Woman vs Wife

[Chase 390]

well for the record, you shouldn't really hit ANYBODY. and you should also hold the door for EVERYBODY. girls are just included in that. idk why they're emphasized. I like to think in my head the first go who said that secretly meant "kuz if you do, you just might get laid!" But he never said that because he wanted to look like a gentleman, and thats where that came from. lol.

It is a polite thing to do to open the door for someone, be they male or female. However, I've been taught not by men, but by women (my mom, grandmother, elementary teachers) that I should be a gentleman and always treat ladies with respect. It was women that instilled in me the responsibilities I have in regards to the opposite sex.

[Aethix 129]

I'd hit a man if he provoked a fight, but I wouldn't hit a woman unless I thought my life or somebody else's life was in danger.

[Chase 390]

I'd hit a man if he provoked a fight, but I wouldn't hit a woman unless I thought my life or somebody else's life was in danger.

Me as well. Maybe it's just my raising talking, but it seems that men have an instinct not to hit women or treat them like we treat other men.

[Ammonsa 308]

It is a polite thing to do to open the door for someone, be they male or female. However, I've been taught not by men, but by women (my mom, grandmother, elementary teachers) that I should be a gentleman and always treat ladies with respect. It was women that instilled in me the responsibilities I have in regards to the opposite sex.

It's funny, I was always taught by the men in my family to be a gentleman and treat ladies with respect.

I'd hit a man if he provoked a fight, but I wouldn't hit a woman unless I thought my life or somebody else's life was in danger.

The same for me, I think we don't treat women the same way because we tend to regard them as more fragile, even if they aren't. I don't think it's because of attraction, because I am not attracted to women. It's more the way I've been brought up.

I just want to clarify my position, I don't regard married women subordinate. Both positions are equally important and I think women have a right to have a say in everything. I have noticed however, that most women like to have the men wearing the pants most of the time. It makes them feel secure to have someone they trust making those important decisions.

I don't think of myself as sexist, considering this is based off what women think, not men.

[Roc 8]

I don't see how gender matters much. I try to treat everybody the same. I hold doors open for everybody, and I will give anyone a polite attitude. It's more of a matter of treating everybody with that same respect, and in my opinion, people who bring gender into the situatuion are indeed sexist.

Also, for this thread, why not throw race in it, too!? It'll be fun. Racist and sexist almost go hand in hand, both discrimination towards genders or specific areas you're from.

[Chase 390]

Croc, how are people who bring gender into the equation sexist? We ARE different.

Think about it this way:

Is it racist to celebrate one's culture? Then why should it be sexist to take pride in one's own gender?

Edited 14 Sep 2009 by Lionheart (see edit history)

[Ammonsa 308]

Indeed, you don't need to be mean to other cultures or genders, but you can take pride in your own.There is a difference between taking pride in it and thinking it better than other genders or cultures.

Even then, you are entitled to your opinion, are you not? Political correctness is a load of poo.

[Sahaqiel 1232]

Sahaqiel, I used to respect you a lot more as a debater, even though I disagreed with you most of the time, but lately you've taken to blowing people's thoughts way out of proportion. Lionheart never said that women were inferior to men.

I would think this is one of the only times I really blew something out of proportion, though discrimination and inequalities tend to set me off more than other things. My mood normally changes as soon as I post something. About 9/10 times I post a counterargument, my mind gets slingshotted back and I think, "Why did I post this? This means more debating." Generally, I feel nervousness and remorse when I see I've been replied to.

Then I read it and go back into Sahaqiel-debate mode. It's pretty much masochism for thought. I don't have a pleasant skin to be in.

It's nice to know I've got respect, though.

Think about it like this. A household is like a ship. The husband is like the navigator, and the wife is like the captain. The captain manages the ship, while the navigator keeps the ship on track. Each must differ to the other in areas the other holds control of.

Yes, but Lionheart stated that there should be distinct gender roles.

I do not fly this way.

If I ever have a wife, I would like to think we're both the captain and navigator, if you see what I'm saying.

I don't follow gender stereotypes, because I believe stereotypes in general are wrong, and the easy way out to something that should be thought through. Heck, I'd wear an apron. A frilly one. I'd cook and clean. At the same time, I'd work and support. Does it make me less of a man? I don't think so, because gender is really only a difference in plumbing. I don't believe there should be a standard expected of people just because of what they were born as.

Just because a woman is subordinate to her husband doesn't mean she takes marching orders from him. The woman is queen of the house. That isn't just my opinion, it's an argument that I can back up with facts. According to a study on the BBC website, women are about 50% more likely than men to keep the house in a divorce case.

I thought the man was the breadwinner and supporter of the house? This just makes me think women would rather be the breadwinner and supporter of the house. :/ Also, as I stated before, I don't believe people should be born into subordination. Reminds me of white supremacists.

The man's role tends to expand more outside the home than the woman's. Therefore, the man's role is considered, in a way I can only only describe as farther up on a "hierarchy". The meaning of this is easily misconstrued, and some people will deliberately twist it to label their opponents as "sexist".

Actually, the meaning, in my eyes, is quite clear.

"You are born female, and therefore, are lower in the hierarchy of a relationship."

There is no way to look at that sentence without thinking sexism.

Subordinate is not the same as inferior. The woman manages the home better than the man, which does not make her less than a man. For example, if a man wants to give his 14-year-old son a dirt bike, and his wife says no, guess who probably isn't going to get a dirt bike. However, in most cases the man is the chief breadwinner, and should therefore play the head role in that area.

