no this thread sucked from the beginning

[pppoe]

I'm actually a very good poster.

great new threads?

But seriously, Medical Conditions is a great thread idea

NO.

[monetmelly]

I Agree .i Would Strongly Want To Be A At Home Wife And Mother But On The Side Have My Hobbies .i Feel A Real Man Takes Are Of The Back Bone Of The Family But Together Knows That The Wife Has Her Say Because I Don't Agree To It If There Is A Man Who Is Just Begin A Straight Control Freak.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

I Agree .i Would Strongly Want To Be A At Home Wife And Mother But On The Side Have My Hobbies .i Feel A Real Man Takes Are Of The Back Bone Of The Family But Together Knows That The Wife Has Her Say Because I Don't Agree To It If There Is A Man Who Is Just Begin A Straight Control Freak.

quick, somebody trademark this before fallout boy uses it as the title of their next single!

[1338 h4x0r]

Can you elaborate on why you think keeping women in the home is a) love and b) not essentially forcing them to, as I put it, "pump out kids and bake ****"?

[Volumnius Flush]

Can you elaborate on why you think keeping women in the home is a) love and b) not essentially forcing them to, as I put it, "pump out kids and bake ****"?

I will explain b to an extent. I don't believe in pumping out kids. I believe in living within your means. If you can only afford to have two kids, you have a choice to save money, have one, or have two. If you want 12, and you can afford it go for it. I believe a stay at home wife can bake for her husband especially if he is the main breadwinner, but when kids come into the picture I believe it becomes a familial responsibility where everyone pitches in (when the children are old enough) but I also believe that the man is never above doing household chores.

Does that explain it for you?

[1338 h4x0r]

ok, why do you give men preferential status

[Volumnius Flush]

ok, why do you give men preferential status

I have a fundamental disagreement with you that preferential status entails a man being the main breadwinner which entails working a full time job busting his *** to support his wife and her kids when the least they can do is fix his dinner and clean the house.

[1338 h4x0r]

I have a fundamental disagreement with you that preferential status entails a man being the main breadwinner which entails working a full time job busting his *** to support his wife and her kids when the least they can do is fix his dinner and clean the house.

why shouldn't women be allowed to enter the industry

I have a feeling this is going to boil down to 'Jay-zus'

why doesn't the breadwinner just turn the other cheek, huh?

[guitrguy]

I have a fundamental disagreement with you that preferential status entails a man being the main breadwinner which entails working a full time job busting his *** to support his wife and her kids when the least they can do is fix his dinner and clean the house.

You should learn to not expect people to behave in a manner completely outside of your control.

[Volumnius Flush]

You should learn to not expect people to behave in a manner completely outside of your control.

I never said I expected these things, just that in an ideal world, this is how it would be on average.

[Illmatic]

I have a fundamental disagreement with you that preferential status entails a man being the main breadwinner which entails working a full time job busting his *** to support his wife and her kids when the least they can do is fix his dinner and clean the house.

it's preferential status because if the man decides he wants to leave he can do it whenever he wants and that leaves the wife and kids up ****'s creek.

[1338 h4x0r]

I never said I expected these things, just that in an ideal world, this is how it would be on average.

Hopefully your misogyny will weed your undesirable genetic and memetic material out of the wider human population

[Volumnius Flush]

it's preferential status because if the man decides he wants to leave he can do it whenever he wants and that leaves the wife and kids up ****'s creek.

In an ideal world this would never happen. And five words: child support, welfare, and alimony.

[1338 h4x0r]

Yes, maybe, but you're missing (evading) the point: denying women the right to enter the industry in an 'ideal' world is discriminatory. By definition.

[Illmatic]

In an ideal world this would never happen.

then start thinking in terms of the real world.

And five words: child support, welfare, and alimony.

these things have always been conducive to successful families.

[Kreator2112]

I don't feel like reading the entire thread. Is this thread serious?

[Volumnius Flush]

then start thinking in terms of the real world.

I am just saying what would be good in theory. In practice it doesn't always work out like that.

these things have always been conducive to successful families.

Glad you see my point!

I don't feel like reading the entire thread. Is this thread serious?

The internets is for serious business only.

[Illmatic]

I am just saying what would be good in theory. In practice it doesn't always work out like that.


yeah you could definitely use some real world experience.

[Kreator2112]

I just read you first post. It said something about women were made for cooking dinner and doing the dishes.

[1338 h4x0r]

Your 'ideal' society would quickly be destroyed by filthy pagans who let more than 50% of their adult population enter the industry

And I'm waiting for you to acknowledge that doing otherwise is discriminatory.

[Volumnius Flush]

yeah you could definitely use some real world experience.

You could use some experience in capitalizing the first word of a sentence. :thumb:

[1338 h4x0r]

I capitalize the first letters of my sentences. And in other news:

Your 'ideal' society would quickly be destroyed by filthy pagans who let more than 50% of their adult population enter the industry

And I'm waiting for you to acknowledge that doing otherwise is discriminatory.

Your 'ideal' society would quickly be destroyed by filthy pagans who let more than 50% of their adult population enter the industry

And I'm waiting for you to acknowledge that doing otherwise is discriminatory.

Your 'ideal' society would quickly be destroyed by filthy pagans who let more than 50% of their adult population enter the industry

And I'm waiting for you to acknowledge that doing otherwise is discriminatory.

