Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Romance

How many women have actually declared war against another country???? How many women are actually responsible for the decline of economies??? Not too many is my guess. I guess we were too busy in the kitchen, raising children, doing laundry. being abused, etc., etc.

You are absolutely right Bora - I am not being sarcastic. Women have rarely been at the seat of power and therefore have declared war less - albeit you should take note that Thatcher started the Falklands war when most in her cabinet (men) were against it at the time. Whether women would declare war less than men if they held equal power in the world its open to question and I guess the future but I do agree that I think women are less black & white than men and might pursue more discussion before going to war. Lets see.

Personally I think women hold all the cards - without women the miracle of life is impossible.

God made man before woman, but there is always a rough draft before arriving at perfection.

JoeTGF wrote:Personally I think women hold all the cards - without women the miracle of life is impossible.

Not being impervious here joe, but do you think women on their own could reproduce. At the end of the day men have the ignition key to the reproduction motor.

And yes thats an interesting point that would women go to war less. Not if the decision to go to war has to be made on the day she's having PMS ! LOL

On a serious note the comparision is not viable as there just haven't been enough women at the helm to make a conclusive decision. The few examples we do have show that women in power are just as much of mixed bag and cooky as men. Benazir managed to screw Pakistan even further while her pockets got fatter while Indira Gandhi did well for India. Thatchter went to war. Golda Meir could not bring peace to the region. There have been some great women presidents and prime ministers but just as many lame ones.

Currently in todays world there are enough women in position of influence in all sectors to deduce they are just as good or bad as men depending on which way you want to look at it. To say that if all position of power was handed over to women today that the world would become peacefull, more economically stable or equal would be naive in my opinion, because when it come to playing down and dirty women can be just as good at dishing the blows if not better than men. We all know how vindictive they can be. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned !

DDS - it definitely takes 2 to tango but assuming that sperm is available women can create babies. Men on the other hand would need more equipment. My comment wasn't meant to state that men are useless and god created two kinds of humans to make the cycle work but I think women play a bigger part in reproduction than men. That was my point.

This thread seemed to be about men v women and on that my only statement is that I think women are fantastic - I love them. I think men have dominated in the past due mainly to physical virtues but thats changed and is still changing and so it should. But lets be fair when criticizing the opposite sex as per my last post - the equality bias is not solely in the hands of men anymore. Indeed we should all recognise that there should be some bias - we aren't the same. My wife works because she loves it - some might say that she should be at home with the kids but its her life and I support her doing what she wants. However I can never play a mothers role to our children nor can she play a fathers role. We are who we are and we can never change that. Having the right balance between our roles and responsibilities is key.

Agree too few examples on women in power and war but that was straying quite off topic. Not even sure this topic title is still valid but its all good.

JoeTGF wrote:DDS - it definitely takes 2 to tango but assuming that sperm is available women can create babies. Men on the other hand would need more equipment. My comment wasn't meant to state that men are useless and god created two kinds of humans to make the cycle work but I think women play a bigger part in reproduction than men. That was my point.

This thread seemed to be about men v women and on that my only statement is that I think women are fantastic - I love them. I think men have dominated in the past due mainly to physical virtues but thats changed and is still changing and so it should. But lets be fair when criticizing the opposite love as per my last post - the equality bias is not solely in the hands of men anymore. Indeed we should all recognise that there should be some bias - we aren't the same. My wife works because she loves it - some might say that she should be at home with the kids but its her life and I support her doing what she wants. However I can never play a mothers role to our children nor can she play a fathers role. We are who we are and we can never change that. Having the right balance between our roles and responsibilities is key.

Agree too few examples on women in power and war but that was straying quite off topic. Not even sure this topic title is still valid but its all good.

Nothing I could disagree with there. I think the whole problem arsies with unfait unexpectations from both sides. The true deciding factor that everyone needs to take into account as you very rightfully mentioned and there are still many even in so called liberated society that have gotten their head around to it.

Is that men and women are different and not equals and I don't mean that in a condecending or negative way. Just that each is good at certain things or has certain attributes and bad or mediocre at others. One compliments another and makes up in places for where the other lacks.

Hence a very tuned and insync partnership and a system of very fine checks and balances. And these are also not universally true across the board for example some men are good at child rearing while some women arn't.

In conclusion I guess we can say the old saying that it takes two to tango is fitting.

