Response to Curious on feminism and modern social trends.

Submitted by Straight_Talk_Luigi (United States), Sep 16, 2009 at 14:20

That's exactly right, Luigi. Opinions do lack credibility when they are not supported by facts. I'd say the facts of this matter (changing of women's role in society) have spoken quite clearly over the last 6 decades.

I don't think anyone will say things have not changed since 1949, but these new changes that you praise and agree with are unsustainable and will not last. History has proven that over and over. Really, Curious, the fundamentals of this "change" have been done, tried and failed before and I already see signs it's coming apart at the seams.

Did I ever once refer to "casual sex" when discussing the selection of a mate? Nope. Not me ... though I seem to remember you having made several references to casual sex in these posts.

I have, Curious, because that is what most of these little flings are. I never insinuated that you are having casual sex, but it's become very clear to me that you have some personal situation at stake here.

If you're concerned about the validity of the poster's appearance, why dont you ask them for a some recent pictures or videos, Luigi. Let me know if you feel the need to see me, I'd be quite happy to oblige.

I'm sorry, Curious, but such validity can hardly be confirmed by videos or pictures. I've already know three people (all women 22 or younger) who were the victims of people stealing their identity and setting up fake profiles. And I'm not asking anyone to reveal themselves on here. Personal contact information is often filtered out.

I don't know about that, Luigi. Does it? I mean after all, we are all different. We don't all suddenly become cut from the same mold just because we get older. You are 27 now? You will be finding out all about that soon enough.

Oh, we've been through this before on here, Curious. The "but we are all different" excuse. The more things are different, the more they are the same. Liking chocolate ice cream as opposed to vanilla and rap instead of country really won't make much difference if you have any of the warning signs I have talked about because attraction is based on so much more than irrelevant details of individual uniqueness. And I get hit on by attractive older women a lot, but I also realize that I don't really want to be with someone who is 55-60 by the time I am 40.

Eventually, Curious, age will set in. That will be the real test.

What's that supposed to mean? 2009 seems pretty radically different to me from 1955 :-)

Much to our own detriment, but do not worry. Conservative elements around the globe will prevail as they always have for the last 10,000 years. Stability and strength of family will begin to overshadow progressive feminism this century, especially in the EU.

Yes, Luigi. Quite radically considering that we never even had the option to create long distance relationships in the old days, not unless we were world travelers.

Actually, there are well-documented cases about distance relationships and their bizarreness and failure over the phone and by letter. The internet is just another media by which this happens.

I suppose these relationships fail when two people have unrealistic expectations, Luigi .... and there are probably as many unreal expectations about long distance relations as there are about domestic relations.

Not when it comes to proximity and the fact that our words make up less than 30% of overall communication. Nonetheless, if you are seeing the guy next door and he spends all night on-line and wants a quick marriage, well, those are always signs of trouble.

Well, Luigi. I suppose you and I live on a different planet because I have surely seen plenty of uncertainty in my lifetime over realtime, domestic dating (and the marriages that result and often end in divorce).

No, Curious, we live on the same planet, and on-line, distance dating has an even worse success rate because of the communication gap.

Why is the chance of "getting" a younger man or it turning into a "lasting relation" not much different or even less, Luigi?

Because women mature faster than men and ultimately want a man who they are secure with and who can protect them. Most of the "relationships" involving younger men and older women do not end well or progress beyond a sex buddy style relation. It's also largely based on appearance. Just listen to some of the stories on here, Curious. Some women are adamantly insisting they do not look their age but younger. So, in that sense, the woman does not seem older than the man, which really does throw another wrench into your argument.

Seems to me that there is plenty of this sort of thing going on in the domestic front.

What is going on the domestic is the same thing that happens on the international front---sexual flings, not stable relationships.

Again, I think if we use our logic and leave our "heart" out of the decision making process, we will find the right mate regardless of the age. Granted, it is probably easier by going domestic, but some women may prefer foreign men, I don't know Luigi ... you'll have to take a poll.

No one is suggesting that logic alone equals love, but in this me-first, emotional era of living, it is pretty always the one element missing and that's why so many women on this forum have problems.

If you don't know, then just say so, Curious. There is no need to take a poll, because all one has to do is look at the dating trend. First of all, more white men in this country date internationally and interracially than white women. Most of the women on this site who have tried or are in international relationships are either divorced, have had extended relationships with men in proximity to them that went nowhere or have been screwed over and hurt. That is why they look internationally, because they see it as a last bastion of hope.

I went through something similar right after high school. I wasn't very popular with the girls at all, and I said "screw all American women" and look at foreign brides from the second and third world. I was amazed at how older, good looking women from places Russia, the Ukraine and other parts of the Second and Third World wanted me. Fortunately, I did not have the means to seek them or even give them what they really wanted---a visa and/or money.

Firstly, I never said it was "bad" to have kids. But, Luigi, in the old days that's exactly what most women were relegated to in their life ... having "litters" (for lack of a better term). This happens when we dont have access to birth control. No one has suggested that we should have a zero birth rate,

We don't have to have a zero birth rate to be in big trouble, Curious. Anything less than 2.1 will do. Just ask the Europeans as to why they put up with riots and crime from immigrants---they need the numbers. It's as simple as that. Everything from burning cars in France to trashing shops in Estonia to chants of NUKE NUKE DENMARK on the streets in broad daylight in Copenhagen.

Luigi ... really, you are reaching well beyond the scope of my discussion

I don't think I am at all, Curious. You want to keep this about very general trends so that you can just keep arguing from your own personal observations.

. I will say that we should have balance in population, not cut it to zero or have another baby boom. Moderation in all things, Luigi ... including birth control.