[Volumnius Flush]

There is nothing discriminatory about having a woman stay at home. I don't see why you think it is. I think they should be able to work and in certain conditions they really don't have a choice but to work. But I think the mom should stay at home for the first few years the couple have kids. Or at the most work part time.

[1338 h4x0r]

There is nothing discriminatory about having a woman stay at home. I don't see why you think it is. I think they should be able to work and in certain conditions they really don't have a choice but to work. But I think the mom should stay at home for the first few years the couple have kids. Or at the most work part time.

See, that's discriminatory. 'Discriminate' means 'distinguish between'. You are splitting people into arbitrary groups according to which silly-looking lumps of flesh are in between their legs, which is discriminatory by definition.

I think roles should be based on merit. If you're good at some field, you should either go into it or teach it, regardless. That is how modern societies function.

[Volumnius Flush]

See, that's discriminatory. 'Discriminate' means 'distinguish between'. You are splitting people into arbitrary groups according to which silly-looking lumps of flesh are in between their legs, which is discriminatory by definition.

I think roles should be based on merit. If you're good at some field, you should either go into it or teach it, regardless. That is how modern societies function.

I am not discriminating. I am just saying that ideally this is how things would work. I am not saying this is how I believe, but I am saying I believe this is the ideal way to approach the situation, though it often never comes out like I described it in the OP.

[1338 h4x0r]

Your ideal model is discriminatory then

Not to mention retarded. Both parents should be there to raise the kids. But thanks to Jesus Bush gubbermint that's not going to happen.

[Der Übermensch]

My dad was the stay at home parent (well, he is self-employed, so worked from home - slight difference) while my mum was the one with a job out of the house.

Regardless though, your viewpoint is amazingly sexist, and stuck in the 50's. Which parent is the primary caretaker should be up to the couple raising the kid, not someone else... most of all you...

[badtaste]

Men were created with more natural strength.

Evidence right here:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=CDubH5Kl1KI

[1338 h4x0r]

Regardless though, your viewpoint is amazingly sexist, and stuck in the 50's. Which parent is the primary caretaker should be up to the couple raising the kid, not someone else... most of all you...

50's CE

[guitrguy]

There is nothing discriminatory about having a woman stay at home. I don't see why you think it is. I think they should be able to work and in certain conditions they really don't have a choice but to work. But I think the mom should stay at home for the first few years the couple have kids. Or at the most work part time.

You're rich. You explain why it is discriminatory, and yet you still can't see why it is.

[cometuesday]

i almost made a lengthy post about my parents' work history in my youth but decided against it. bottom line of it all, however, is that my mom rakes in more money than my dad and is largely responsible for not only what we're lucky enough to have but the opportunities i have available to me. both of them work, with my mom now doing it from home.

and, personally, i'd prefer for that both myself and the woman i was with not jump into pumping her full of seed and instead take some responsibility in both working, establishing careers, and building a solid financial and situational foundation upon which when we chose to have a child something like this wouldn't be an issue.

[DBoons Ghost]

and, personally, i'd prefer for that both myself and the woman i was with not jump into pumping her full of seed and instead take some responsibility in both working, establishing careers, and building a solid financial and situational foundation upon which when we chose to have a child something like this wouldn't be an issue.

:thumb:

Well said and stick to the plan. You will be happy!

[Sunshine]

Both of my parents were in the army, and though my dad went CW3, my mom was a Master Sargent so they made about the same, and they were both gone a helluva lot [though my dad's languages were slightly more useful than my mom's so he was deployed a bit more than she].
They just retired after their 20 years, and now my mom works the 40-hour-a-week job and my dad works at the mall part-time.

I see nothing wrong with this.

And I plan to go about the same way --- not into the army, 'cause I'm tired of the lifestyle, but I refuse to let my future $120k university degree go to waste by sitting around at home doing laundry all day.

[Reaganista]

really the major issue here isnt that this mindset is bad for women which it is but that it's bad for children it's retarded that we still leave something as important as raising children up to amatuers

[Der Übermensch]

You're rich. You explain why it is discriminatory, and yet you still can't see why it is.

No he isn't. He claims he has been on and off homeless and that he collects welfare benefits.

[guitrguy]

No he isn't. He claims he has been on and off homeless and that he collects welfare benefits.
I meant rich as in lulzy:confused:

[Der Übermensch]

Lol. I don't think I've ever heard anyone born after 1950 use it in that way :p

[guitrguy]

I'm only 21. :upset:

[1338 h4x0r]

That's 'swell'

[Der Übermensch]

I'm only 21. :upset:

Heh, don't worry. I speak archaically too at times.

[Mr. Ron]

Evidence right here:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=CDubH5Kl1KI

....you mean he's a real person?


ew

[Der Übermensch]

Why has no one done a video response to that yet?

[Mr. Ron]

I still think he's a gimmick.

[Shell]

I think kids would maybe be more well-behaved if one parent actually stayed home to teach them proper manners, discipline, etc. Whether it's a man or woman I don't think really matters.

A while back a few people mentioned that most families can't afford to only have one income... however, the cost of child care these days is such that if you have more than 1 child, it's going to be difficult for the typical family to afford to pay for daycare. It's almost more cost-effective in that situation for one parent to stay home, rather than their entire income paying for child care.

[Volumnius Flush]

You're rich. You explain why it is discriminatory, and yet you still can't see why it is.

I am in great poverty actually, but thanks for making this judgment on my financial standing! (which you really have no clue on and only assume this because I am a conservative) :thumb:

No he isn't. He claims he has been on and off homeless and that he collects welfare benefits.