..The phenomena took place throughout the Western world from the 1960s into the 1970s...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_revolution

Source - http://www.pbs.org/fmc/book/4family6.htm


Source - http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2008-1 ... vorce2.jpg

Notice the astronomical increase in divorces during the same period the sexual revolution was started.

As you can see this movement served to do nothing but to destroy the most important and fundamental unit of any healthy society , Ie., La Familia , yes ladies, Rejoice in your freedom

zubber wrote:As you can see this movement served to do nothing but to destroy the most important and fundamental unit of any healthy society , Ie., La Familia , yes ladies, Rejoice in your freedom

Yea I think we are much happier in our spinisterhood rather than being trapped in hell ( healthy family in your dictionary) making efforts to "reconcile differences"!

If that chart reflects the number of women divorced, couldn't the same chart reflect the number of men who divorced? Is that chart to say that ALL those women initiated the divorce because of their "inability" to reconcile??? Divorce isn't something that women "own". Who is to say that men didn't initiate the majority of those divorces?? As women became more independent, men also found it easier to walk away from marriages. Some men can't deal with strong women and feel that their manhood is being chipped away by her strength.

Bora^2 , The chart reflects the total number of divorces ( where the initiating party is not indicated ), the only stat report that does indicate the initiating party mentioned in my orginal post. However you have raised good questions that require further investigation ,

However the primary objective of the charts are to illustrate the strong correlation between the adoption of the feminist ideas and the subsequent explosive growth in the total number of divorces, leading to all the social ills that exist in this day (domestic violence stats are also available),

I can understand why perhaps one would not be able to link the destruction of the family unit to practically 99% of all the social problems we have today , that would require an understanding of sociology, please feel free to investigate this matter.

If you are interested to see the stats from other western countries, My original post has the links to some swiss center of european statistics that support my inferences .

zubber wrote:Bora^2 , The chart reflects the total number of divorces ( where the initiating party is not indicated ), the only stat report that does indicate the initiating party mentioned in my orginal post. However you have raised good questions that require further investigation ,

Why investigate, you'll just say that it was women instigating mostly, or the men who instigated did so because their wives became so unbearable because of their feminist ideas that the divorce was justified.

zubber wrote:However the primary objective of the charts are to illustrate the strong correlation between the adoption of the feminist ideas and the subsequent explosive growth in the total number of divorces, leading to all the social ills that exist in this day (domestic violence stats are also available),

How terrible that women suffering under bad marriages suddenly realized that they could do something about it. During WW2 when women were working in jobs that all the men in the war were previously doing, the seeds were sown. Of course there was a big effort to get women back into the home with lots of kids after the war and then the backlash eventually came. What is so wrong with a woman wanting to work like a man, have a family like a man, and be in an equal partnership in the home like a man? If the men pulled themselves out of the dark ages and treated women as an equal there would be less divorce. Men are therefore equally responsible for the decay of marriage and whatever social ills you are claiming (which are...?).

zubber wrote:I can understand why perhaps one would not be able to link the destruction of the family unit to practically 99% of all the social problems we have today , that would require an understanding of sociology, please feel free to investigate this matter.

If you are presenting the argument to us that feminism causes divorce and therefore creates social ills in our society yet you admit that it would require an understanding of sociology (that you don't have?) and ask us to look into it, what is your argument based on besides your own chauvinistic opinion about feminism and the role of women in society?

I'm with Mel. I'd rather be a spinster or die than live in a marriage with a man who wanted me less educated and completely financially dependent on him, wasting my intelligence, talents, goals and aspirations for his own ego and old-fashioned ideas that women were born to cook, clean, do laundry and look after the children "for the good of society".

-- Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:45 am --

Walt Disney movies are pretty good for grooming little girls about what they should expect for "love" (From Second City ) See, we feminists can have a good sense of humour about it all!

Advice for Young Girls from the The Little Mermaid http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation ... feature=iv

Advice from a Cartoon Princess: Belle http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uuk-h2ZY ... ature=fvwp

Advice from a Cartoon Princess: Snow White http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT2R3E7v ... re=channel

kanelli wrote:
Why investigate, you'll just say that it was women instigating mostly, or the men who instigated did so because their wives became so unbearable because of their feminist ideas that the divorce was justified.

What I or you say doesnt hold much relevance, Do investigate when you have the time Kanelli

What is so wrong with a woman wanting to work like a man, have a family like a man, and be in an equal partnership in the home like a man?

There is nothing wrong with that.

