bluesmama wrote:
> mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com wrote:

> > > A reason is not an excuse, it's just a way to understand why
people
> > do
> > > things the way they do. Men and women both have contradictory
> social
> > > expectations placed on them - and as a woman I've had to struggle
> > with
> > > conflicting ideas like be strong, but feminine because a man
needs
> to
> > > feel like a man;
> >
> > Sometimes it's hard to be a woman...
>
> Sure it is, probably just as often as it's hard to be a man. Though
of
> course I can't write from a male perspective, I'm just trying to
> understand it better.

You're making understanding all the more difficult as you
over-generalize.

Most people, across all social backgrounds, feel that they have
difficult challenges in their lives.  What helps me is to sometimes
pause and take a deep breath and compare my situation to others
who might be jealous of me.  Those people may be thinking to themselves
that if they had the resources I have available, all of their
problems would be solved.  So if that person could be happy
with my situation, why can't I?

That said, it's clear that some people have more hardships
and challenges than others.  That doesn't mean nobody can
whine (or that it doesn't matter) but just puts things
into perspective: If Donald Trump was whining about
his problems with his cable bill, would you think less
of him than a grandmother on her retirement check doing
the same thing?

> > Yes, it's so hard for women who want to have it all to
> > make those things work because "society" tells them.
> > For example, I want lots of money but to not work very
> > hard because "society" creates those expectations in me.
>
> Isn't it just human nature to want a full, fulfilling life and to
> develop all aspects (whether they be stereotypically masculine or
> feminine) of your self?

Want, yes.  NEED, no.  Whenever I hear someone talk about human
nature, especially when explaining their own behaviour, I suggest
they speak for only for themselves.  Remember the teenager
and the smokes?

Then again, as I was thinking about this last Easter Sunday,
many people find spiritual fulfillment through DENYING themselves
things.  Sure, you can stuff yourself with hot dogs on friday,
as you do every other day of the week, but why not give it a rest
and see if you really need it?  Sure, you can try to please
the "inner child" and be both feminine and masculine, but why
not try and see what it would be like to control yourself?

I get the impression about people who want to have it all as
being gluttons.  In some cases, literally.  I dated some chunky
American women who came across as slobs both intellectually and
physically.

Women, in the past, were supposed to be the "nitpickers" or
the members of the household who paid attention to detail
BUT also took responsibility for it.  In other words, they
functioned as helpmates while men functioned as the broad
thinking risk takers.

In trying to live up to both roles, many women degenerated
into nasty nags and harpies or half-cowardly adventurists.
Rather than enjoying the benefits of either role, they
instead lived up to none.

> I'm not whining about how hard it is to be a
> woman, it's hard just to be human... all I'm commenting on is that
there
> are societal pressures on both men and women to think and act in
> certain ways.

My wife was amused at how I would snarf copies of the Washington
Post out of the newsbox at the train station.  "Why don't
you pay for it?" She asked.  "Because I'm not giving the commies
a quarter!" I responded.

Now did the commie newspaper company "pressure" me to steal those
papers?
I mean, they were in that box and all.  Also, the newspaper
company advertised their wares.  I mean, how could I resist
the urge to steal?  (I'm going to have to say a dozen
Hail Mary's for this one...)

Anyways, you get the point: I didn't need "societal pressure" to
snap the box lid open and snarf a paper.  I did that all on
my own.  Simple, unchecked human selfishness is responsible
for women who want all the benefits of sexism without
the icky corresponding responsibilities.

> > There are plenty of men around who aren't threatened whatsoever
> > by strong women.  But then again, those guys are not going
> > to be swimming through moats to rescue "liberated" women.
>
> "Strong" doesn't have to mean completely independent; interdependence
> is so much more satisfying.

Nonsense.

Do you enjoy shopping more than work?  Do you enjoy taking
vacations more than cleaning the house?

Money and power allows people to indulge their most selfish
fantasies.  This often includes people pretending to enjoy
doing things for them that they hate.  When you go to
a restaurant, you have people who provide service as
if they enjoy doing so.  If you didn't pay them, they
might develop a more surly attitude.

Men generally are far more generous on dates where they
hope to someday get nookie because they are, how shall
I put this, MOTIVATED, but the same greed and "pressures"
the women are.  Part of the service the men provide is
to lie to women (and even themselves) about their reasons.
If the server comes up to you and acts as if your money
is the only thing he cares about, that will impact
his ability to receive it.  We often want people to lie to us.

> > > Excuse me, I've got to go have a smoke before I jump off that
> bridge.
> > > ;-)
> >
> > Forget the smokes and bridges.  Let's look instead at the single
> > struggling mothers with bastard babies, aging spinsters on prozac,
> > women who are stressed from working a full time job and
> > managing a household, dealing with their weight problems
> > from eating at restaurants, etc.
> >
> > It's not society or men who force fed these women their problems,
> > it's all the choices feminists insisted upon women having.
> > You got the vote and you couldn't make up your mind.
> > It's as simple as that.  You "struggle" with your own
> > indecisiveness.
>
> Oh, it's those evil feminists again.

Absolutely.

You gals clearly crave traditional men even as society has
disempowered them to give you all the extra goodies such
as mo' money at work.  Yes?

You're no better than I am when I stole newspapers except
that I at least took responsibility for the broad consequences
of my act.

> No, I don't struggle with my own
> indecisiveness, I struggle to attain some kind of balance.

Oh, lessee: Get all the goodies without the icky stuff.
Yeah, that's a balance.  I want to eat all the stuff
I like and not get fat.  That's a balance too.

Sometimes, it works out for people and I'm happy for you.
I stole the newspapers and never got caught.  You were maybe
young and naive and the story works for your relationship
that he had a "crush" on you and gave you all the goodies
you liked AND he can stand up for himself AND he
was motivated because he loved you for your mind, etc.

Super.

But for a lot of people, it doesn't work out that way.
And yes, I'm kind of happy about it because it was my
"newspaper" the women were trying to snarf.

 > Most women I
> know don't think in an "either-or" way, although most men I know have
a
> tendency to do so.

Nonsense.

Let's say a man doesn't put up the mullah for a first date.
Certain neurons kick off immediately.  Yes?

The difference between the menfolk and the ladyfolk is
the men are taking responsibility for their actions.  That's
why most of the money spent by the government is to protect
the ladies from their own actions.  Sorry, but you gals
really are a danger to yourselves and others.

> > Pardon me, I'm now thirsty because I didn't get up to grab
> > a drink because I was writing to you.  That's YOUR fault!
>
> You can imagine how overcome with guilt and remorse I am at this
moment.

:-)

Of course, you don't care and that's ok.  What's sad is when
people do try to push guilt onto those close to them in their
lives as some kind of sick power play.

The first thing you did for a man who had a crush on you was
to mooch a meal off of him.  You don't feel any guilt.
Then again, lots of people steal things and don't feel
any guilt either.  Are they, or I, better off?

regards,
Mark Sobolewski



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/28/05 12:46:38 PM ---