Quoted for truth.

[Sunshine]

As he explained later, he wasn't talking about wealth.
More of a "full of it" definition of rich.

[Against Miik!]

Honestly Sunshine sometimes I just have to wonder what the hell is wrong with you

[Volumnius Flush]

As he explained later, he wasn't talking about wealth.
More of a "full of it" definition of rich.

Full of what? I don't know what he's talking about. I just have my beliefs, but doesn't everybody?

[dei]

your beliefs are ****ing ridiculous.

[Sunshine]

Honestly Sunshine sometimes I just have to wonder what the hell is wrong with you

Um.
Ok.

I meant rich as in lulzy:confused:

Lulzy, full of it, whatever.

[Volumnius Flush]

your beliefs are ****ing ridiculous.

I thought one of the first rules of debate was not using personal attacks and only using language conducive to lively and productive debating.

[guitrguy]

I am in great poverty actually, but thanks for making this judgment on my financial standing! (which you really have no clue on and only assume this because I am a conservative) :thumb:
Learn2read

[guitrguy]

I thought one of the first rules of debate was not using personal attacks and only using language conducive to lively and productive debating.

Yeah your stance in neither lively nor productive. Why should it be taken seriously?

[Volumnius Flush]

Learn2read

Yeah your stance in neither lively nor productive. Why should it be taken seriously?

Learn to type first. In =/= is, fyi.

And why? Because I thought this would be a productive, useful, and stimulating topic. I had no idea I would be flamed for it.

[guitrguy]

Learn to type first. In =/= is, fyi.

Oh wow a typo, and you still knew what I meant. You could just shut up about minor typos already, Mr I think Jew is a synonym for Israelite.

And why? Because I thought this would be a productive, useful, and stimulating topic. I had no idea I would be flamed for it.

Its backwards and hickish. Of course you're not going to be taken seriously. If you want people to agree with you, then post this on the Southern Baptist Convention forums or something.

[Volumnius Flush]

Its backwards and hickish. Of course you're not going to be taken seriously. If you want people to agree with you, then post this on the Southern Baptist Convention forums or something.

Funny, I'm not SBC, for reasons you wouldn't understand. :thumb:

But no really, I just want to be taken seriously is all and everyone has to make fun of me and attack my beliefs when I have done nothing to them. Especially you. I have done nothing to you nor deserve your hate directed to me.

I just wish everyone would not be so anal and take what I am saying seriously. If you want to criticize, do it in a constructive manner and not in a manner that tears people down instead of building them up. Give it a shot and you might feel better about yourself!

[guitrguy]

Funny, I'm not SBC, for reasons you wouldn't understand. :thumb:

But no really, I just want to be taken seriously is all and everyone has to make fun of me and attack my beliefs when I have done nothing to them. Especially you. I have done nothing to you nor deserve your hate directed to me.

I just wish everyone would not be so anal and take what I am saying seriously. If you want to criticize, do it in a constructive manner and not in a manner that tears people down instead of building them up. Give it a shot and you might feel better about yourself!

I feel just fine about my self.

Tip: Don't introduce backwards ideas from the 1950's and before and expect people to take it seriously.

[Volumnius Flush]

I feel just fine about my self.

Tip: Don't introduce backwards ideas from the 1950's and before and expect people to take it seriously.

No you don't. You feel very bad.

Backwards does not mean it is incorrect, fyi.

[guitrguy]

but it does mean regressive

[Sunshine]

It's a little hard to take your beliefs seriously when you're sayin' women should be shut in at home all day while the men are out to work and play.
Y'know.
What with the 21st century bein' about pro-equality and all, for the most part.

[Volumnius Flush]

It's a little hard to take your beliefs seriously when you're sayin' women should be shut in at home all day while the men are out to work and play.
Y'know.
What with the 21st century bein' about pro-equality and all, for the most part.

Hard work =/= play. I never said the men get to play. If anything the women get to play. Play house.

[1338 h4x0r]

Heh, don't worry. I speak archaically too at times.

Be thou hale, over-man!

Hard work =/= play. I never said the men get to play. If anything the women get to play. Play house.

Wimmenfolk: barefoot, preg'nit, n' in thuh kit'chin, where they's belong

ITT: Volumnius Flush is totally non-discriminatory

[Sammy_L_D]

Yeah for womyn, don't assume she can cook!

[Mr. Ron]

I think it would be cool for either a man or a woman to stay home, voluntarily of course, if they could and spend more time with their children. i think that would only do good, but this society sort of forces two people to work to make sufficient money.


But yeah, VF u crayzay bruvva'

[Jude]

Why is this thread being taken serious

[Sunshine]

Hard work =/= play. I never said the men get to play. If anything the women get to play. Play house.

Yeah, but some people actually find work enjoyable.
I know my mom goes CRAZY if she doesn't have a job, which is why she is now the one with the 40 hour a week job and my dad is ****ing around playing chess all the time and occasionally working his part-time minimum wage job at the mall.

I know I'd hate being home all day. I'm going to college because I want a job, I don't want to stay home all the time. That blows.

[EinzingerIsGod]

People should be free to do what they want to do with their lives. Women should not be obligated to be housewives in the same respect as the men should not be obligated to "bring home the bacon". Each couple should decide what is best for their unique situation and desires. And no man should force his wife or girlfriend to a life of domestic slavery. We need to stop looking at each gender as having its own role in society and start realizing that at the end of the day men and women are all people and people should choose their own endeavors.