If the men pulled themselves out of the dark ages and treated women as an equal there would be less divorce. Men are therefore equally responsible for the decay of marriage and whatever social ills you are claiming (which are...?).

Do look into this, so that your questions will be answered.

what is your argument based on besides your own chauvinistic opinion about feminism and the role of women in society?

As I said, LOOK INTO IT. , and lay off the name calling and presumptuous arguments, And do understand what the difference between "Subjective" and "Objective" arguments

I'm with Mel. I'd rather be a spinster or die than live in a marriage with a man who wanted me less educated and completely financially dependent on him, wasting my intelligence, talents, goals and aspirations for his own ego and old-fashioned ideas that women were born to cook, clean, do laundry and look after the children "for the good of society".

More assumptions in this argument here, your personal opinions are your own and does not reflect reality.

Walt Disney movies are pretty good for grooming little girls about what they should expect for "love" (From Second City ) See, we feminists can have a good sense of humour about it all!

Advice for Young Girls from the The Little Mermaid http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation ... feature=iv

Advice from a Cartoon Princess: Belle http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uuk-h2ZY ... ature=fvwp

Advice from a Cartoon Princess: Snow White http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT2R3E7v ... re=channel

Haha, ever heard the saying "If you watch TV, it will rot your brains" , Let us try to find out why this saying came into existence.

-- Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:05 am --

JoeTGF wrote:without women the miracle of life is impossible.

The MIRACLE of LIFE Mr.Joe, requires both the male and female, Although I would agree that the female's carry out the majority of the "work" involuntarily

zubber, has it occurred to you that many of us women posting have looked into it. I've had entire university courses on feminist topics. Perhaps you are the one needing to look into the history of women and discussions in feminism before you come and make statements like feminists cause divorce and feminism and divorce create ills in society.

kanelli wrote:zubber, has it occurred to you that many of us women posting have looked into it. I've had entire university courses on feminist topics. Perhaps you are the one needing to look into the history of women and discussions in feminism before you come and make statements like feminists cause divorce and feminism and divorce create ills in society.

Excellent objective argument. Do follow this style of posting.

Hmm the statistics often paint a different story. There are a lot more, deductions are based on numbers and observations kanelli.

zubber wrote:

kanelli wrote:A false idea propagated by the feminists? You have a lot of balls to say that. Completely baseless.

Yes feminists aka BraBuners aka ManHaters aka Those who wish that MEN SHOULD HAVE UTERUS'S, the feminist idea is rooted in complete madness , they and the other sexual revolutionists have only contributed to the destruction of the family unit, to the rise in spinsterhood , to the increase in divorce rates, to the increase in bastards , to the moral decay of society.

"Feminism - The Greatest conspiracy against WomenKind" ~Zubber

^Just a reminder

haha , Yes that statement about female conspiracy was indeed my statement , this is why I put it in quotes

Zubber, nobody needs to make assumptions to read your intentions. K provided a very good arguement, be sure we are much more interested in feminism philosophy than you.
You started with the times with fewer rights for women were better
Then you went on with you are the only one who is familiar with feminism and its effects on the society.
K provided very good debate on this and your answers are not a reply to them but all based on superiority, which I ASSUME is coming from your mindset of superiority of men
And as I saw this in the other thread as well,you manipulated on introdusing stats as Bora pointed out!(talking about conspiracy!!!)
So who needs to make assumption about you?!

.
.
Health: Kids Who Live with Both Parents Are Healthier

New figures, just out in December from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), looked at the comparative health of children in all types of living situations. Those who lived in the same home as their two parents (technically, they didn't have to be married, but they had to be together) had lower rates of a whole litany of ailments, including asthma, vision problems, developmental delays, ADHD and migraines, even when wealth and education were factored in. The only malady the CDC found more prevalent among the children of married parents was allergies.
At the other end of life, a separate study showed that elderly people whose parents were divorced had twice the risk of stroke as people whose parents stayed together. We're talking the loooong tail.
.
.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20110106/h ... 5zdG9nZQ--

There is nothing positive about single parenting, this has been known throughout time, But for arguments sake. This is an actual study by the CDC concerning this issue.

That is such a crappy article and it is not a presentation of the actual CDC study - primary versus secondary sources Mr. Zubber tsk tsk!