Subordinate means "inferior". "These are my subordinates", "These are my inferiors".

Men can manage a home, too.

Women can win bread, too.

If a man is controlling of his wife, or a if a woman has to do something she doesn't want to do in order to be subordinate to her husband, then the couple shouldn't be married in the first place.

Am I saying married women shouldn't be allowed to have jobs or lives outside the home? Certainly not. However, I believe the family comes first. A woman with a husband and young children should not be working say, 80 hours a week and going out clubbing every night. For that matter, the husband shouldn't work ridiculous hours either, unless he has to in order to support his family.

K.

My mom used to work ridiculous hours to support me. She was the breadwinner.

But right now, she's ill.

In conclusion, yes, I think a woman should be subordinate to her husband. However, if you think about it, this also requires a man, in certain respects, to be subordinate to his wife. A truly good relationship is built on mutual trust and respect, and trust requires one member to put the other before himself or herself. Dominance and control are not part of that relationship.

Why can't we just say, "Mutual importance in the relationship" without establishing hierarchies.

Wives are subordinate to their husbands and husbands are subordinate to their wives.

There doesn't need to be a leader of the pack.

It's a mutual thing.

I still stand by my view on your sexism, though. Because I do think about this stuff when I'm not on the forum.

It's just plain sexist.

We are different, physically, and sometimes, emotionally, but that shouldn't mean anything.

I expect everything of my female friends that I expect of my male friends. And when I look, they don't really have a major difference between them.

Sahaqiel

[Aethix 129]

The way I see it, if one chooses to be subordinate, and can at any time choose not to be subordinate, then one really isn't inferior. Subordinate may not be the best word to use to describe things. I didn't mean hierarchy as a master-slave relationship, as was referring to more of expansiveness of roles. The man protects the woman, and the woman protects the home.

I personally believe that there are substantial differences between women and men, physically, mentally, and emotionally. As such I personally believe in gender roles. However, I believe that gender roles can be flexible, as nobody shares the exact same situation.

These are my beliefs. I consider beliefs on this subject to be very personal to their holders, and therefore I would never try to force anyone to accept my own beliefs. I believe the role, be it gender role or otherwise, is a personal choice. And I have no reason to have any kind of problem with the opinions of those who disagree with me. I only have a problem when I am unfairly labeled as a sexist.

I believe that natural gender roles exist. I don't think that makes me a sexist. I am not a chauvinist or a misogynist. I treat women with respect. I don't think that makes me a sexist--I think that makes me a gentleman.

[pheonix561 2080]

We are different, physically, and sometimes, emotionally, but that shouldn't mean anything.

I expect everything of my female friends that I expect of my male friends. And when I look, they don't really have a major difference between them.

Sahaqiel

very nicely put.

I hate sexism, racism, etc. its stupid. We're were all created equal. Now obviously some people are better at something than others, I suck at basketball but Michael Jordan and Larry Byrd are pretty much the kings of it. I look at the world as kind of one of those choose your character's stats screens you see in video games. Say you get 50 pts. and you get to put them wherever you want. Sure you can be great at this and suck at that, but in the end, it all adds up to 50, right?

[Shadowknight 54]

Ever heard the phrase "you complete me" between people who are in a relationship? How about the term "you're

my better half"? That's how it should be. Different roles, but without one being totally dominant. They should compliment their spouse with their actions, helping for no reason other than love.

[Sahaqiel 1232]

And I have no reason to have any kind of problem with the opinions of those who disagree with me. I only have a problem when I am unfairly labeled as a sexist.

I believe that natural gender roles exist. I don't think that makes me a sexist. I am not a chauvinist or a misogynist. I treat women with respect. I don't think that makes me a sexist--I think that makes me a gentleman.

I don't believe in gender roles, and I still consider myself a gentleman towards females. Once we're properly acquainted, then she becomes one of the guys, pretty much. I don't see why there has to be a division in behavior. If anything, I notice it makes me a bit more liked than if I act more reserved and proper towards them.

I mix it up, though.

It's fine if you want to treat women differently, but having a predetermined attitude towards people other than "being respectful and friendly", based on what they were born as, just doesn't sit well with me.

As you feel you've been unfairly labeled a sexist, I'm fairly sure there are women who would feel they've been unfairly labeled in the home and in marriage.

But you're open to displacement (in gender roles), so I guess that's cool too.

shadowknight, thanks for that comment.

It's pretty much what I've been trying to get at.

Also, Pheonix, that's a cool way of looking at it.

Sahaqiel

Edited 15 Sep 2009 by Sahaqiel (see edit history)

[Chase 390]

If the woman has a problem with being a wife, she shouldn't get married. She has freedom as a single woman to do whatever her heart desires.

[pheonix561 2080]

this is kind of off topic, but WHAT ABOUT LESBIAN MARRIAGE? WHO IS THE MANLY MAN THERE?

[Sahaqiel 1232]

If the woman has a problem with being a wife, she shouldn't get married.

Lionheart, like I said, wife is not synonymous with subordinate. :/ I say this assuming, by "wife", you mean wife in the way you've been describing all this time.

You're really making it hard for me to empathize with you.

Also, yeah, pheonix, I mentioned this earlier, back on page one.

He doesn't have a response, because he thinks it's contrary to nature, which is technically untrue.

Sahaqiel