[ilikemusic]

To an extent I agree with gender roles as they're pretty prevalent in day to day life regardless of whether or not people acknowledge them. However I also feel its the choice of the individual to plan their own path in life and they shouldn't be ridiculed for it. If a woman decides to stay at home and raise a family she shouldn't be ostracized by feminists for making such a choice. The opposite applies for men.

[Mr. Ron]

I've always heard of women (not all) having terrible lives that were depressing because they couldn't pursue things outside of the home. Well, what about the men who had the pressure on them to be "the bread maker" and support an entire family? Am I sounding like VF?

[guitrguy]

To an extent I agree with gender roles as they're pretty prevalent in day to day life regardless of whether or not people acknowledge them. However I also feel its the choice of the individual to plan their own path in life and they shouldn't be ridiculed for it. If a woman decides to stay at home and raise a family she shouldn't be ostracized by feminists for making such a choice. The opposite applies for men.
Gender roles are a reason why there is inequality between men and women. How can you agree with that?

[Mr. Ron]

I disagree with gender roles, but I do think that women are better suited for somethings more then men, and men are just better at some things than women in a few respects.

[guitrguy]

I disagree with gender roles, but I do think that women are better suited for somethings more then men, and men are just better at some things than women in a few respects.

from a physiological stand point, yes. But from the aspect of normal day to day life that for the most part doesn't require much physiological consideration on other side, no.

[Mr. Ron]

from a physiological stand point, yes. But from the aspect of normal day to day life that for the most part doesn't require much physiological consideration on other side, no.

I agree.

[BridgeToSolace]

of the home. Well, what about the men who had the pressure on them to be "the bread maker" and support an entire family? Am I sounding like VF?

I made that point several pages ago >_>

[ilikemusic]

Gender roles are a reason why there is inequality between men and women. How can you agree with that?

I'm kind of curious as to how that is the reason for inequality. The tendency is that women stay home and raise the family and men go out and work, yes. However that isn't canon in day to day life. I feel that physically and mentally men and women are constructed for different roles hence my opinion.

[interviewer02]

Why is this thread being taken serious
kind of what I was thinking. "Hey, lets overgeneralize everything."

I had a friend once tell me, "If i can get a 40 hour a week job, have my girlfriend move in with me, and fully support her while she stays at home, I'll be so happy."

Personally, I would never date a deadbeat girl.

[ringworm]

but this society sort of forces two people to work to make sufficient money

how is that?

[Dr Hooch]

I agree, to a degree; to me, the purpose of life isn't to work, it's to be part of a family.

Don't you have any... More personal visions of what life ought to be about?

[guitrguy]

I'm kind of curious as to how that is the reason for inequality. The tendency is that women stay home and raise the family and men go out and work, yes. However that isn't canon in day to day life. I feel that physically and mentally men and women are constructed for different roles hence my opinion.
You can feel that way but the difference is not great enough enforce irrational gender roles. Just because there is a tendency for something doesn't mean that s how it should be. Women are just as capable as men to go out and make a living, and men are just as capable as women at staying home and raising a family.

[Mr. Ron]

how is that?

If you are middle class, and have to pay for expenses that involve yourself, your wife, and X amount of kids (kids are ****ing expensive) you almost HAVE to have both parents working to have sufficient funds. Unless one of the parents has some extremely cushy job.

[ilikemusic]

You can feel that way but the difference is not great enough enforce irrational gender roles. Just because there is a tendency for something doesn't mean that s how it should be. Women are just as capable as men to go out and make a living, and men are just as capable as women at staying home and raising a family.

which is why i said in my previous post that it is a decision entirely up to the individual to decide whether or not they want to stay at home or pursue a career. I made light of the fact that I feel gender roles are existent because I also feel that due to the nature of today's society people try to gloss over the tendencies which lie at what is more or less the base of our existence. At no point did I say that we must adhere to these roles in everyday life. I just feel that they shouldn't be ignored, that's not to say people should be ridiculed for upholding these roles or contradicting them.

[Smokey D]

I'm kind of curious as to how that is the reason for inequality. The tendency is that women stay home and raise the family and men go out and work, yes. However that isn't canon in day to day life. I feel that physically and mentally men and women are constructed for different roles hence my opinion.

No one on earth was 'constructed' to live in the sort of societies we live in so that's a pretty stupid conclusion, really.

[Iskandar]

If by "constructed" you mean "conditioned."

[1338 h4x0r]

Wimmen: all they's good fer is cookin' n' ****in'

[Iskandar]

Because it makes perfect sense to have half of your workforce at home changing diapers in a modern economy.

Why do people still think this way?

[guitrguy]

which is why i said in my previous post that it is a decision entirely up to the individual to decide whether or not they want to stay at home or pursue a career. I made light of the fact that I feel gender roles are existent because I also feel that due to the nature of today's society people try to gloss over the tendencies which lie at what is more or less the base of our existence. At no point did I say that we must adhere to these roles in everyday life. I just feel that they shouldn't be ignored, that's not to say people should be ridiculed for upholding these roles or contradicting them.

yeah gender roles are not the basis of our existence, and we should work to break down such a stupid social construct.

[guitarded_chuck]

Who says it is the women that need to be at home? You argue that it is men who should be working because they are built stronger and the women should be at home. However, the most income-earning occupations come with little physical workload, and they are careers which women can do just as well as any man.

Not too mention it is perfectly find to have both parents working. Of course they both should not be working 10+ hour days, and they should be away for work on weekends. But really, for any relationship between man/woman to remain strong and healthy, this should be the case anyhow.