Curious, I will NOT accept birth control as a viable option. Perhaps it would interest you to know that it may reach a point where Western women will evolve to NOT get pregnant thanks to birth control

** You mean opting for a "career" instead of a family? More times than naught, I find such decisions to be selfish. Yet, many women do this because they have to in order to maintain a decent standard of living, not because they want to be some ideallic beacon of change.

Prior to the 1960's, women didnt have the choice to "opt" for a career, Luigi. If we want to analyze selfishness, we could take a look at the attitudes of men toward their wives in those days, Luigi. That was the epitomy of selfishness. I think maintaining a decent standard of living is an obstacle we all must overcome, regardless of the time in which we live.

** That is what my logical mind sees, and logic and idealism are a poor match, Curious.

That's right, Luigi. Logic and idealism are a poor match. You should take your own advice on that count.

Were families really more content back then, Luigi? Well, I lived back then and I can tell you that some members of the family were more content, but not all members, Luigi. Comparing life now to life then ... well, there is no comparison and for a woman, this day is infinitely better, Luigi.

Better? Better for who, Curious? The selfish feminist who blames all of her problems on white men and who doesn't want to have any kids but expects her way of thinking and living to continue on?

Luigi, in case you didn't know it, the reason American power was at an "all time apex", or America being established as a world power by the 1950's had absolutely nothing to do with the 1950's American housewife and everything to do with the FDR administration's policies for dealing with the Great Depression and it's subsequent merge into WWII with the Allied European countries ... really, Luigi, you do grasp at straws.

First of all, FDR was the worst President ever. Had it not been for WWII, I would not like to think how bad things would have gotten. Government intervention always screws things up. It was World War II that got our economy turned around, not big government. And we were powerful because the basic unit of society, the family, was strong and stable. None of this progressive BS that came about in the 1960s of sleeping around with all your friends to prove you weren't a racist and no no-fault divorce, or that religion and the white Anglo Saxon Christian male was the root of all the world's problems. No gay marriage and few broken homes. That's the secret, Curious, and I realize it may not have been what your professors, newspaper editors and 10 pm news anchors have told you, but the facts speak for themselves.

You put one of these women in the role of a 1950's housewife, and I will give them 6 months, a year, tops before they go screaming out of the marriage.

Actually, I personally know of several Catholic women who prefer such a lifestyle to the empty materialism of working or "having a career" to merely obtain a bunch of junk that has no value whatsoever.

Well, you could be right about that, Luigi ... but face it, we just never see many (if any) blogs about the pursuing of "older men" by women of ANY age. Please do provide us with a link to a few of these sites.

The explanation for that is very simple: Because they, like most Muslim-Muslim couples, do not need to come on the internet and discuss their relationships. Why? Because they are secure and trust each other and could care less what we think, Curious. They don't need third party confirmation about the validity of their partner and are not looking for some kind of deranged approval rating, encouragement or attention from total strangers on the most intimate aspects of their lives.

They "mull" it over because it's exciting, it's different, Luigi. But given the reality of the situation and as I've seen many of these posters make similar comments, in fantasy it seems like a wonderful life, but in reality, they know it's not the life they really prefer.

Really? Then why do some women on here refute the wonderful advice given and proceed anyways? They are more convincing than you seem to realize.

No, Luigi. I speak only for the women involved in the movement at the time. If these women don't like it, they're free to make a change or demand a change back to the times prior to the mid 60's. I havent seen it happening, Luigi.

I'm not so sure a movement would jump on your bandwagon of generalizations. Simply "letting the times speak for themselves" is not enough, not by a long shot. And our society is conditioned to make women who choose to be homemakers feel like they are not accomplishing anything.

My current response? Well, I was most certainly subject to "them", Luigi. And I realise these customs were initiated for protection, but it was protection gone wild. There is a place somewhere between rigid social standards and out of wedlock mothering, Luigi.

Well, Curious, out-of-wedlock mothering destabilizes civilizations. So does contraception.

Well, my response to all of this is ... it may well have something to do with making sex easier but probably very little to do with the biological "need" to reproduce. Maybe that's why so many men leave their girlfriends or wives when they find out they're pregnant?

Exactly. There's a lot of men out there who are jerks and it's the number one reason why women go looking abroad for decent men.

My response, " Defending the religion should not be confused with the defending of Islamic males who perpetrate these confidence games on unsuspecting women. I agree that I see many women on these blogs defending Islam, and in the same breath they're saying that Islam refutes the actions of these men. And actually, it seems I have seen response from more than a few muslims saying the same words, Luigi. Don't judge Islam by the evil actions of desparate men. We all know that Islam is not the issue presented on this blog, Luigi..

Don't get too confused, Curious. The only reason women on here defend Islam is because they are attracted to an Islamic man. It's the same thing as when a woman stands up in a courtroom defending her

Also, you'll have to show me the precise links of Muslim posters on here defending Islam, because I do not see it. Every so often someone will come on here and request that not all Muslims get generalized, which is a fair point, but those requests are radically different from the accusations of islamophobia and racism against regular posters who merely point out the facts, facts that pretty disprove the legimaticy of said person's "relationship".

My response, " You're really reaching, Luigi, if you can accuse me of advocating for "more sex" in any of my posts. Your reading comprehension is quite pathetic, Luigi". Try Google, Luigi ... I'm sure you can find some great remedial reading sites. Try Reading for Comprehension .

1) If my comprehension is so "pathetic", why do respond with such vigor and detail? I guess you just can't stand what I have to say. It would also explain your quick responses.

2) I find your insults rather amusing, Curious, and your posts clearly indicate that you have some kind of personal stake here that goes beyond having just younger male friends.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".