Divorce is huge for kids, it really sucks, is very painful - been there, done that, got the t-shirt. However, can I imagine my parents still being together? No. Is it fair to ask my mother to stay married to my father who is easily angry and full of ego and was mentally abusive (to her) and physically abusive (to us kids)? She found another man and has been happily married for a long time (unlike my dad who has a long string of women (and children) behind him). Who am I to deny her that happiness, and what about her health?

kanelli wrote:That is such a crappy article and it is not a presentation of the actual CDC study - primary versus secondary sources Mr. Zubber tsk tsk!

Ms Kanelli, you ought to open the article and see it before make such a statement, FYI the source is the National Center for health Statistics an arm of the Center of Disease Control , Which I might add also has the full articles for your examination

Divorce is huge for kids, it really sucks, is very painful - been there, done that, got the t-shirt. However, can I imagine my parents still being together? No. Is it fair to ask my mother to stay married to my father who is easily angry and full of ego and was mentally abusive (to her) and physically abusive (to us kids)? She found another man and has been happily married for a long time (unlike my dad who has a long string of women (and children) behind him). Who am I to deny her that happiness, and what about her health?

Yes I am in agreement with you on this issue, if women are in abusive relationships the negative effects directly impact the kids, In a case such as this, Indeed divorce would be a good option, but for the sake of the children , Adults with rational minds still need to sit down and "reconcile their differences"

zubber wrote:Adults with rational minds still need to sit down and "reconcile their differences"

I would say that the majority of couples who divorce are rationale and do sit down and try to reconcile their differences, which is to settle or resolve the issue(s), and come to the conclusion that it just isn't working out!!! Both can accept it, or one person cannot accept it. You can't say that divorce happens because people are not rationale and DO NOT make the effort to "reconcile their differences".

I'm sure abused women send out warnings that the marriage isn't going to last if the abuse (take your pick) continues, or one has an addiction (alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc.) and chooses the addiction over the relationship even after being warned or asked to seek help and refuses, or a partner that constantly cheats, or a partner that is controlling. These are situations where one is a victim and the other the victimizer. How do you handle a marriage where one partner feels they have "outgrown" their spouse? What do you do when one doesn't feel that love for the other person, when there is no more "spark", no excitement --- the marriage basically died.

I think women are more likely to talk through the situation. I'm sure there are many women who are still wondering what happened after the husband went to the grocery store 10 years ago to get a pack of smokes, never to return, because it was so much easier for him to walk than do the talk.

^^ Well bora^2, there is not one point in your post I disagree with , And indeed husbands need to "Rekindle the spark" , a large majority is guilty of neglecting this aspect. (Note - Not known through personal experience, based on print sources)

Because they think, "Why rekindle the spark with my wife when I can create a spark with a new woman. More exciting and less work."

kanelli wrote:Because they think, "Why rekindle the spark with my wife when I can create a spark with a new woman. More exciting and less work."

How chillingly true ! , You ladies would be glad to know , that in certain countries, New couples have to attend a 3 day seminar and course before getting married, however this was not good enough to reduce the rising rates of divorces, and the course is neither free, Perhaps governments would have something like this instituted in other countries also

Those programs can be found all over the world through family or religious organizations.

kanelli wrote:Those programs can be found all over the world through family or religious organizations.

Is taking the course mandatory before registering the marriage ?

zubber wrote:

kanelli wrote:Those programs can be found all over the world through family or religious organizations.

Is taking the course mandatory before registering the marriage ?

The Catholic church makes it mandatory. Results would say that they aren't very successful!! People go because they HAVE to go if they want to get married in the church. Oh, and it does generate revenue for the church.

3 days seminar can change absolutely NOTHING in this matter!

Bora Bora wrote:The Catholic church makes it mandatory. Results would say that they aren't very successful!! People go because they HAVE to go if they want to get married in the church. Oh, and it does generate revenue for the church.

Yes, Unfortunately this is the general trend also in asian countries that make it mandatory, Perhaps this problem is much more than just the lack of information, Perhaps having proper relationships should be taught in schools as a mandatory subject with an exam , maybe..

-- Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:40 pm --

melika969 wrote:3 days seminar can change absolutely NOTHING in this matter!

Yes I agree Mel , however atleast its something , maybe some couples out there who are seriously worried about their relationship in this modern day era of dismal marriages, just might take heed ,

zubber wrote:Yes I agree Mel , however atleast its something , maybe some couples out there who are seriously worried about their relationship in this modern day era of dismal marriages, just might take heed ,

In a real world, there are better ways!