[Volumnius Flush]

So this thread confirms that VF will never have a relationship with a women.

No I won't have a relationship with a women. I'm not Mormon. :wave:

[guitarded_chuck]

Haha

Yea I apologize for that comment it was unnecessary. I just have a hard time understanding how you come to having such an opinion, that's all.

[Volumnius Flush]

Haha

Yea I apologize for that comment it was unnecessary.

Are you sorry because you hurt my feelings or are you sorry because you made a mistake in your post?


I just have a hard time understanding how you come to having such an opinion, that's all.

To make it really simple, I am from Texas and that is how things go down here. Plus it is how my family always was. To prove a point, my parents are divorced and it did put a strain on my monther since she had so little work experience and she therefore had to work two jobs to support three kids.

I think one person put it in terms of "up a creek without a paddle".

[guitarded_chuck]

Are you sorry because you hurt my feelings or are you sorry because you made a mistake in your post?

your feelings

To make it really simple, I am from Texas and that is how things go down here. Plus it is how my family always was. To prove a point, my parents are divorced and it did put a strain on my monther since she had so little work experience and she therefore had to work two jobs to support three kids.

I think one person put it in terms of "up a creek without a paddle".

Well maybe if she hadn't been encouraged to stay at home so much she would have gained work experience or had a chance to get an education. If she had, the divorce would not have been so hard on her because she would be more independent.

[Amit]

Well maybe if she hadn't been encouraged to stay at home so much she would have gained work experience or had a chance to get an education. If she had, the divorce would not have been so hard on her because she would be more independent.

it's funny how there are people out there who don't come to this conclusion

how scary

[Volumnius Flush]

it's funny how there are people out there who don't come to this conclusion

how scary

I agree. Mostly what I was referring to was that a mother should stay home the first 4-5 years with the kids before they start school. Then it would be best to find a typical 8-4 position or become a student if they haven't already been to college and work around the children's schedule.

[Against Miik!]

It makes perfect sense that women don't get as much job training because companies know that there is a good chance that they will at some point have a baby and quite possibly leave the company. A man is a much better investment, and thats why men go farther in their careers.

Just sayin

[Amit]

umm why the hell would they become a college student after having kids

[Volumnius Flush]

umm why the hell would they become a college student after having kids

Stay at home moms don't typically go to school.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

Stay at home moms don't typically go to school.

Are you kidding? There's a reason women in business programs are often referred to as "aiming for her MRS degree." Where do you think the rich guys of the future find their wives?

[Volumnius Flush]

Are you kidding? There's a reason women in business programs are often referred to as "aiming for her MRS degree." Where do you think the rich guys of the future find their wives?

I don't know, business school?

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

yeah man. if you're a moderately intelligent girl looking for a guy to keep you home, that's where you go. i know at least 3 or 4 girls who have admitted to me they're mostly in school to find a husband.

(disclaimer: these girls are usually gold-digging hos, and i don't really like them, but my point is college is where the husbands are)

[Volumnius Flush]

yeah man. if you're a moderately intelligent girl looking for a guy to keep you home, that's where you go. i know at least 3 or 4 girls who have admitted to me they're mostly in school to find a husband.

(disclaimer: these girls are usually gold-digging hos, and i don't really like them, but my point is college is where the husbands are)

That makes sense. I am in college to find a woman! :chug:














That couldn't be further from the truth.

[Chu]

umm why the hell would they become a college student after having kids
I know of a few girls (I guess more PC would be ladies?) at my current university, who are 30+, had kids in their early 20's and are now going to university because they didn't have the chance before.

[Amit]

yeah but they were born 30 years ago

[Chu]

I guess I don't really understand the context of this thread any more (I sort of just lurk...).

But your post just flew straight over my head Amit :p

[Amit]

my point:

30 years ago, standards of educational expectations, especially for women, were completely different from what they are like now

[Chu]

Indeed, very much so.

[ncnxonattronn]

i think home where the kids is where i belong

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

That makes sense. I am in college to find a woman! :chug:



That couldn't be further from the truth.

Are you purposefully stupid or something? I said there are a lot of people like that in college, not that everyone in college is like that.

[Volumnius Flush]

Are you purposefully stupid or something? I said there are a lot of people like that in college, not that everyone in college is like that.

Much to your chagrin, I wasn't being sarcastic. I was making a joke. If I meant it sarcastically I would have placed a :rolleyes: out to the side.

[Dr Hooch]

I guess more PC would be ladies?) at my current university, who are 30+, had kids in their early 20's

Can i just make a brief aside here that calling 30 year olds with kids 'girls' isn't "unPC" it's just "totally inaccurate"

[Volumnius Flush]

Can i just make a brief aside here that calling 30 year olds with kids 'girls' isn't "unPC" it's just "totally inaccurate"

I agree. I think the proper term is old hag.

[Chu]

They're not that much older than me though.

I've always called ladies of my same age group girls. Don't really know why, never really thought about it tbh.

[Volumnius Flush]

They're not that much older than me though.

I've always called ladies of my same age group girls. Don't really know why, never really thought about it tbh.

I was just kidding about the "hag" post... No, you should call them women.

Do you call yourself a man or a guy? Do you like it when you are called a man? I know I don't.

