Women are so picky about their mates.
Firstly, despite protest contrary, their ideal man must be financial stable, i.e. they must be the breadwinner.
Yet women have been emancipated. Sometimes they make more than men do.
Why is it that women demand a financial stable man, but a man usually marries a woman with no visible means of income, save what her parents might give to her as a wedding presents, or nothing if they foot the bill for the wedding?
A feminist would call the man a misogynist, yet most feminists who are heterosexual demand that the man to be an employee with a good job (doctors, lawyers, or CEO of a company that is green). She would be working, too.
I believe it is sexist for a woman to demand such a thing of a man. It is sexist because few feminists complain about men with jobs marrying women who have no job, save to be homemaker. If they actually were complaining, then why are they not protesting in your neighborhood.
If women want to wear the pants in their future family, then I see no reason why a man must have a job to meet the requirements of a women for her to marry, especially if she is employed at a good job.
He is not a burden to her, just as a woman without a job marrying an employed man is not a burden to him.
Therefore the fallacy that a man must be a breadwinner in order to marry a woman regardless of her employment status is clearly evident.
As well, that a man must be a breadwinner is also an artificial requirement by women which is inherently sexist and misanthropic.
Feminists, cut out the double standard. You are equal in sexism.
Showing posts with label role reversal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label role reversal. Show all posts
20140717
The Value of Role Reversal (satire)
In all the talk of feminism giving women equal rights with men, why is it that women get annoyed with passive men when they are no less aggressive than men?
In my first relationship, I was passive and my girlfriend at the time was naturally aggressive in all positive sense of the word. Yet she wondered why I wouldn't take the initiative.
Perhaps some women are so afraid of taking the leading role in a male-female relationship that they resort the principle of sharing responsibility in a relationship and get annoyed when a man doesn't take his responsibility seriously.
I know that my passivity is a trait that helps me in a relationship because it helps me to determine how aggressive the woman is. From my experience, it appears that some women think they are doing all the work in the relationship and forget that in most traditional relationships, it is the men who do most of the work by initiating most activities they share together.
As for being totally passive, I would deny this because my aggression is channelled into my passivity. This is not passive-aggressive behavior. This is passivity moderated by aggression into a creative aspect of the relationship. In a sense, it is a role reversal in that I am behaving contrary to the traditional male role which is contrary to the ideals of post-modern society.
While I may behave passively in a relationship, my passivity is not used as a weapon but as a tool to facilitate change in the few women I have dated. As well, it may well be that the reason why my relationships were short-lived is because my passivity is effective in meeting my needs.
For the whole purpose of role reversal is to help both men and women to see that not all men and women are traditionally bound to the myth that "all men are dominant and all women submissive."
YMMV
In my first relationship, I was passive and my girlfriend at the time was naturally aggressive in all positive sense of the word. Yet she wondered why I wouldn't take the initiative.
Perhaps some women are so afraid of taking the leading role in a male-female relationship that they resort the principle of sharing responsibility in a relationship and get annoyed when a man doesn't take his responsibility seriously.
I know that my passivity is a trait that helps me in a relationship because it helps me to determine how aggressive the woman is. From my experience, it appears that some women think they are doing all the work in the relationship and forget that in most traditional relationships, it is the men who do most of the work by initiating most activities they share together.
As for being totally passive, I would deny this because my aggression is channelled into my passivity. This is not passive-aggressive behavior. This is passivity moderated by aggression into a creative aspect of the relationship. In a sense, it is a role reversal in that I am behaving contrary to the traditional male role which is contrary to the ideals of post-modern society.
While I may behave passively in a relationship, my passivity is not used as a weapon but as a tool to facilitate change in the few women I have dated. As well, it may well be that the reason why my relationships were short-lived is because my passivity is effective in meeting my needs.
For the whole purpose of role reversal is to help both men and women to see that not all men and women are traditionally bound to the myth that "all men are dominant and all women submissive."
YMMV
20070904
Life Roles (poem)
Almost from the time they are born,
girls are trained to take care of children.
They're given baby dolls, dress them up
and pretend to feed them just like Mom.
At the same time, boys play sports,
play with video games and high-tech things.
Then they both grow up and fall in love,
only to raise a family together.
The woman wants the husband to share
equally in the chores and everything,
forgetting that she played with dolls
while he played with video games.
So if you want men to share equally
in their future lives with women,
don't you think we should let them
role-play with the girls and look after
their dolls while they go to work?
girls are trained to take care of children.
They're given baby dolls, dress them up
and pretend to feed them just like Mom.
At the same time, boys play sports,
play with video games and high-tech things.
Then they both grow up and fall in love,
only to raise a family together.
The woman wants the husband to share
equally in the chores and everything,
forgetting that she played with dolls
while he played with video games.
So if you want men to share equally
in their future lives with women,
don't you think we should let them
role-play with the girls and look after
their dolls while they go to work?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)