🚀 go-pugleaf

Carol Ann Hemingway wrote:

> In <34434198.83F2C373@seas.gwu.edu.NOSPAM> Alan Davis
> <adavis@seas.gwu.edu.NOSPAM> writes:
> >Carol Ann Hemingway wrote:
> >> In <34425F38.BB6FDC48@seas.gwu.edu.NOSPAM> Alan Davis
> >> <adavis@seas.gwu.edu.NOSPAM> writes:

> >> (edit)

> >> >Male and female submit to each other.
> >>             -------
> >>             Men submit to god; the woman to her husband.
> >>             ---------
> >It has been proven to you that your claimis not true, yet you continue
> >your mindless mantra.
> >Your claim is quite flaky.

It's still flaky.

> >> >This does not mean subservience, it means service.
> >>
> >>             ---------
> >>             Gender aparthied service.
> >>             ----------
> >
> >It has been proven to you that your claimis not true, yet you continue
> >your mindless mantra.Your claim is quite flaky.

It's still flaky.

> >> >It's the same 100-100 percent discussion we had before.
> >> >50-50 relationships don't work, because they are
> >> >selfish.
> >>
> >>         -------
> >>         That's fine;  I don't mind 100-100, just so my roles
> >>         aren't prescribed.
> >>         ----------
> >
> >"Roles" are prescribed, to a certain degree,but are not as you say.
> PKers>and their wives>believe marriage is a sacred partnership.  You
> >just think it's a business relationship.
>
>             ----------
>             Not at all; when roles are prescribed by patriarchy,
>             the woman is always subservient or submissive to that
>             patriarchy.  I won't have my roles prescribed based
>             on gender.  I don't respect folks who do.
>             --------------------

Roles, in the sense you consider (which is labor and money)are prescribed
jointly and agreed on jointly throughout "good"
marriages.  Roles of love, charity, and service aren't the
kind you are considering.

Here's a thought.  Before entering into a marriage, one ought
to consider the conditions under which the marriage would
simply become too much, and divorce ensue.  This is an
examination of heart and conscience.  If those conditions
are likely to happen, perhaps the marriage ought not to be
entered in to.



> >> >Relationships in which each respects the other
> >> >100 percent of the time do work, they are based on
> >> >love and service to each other.
> >>
> >>             -------
> >>             Fine, as long as my roles aren't defined I don't
> >>             mind mutual service.
> >>             ---------
> >
> >> >The husband and wife promise to love, honor, and cherish.
> >> >"Submit" means to give in, to give and take, to sometimes
> >> >say "OK, I'll do it your way."
> >>
> >>             ----------
> >>             So fine;  I'll submit to _god_; the man can
> >>             submit to me...his wife.
> >>             -----------------
> >
> >You really do have a chip on your shoulder, don't you?
>
>             ----------
>             No. Do you?  I just happen to enjoy my equality.
>             -----------

You took your falsehood about submitting, whichhas been refuted, reversed
the roles, and said it was ok.


> >>  It also means to contribute>100 percent of ones effort to the
> health> and hapiness>of the family.
> >>
> >>             ----------
> >>             That's simply not possible...realistically.  One must
> >>             also contribute to one's employers, one's friends, etc.
> >>             Nice thought tho.
> >>             ---------------------------
> >
> >One must find a balance among them all.  A spousewho spends too much
> time>in service to an employer>will find that the family relationship
> suffers-all too>common, eh?
>
>             --------
>             Very true;  my comment was only concerning your unrealis-
>             tic idea that one can give 100% to family.

This is not 100 percent of physical labor or dollars;the factors you seem
to consider.  this is 100 percent of
one's love.  Most folks can recognize when they are not
loved.  The challenge is to find the love in each person's
heart and use it for good.

>
> Because it's
>             physically impossible to do that, you are now talking
>             about "balance" which most everyone favors.  Balance in
>             all things, including the division of roles...not by
>             gender, but by balance.  If either mother or father spends
>             too much time on work or family, balance is not provided.
>             ---------------

Money roles, labor roles-I agree with you.

The role PK talks about is love, one men have
(in general) not done well at.

> >> ><snip>

> >And you have only guessed that it is so.
> >It is not, yet you continue your mindless mantra
> >making up myths.
>
>             --------
>             .....and you always end your posts in denigration rather
>             than real argument.
>
>                 Lefty
> >

Your comments about submitting are a mantra.
Repeated again and again in spite of reasoned
arguments to the contrary, to which you don't
respond.  I think these myths you try to shout
through are more denigrating than my feeble
attempt at figurative language.

--
Al Davis ***** A Displaced Cub Fan in DC ***** adavis@seas.gwu.edu
I like two teams:  The Cubs and whoever is playing the Mets
Vote Santo into the Hall of Fame!
Let's play two!