[Chu]

I don't really think of myself as a 'man' I guess, I'm still a boy :p

Edit: I figured you were joking with the old hag btw, didn't really seem to be honest coming from you :p

[Volumnius Flush]

I don't really think of myself as a 'man' I guess, I'm still a boy :p

Edit: I figured you were joking with the old hag btw, didn't really seem to be honest coming from you :p

I would not have chose the word "honest". I think there are more fitting summations of my intended, or attempted "joke", which didn't come over to well.

But really, biologically, I am a man. I can procreate, I have balls, a prostate, I am equipped I guess you could say. But "man" is so polarizing. I think "guy" fits just fine! :thumb:

[Dr Hooch]

If i say "hi guys" that's gender neutral, but i'd never say a girl was a "cool guy".

Curious.

[1338 h4x0r]

If i say "hi guys" that's gender neutral, but i'd never say a girl was a "cool guy".

Curious.

Think of French, where a group of mixed sex is referred to as 'ils' ('they' in masculine form)

[Volumnius Flush]

If i say "hi guys" that's gender neutral, but i'd never say a girl was a "cool guy".

Curious.

I think "girl" should suffice. Or "woman" or "lady" for the older females. Like anyone over 28.

Think of French, where a group of mixed sex is referred to as 'ils' ('they' in masculine form)

Oh look at you, you know basic elementary French. You are soooo smart.

/just mad because I can't remember hardly anything from my 3+ years of French/

[1338 h4x0r]

Oh look at you, you know basic elementary French. You are soooo smart.

I didn't claim to know much else, just saying.

[Volumnius Flush]

I didn't claim to know much else, just saying.

I know basic things.

Je suis un chien!
Je ne parle pas Francais.
Je parle Francais tres peu.
Le fleuve es gay!

[1338 h4x0r]

huh huh huh

he said "gay"

[Volumnius Flush]

huh huh huh

he said "gay"

I don't know how to say gay in Frence. But I think in Franglish, that would say, "The river is gay."

[1338 h4x0r]

There are dictionaries for this purpose. I'm pretty sure the word is 'homosexuell', but I don't think they use it for the same purpose as 'gay' is used here.

[Smokey D]

I know basic things.
Je parle Francais tres peu.
Le fleuve es gay!

Those don't make sense.

And the word for gay is pédé. But it doesn't make sense to call a river gay.

[Dr Hooch]

Bonjour, les monsieurs, d'un argument stupide.


My french is so embaressingly awful

they'll never let me into canada

[Volumnius Flush]

Those don't make sense.

And the word for gay is pédé. But it doesn't make sense to call a river gay.

Je parle francais tres peu?

How would you say it then?

[1338 h4x0r]

My french is so embaressingly awful

they'll never let me into canada

In that case, just stay out of Quebec.

On second thought, stay out of Quebec regardless.

[Smokey D]

Je parle francais tres peu?

How would you say it then?

Je parle seulement un peu de Francais.

I could be wrong, but even je parle tres peu de francais sounds weird.

[Dr Hooch]

I'd really quite like to visit montreal though

for the musics, see

[1338 h4x0r]

that zydeco **** they be playin

you can hear that in the US as well, although Katrina may have washed a lot of it away

[Volumnius Flush]

Je parle seulement un peu de Francais.

I could be wrong, but even je parle tres peu de francais sounds weird.

Well if you translate directly from English, which is a no-no I know, it would be: Je I parle speak Francais French tres very peu little.

[1338 h4x0r]

yeah that'd be wrong tbh

It would be strange if I went around saying "You good!" and "You early!" to everyone

[Volumnius Flush]

yeah that'd be wrong tbh

It would be strange if I went around saying "You good!" and "You early!" to everyone

What does you good have anything to do with what we're discussing now? I had a subject and a verb in my initial sentence so what's your point?

[Smokey D]

In French, the adverb usually comes directly after the verb it's modifying. But I speak French very little doesn't make sense in English either. Besides, peu doesn't translate as little. It means bit, a few or small amount.

After thinking on it for a few minutes, je parle un petit peu de francais is probably the most correct. Je parle peu de francais would also work.

[Volumnius Flush]

In French, the adverb usually comes directly after the verb it's modifying. But I speak French very little doesn't make sense in English either. Besides, peu doesn't translate as little.

Je parle peu de francais would also work.

So right after telling me I can't use peu you use peu? :rolleyes:

Get Jelle in here.

[guitarded_chuck]

Cette discussion s'est tourné vers merde que je n'ai vu.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

you all suck at french.

le fleuve est fif (the river is a fag)
vous êtes tous des pédés incultes (you're all uncultured butt****ers/pedophiles)
venez pas visiter le québec, on vous veut pas de toute façon (don't come to quebec, we don't want you anyway)
et en passant ça s'écrit "homosexuel" (and by the way it's written "...")

/real live bilingual anglo-quebecer

:smash:

[guitarded_chuck]

ahhhhh le quebecois, non?

[ringworm]

If you are middle class, and have to pay for expenses that involve yourself, your wife, and X amount of kids (kids are ****ing expensive) you almost HAVE to have both parents working to have sufficient funds. Unless one of the parents has some extremely cushy job.

i wasnt really disagreeing with you :wave:

americans seem unable to sacrifice our daily luxuries in tough times
they'd rather WORK more to keep their TVs, multiple car, cellphones and so on instead of clipping them out to save a few bucks

but this is coming from a guy who remembers my families FIRST color TV :) so much of what is considered a must have today is simply fluff to me

[Dr Hooch]

I like to think I could live cheaply but in reality that's because I've never had to live in a shitty neighbourhood

like the second i'm not living with parents or with like 5 other people student style

it's gonna be tough methinks

[Amit]

i wasnt really disagreeing with you :wave:

americans seem unable to sacrifice our daily luxuries in tough times
they'd rather WORK more to keep their TVs, multiple car, cellphones and so on instead of clipping them out to save a few bucks

but this is coming from a guy who remembers my families FIRST color TV :) so much of what is considered a must have today is simply fluff to me

cell phones aren't a luxury anymore unless you're from 1995

[1338 h4x0r]

What does you good have anything to do with what we're discussing now? I had a subject and a verb in my initial sentence so what's your point?

'Ni hao', it's the Chinese equivalent of 'wes ðu hal' or 'wes gesund'

And if I translated it literally into English, it wouldn't sound quite right. Neither would 'double shoot' sound right where I should say 'bijection'.

duh-uhhhhh

[siva_chair]

cell phones aren't a luxury anymore unless you're from 1995

Or if you are me:

2006 :eek:

[Amit]

i didn't get a cell phone until 2005 :I

[Smokey D]

So right after telling me I can't use peu you use peu? :rolleyes:

Get Jelle in here.

Well peu is the right word you just used it in the wrong place. At least to my ear, which admittedly is quite out of practice.

you all suck at french

For reference, where exactly would you use the peu?

[EinzingerIsGod]

To make it really simple, I am from Texas and that is how things go down here.

And if this was 150 years ago and a "is slavery moral" argument you could say the same thing. Just because its status quo doesn't make it acceptable.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

For reference, where exactly would you use the peu?

As in "I speak a little bit of French"? The closest way would be to say "je parle un peu de français" ("I speak a bit of French"). The way you said "un petit peu" isn't really wrong, it's just sort of awkward because it's a direct translation from English. People would still understand.

[Eliminator]

i didnt get a cell phone until never

[fingers mccoy]

well i hope you're proud of yourself

[Volumnius Flush]

And if this was 150 years ago and a "is slavery moral" argument you could say the same thing. Just because its status quo doesn't make it acceptable.

But it is acceptable. Who has a moral authority to dictate what a husband and wife can and can't do in the privacy of their marriage? What is right for some is not always right for all...

What is unacceptable is these fathers running out on their families, leaving them to fend for themselves, and not paying child support payments. That is unacceptable. The way a stable and loving man and wife choose to lead their lives, in this case, is acceptable.

Well peu is the right word you just used it in the wrong place. At least to my ear, which admittedly is quite out of practice.

I still think I'm right.

[1338 h4x0r]

I still think I'm right.

I take it you subscribe to the doctrine of 'truthiness'

[Volumnius Flush]

I take it you subscribe to the doctrine of 'truthiness'

Well since no one has provided or supplied us with any evidence to the contrary and considering I did have three years of French, I think my translation is correct. Also no native speaker has told me I'm wrong so unless Jelle comes in here I guess we'll never know.

[1338 h4x0r]

There was a Quebecois poster earlier in the thread. I'm pretty sure Jelle is from Flanders (Vlaams speaker) anyway.

[Volumnius Flush]

There was a Quebecois poster earlier in the thread. I'm pretty sure Jelle is from Flanders (Vlaams speaker) anyway.

Link or it didn't happen. Jelle speaks French, fyi.

[1338 h4x0r]

Well, Jelle is a Dutch name

[Volumnius Flush]

Well, Jelle is a Dutch name

But he is right next to France practically and I know they speak it in his country.

[1338 h4x0r]

In Wallonia, yes.

Jelle, I believe, is from Flanders, which is closer to the Netherlands.

Looks like you need a history lesson too, huh.

[spitfirejunky]

I still think I'm right.

Actually you're absolutely wrong. Smokey D nailed it.

[1338 h4x0r]

What does French have to do with VF's bigoted views anyway?

[Smokey D]

As in "I speak a little bit of French"? The closest way would be to say "je parle un peu de français" ("I speak a bit of French"). The way you said "un petit peu" isn't really wrong, it's just sort of awkward because it's a direct translation from English. People would still understand.

Could you say "Je parle peu de francais"? The de construction is more natural, but when I was looking around for clarification I saw peu used without de. Is that possible here?

I remember saying petit peu last time I was in France because I wanted to make it clear that the amount of French I spoke was very small, not that I was semi-competent.

I dunno, direct translations are usually bad, but saying "I speak a bit of French" in English conveys a level of competence.


I still think I'm right.

It doesn't even make sense in English.

[Aaron]

But he is right next to France practically and I know they speak it in his country.
People speak french in many countries idiot

[Smokey D]

What does French have to do with VF's bigoted views anyway?

Because it got boring hearing how many ways VF is wrong. Asking stuff about French can actually teach me something.

[EinzingerIsGod]

But it is acceptable. Who has a moral authority to dictate what a husband and wife can and can't do in the privacy of their marriage? What is right for some is not always right for all...

What is unacceptable is these fathers running out on their families, leaving them to fend for themselves, and not paying child support payments. That is unacceptable. The way a stable and loving man and wife choose to lead their lives, in this case, is acceptable.

You're not following here...

If a woman chooses to be subservient to her husband because that is what she wants then that is fine. But when you title your thread "Women: Home with the kids is where they belong", you are the one dictating what a husband and wife should do in the privacy of their marriage.

You are saying the woman should stay home with the kids.

You are saying that the man should work during the day to support his family.

If they choose this life its fine. I would argue that with the rising cost of living its far fetched. I would also argue that these gender role stereotypes help perpetuate sexism in our society.

People can choose this life, but as you said, no one has the moral authority to dictate what people should do in the privacy of their own marriage. Therefore, we should not be saying that women "belong at home".

[fingers mccoy]

i dont think choosing to be subservient to your husband is fine

you've gotta be pretty ****ed up to do that

[EinzingerIsGod]

i dont think choosing to be subservient to your husband is fine

you've gotta be pretty ****ed up to do that

I agree, and I think if I were to talk to a woman who chose that I could help her wake up. But I believe people should be able to do as they please so long as it does not impede on any other person doing as they please.

So if thats what she wants to settle for...oh well.

[stevensonmat2]

Some people find comfort in being submissive in a relationship, why is that wrong?

[guitrguy]

Some people find comfort in being submissive in a relationship, why is that wrong?

That would be a choice. What is wrong is when the submissive relationship is forced.

[fingers mccoy]

um i said subservience not submission but still

the kind of humility and obedience that being 'submissive' generally entails is false, and it makes for bad sex, bad conversation and bad parenting

[Volumnius Flush]

People speak french in many countries idiot

That was my point. And since Jelle is practically right next to France, I don't see yours.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

There was a Quebecois poster earlier in the thread.

sup

Link or it didn't happen.
i'd be tempted to ask you the same thing about jesus, the casting in stone of gender roles, and the secret information the CIA is witholding that would justify war in iraq, but i digress.

Could you say "Je parle peu de francais"? The de construction is more natural, but when I was looking around for clarification I saw peu used without de. Is that possible here?

I remember saying petit peu last time I was in France because I wanted to make it clear that the amount of French I spoke was very small, not that I was semi-competent.

I dunno, direct translations are usually bad, but saying "I speak a bit of French" in English conveys a level of competence.

I guess you could say it that way. I wouldn't, and I've never heard anyone say it, but I think it's more unclear than wrong. The most clear would be something along the lines of "je ne parle pas très bien le français," but I guess for a non-French speaker that's a mouthful in itself.

And you're right, "un peu" does still sort of have the connotation that you're at least semi capable of understanding. Petit peu will indeed get the point across better, but it's not something you'd ever hear a French speaker say.

I don't mean to be anal or anything, you just seemed to be wondering how to say it besides waving an American flag and shouting U-S-A :p.

[1338 h4x0r]

That was my point. And since Jelle is practically right next to France, I don't see yours.

Yes but Jelle is also Flemish. Germany and Spain are also right next to France but that doesn't every German or Spaniard speaks French.

[Volumnius Flush]

Yes but Jelle is also Flemish. Germany and Spain are also right next to France but that doesn't every German or Spaniard speaks French.

I thought he was Belgian.

[guitrguy]

Belgian is the nationality.

[Volumnius Flush]

Belgian is the nationality.

Flemish is ethnic I guess.

[guitrguy]

yeah. Belgium is a hodgepodge of ethnicities.

[Volumnius Flush]

yeah. Belgium is a hodgepodge of ethnicities.

But it would still go to reason that as a citizen of a nation where one of the official languages is French, he might well know French.

[1338 h4x0r]

Maybe he does, but free_thinkers_are_dangerous (whatever his real name is) is essentially equally qualified to correct your French, since he's from Quebec. He said it was wrong.

[Volumnius Flush]

Maybe he does, but free_thinkers_are_dangerous (whatever his real name is) is essentially equally qualified to correct your French, since he's from Quebec. He said it was wrong.

Well sah-rry!

[1338 h4x0r]

Apology accepted.

[Volumnius Flush]

Apology accepted.

Awww... How sweet!:chug:

[Der Übermensch]

That was my point. And since Jelle is practically right next to France, I don't see yours.

My state borders Quebec... do I have the right to correct your French as well?

[Volumnius Flush]

My state borders Quebec... do I have the right to correct your French as well?

Go for it. Everyone else has.

[1338 h4x0r]

My state borders West Virginia, do I have the right not to wear shoes at any time?

[Der Übermensch]

My state borders West Virginia, do I have the right not to wear shoes at any time?

Yep. You don't have the right to marry your Cousin though. 2nd cousin perhaps... I think it increases the further away you get.

[1338 h4x0r]

OK, and since my state borders New Jersey, I have the right to be bawls-deep in your sister, correct?

[Volumnius Flush]

Yep. You don't have the right to marry your Cousin though. 2nd cousin perhaps... I think it increases the further away you get.

I would like to marry my third cousin but she is 5 years older and has a degree and is far too, what's the word, fortunate, or blessed, or educated, or proper to marry her cousin.

[1338 h4x0r]

Just put it in her pooper while she's sleeping tbh

[silicon71]

I got detention in school today for making fun of womens rights.

[Volumnius Flush]

Just put it in her pooper while she's sleeping tbh

She lives three hundred miles away. But instead of putting it in the pooper, I'd rather stick it in her scooper!

Get it? Pooper-scooper?

[1338 h4x0r]

I got detention in school today for making fun of womens rights.

And you got put there by humorless female teacher of yours I'll bet. Just go up to her sometime and say:

"You know what's funny?"
"What's funny?"
"Women's rights. LOL!"

She lives three hundred miles away. But instead of putting it in the pooper, I'd rather stick it in her scooper!

Get it? Pooper-scooper?

Um...maybe...?

[fingers mccoy]

man that's ****ed up right there