Last time I looked, many women were getting things like jobs, and often actually contributing to purchase of material items that you appear to value, above all else. Sometimes the married couple will have children. Sometimes one of the partners will remain at home, to raise them. Often, but not always, this is the female, and her contribution, at that stage, will be to give up her work, and raise the kids, through the daytime. On other occasions, she may be able to work and raise kids. I do take your general point, I think marriage is a flawed concept, and actually a bit unnatural, imo. I would even go as far as to say that I could have a full on relationship, these days, but no matter how well it went, I would rather we lived apart.
May I ask, are you in a relationship, at the moment? Do you go to other countries and pay women for company or sex?
I dont pay for sex if that is what you are assuming....I do have a long time girlfriend of almost 3 years in a third world country yes......and also yes....I do see the difference to how a woman treats a guy here and how a man is treated there!
yes marriage is obsolete and also yes I think the courts still favor woman in divorce....so then I ask again....why marry? Its all available for free in most bars. And even worse.....marrying a woman that already has somebody elses kids .....what a total joke LOL. Do you realize most woman dont want a guy with kids unless she already has kids...then she dont mind as she already has kids so I guess its no big deal. You see....they expect you to accept their mistakes ( kids) but they wont accept yours....unless as I said....they already have a kid or two! I highly suggest you look a little deeper and with an open mind.....why is divorce exploding since the GIRL POWER crap? why are most kids dumped in day care now? why is it elderly parents are dumped in nursing homes? And why is it now so many woman cant even cook? Its really a disgrace!
Well, he did rape a prostitute, and since prostitutes sleep around a lot (for money), she probably deserved it for her promiscuity.
Just think of how many people out there are almost gleeful that those who don't accept Jesus as personal savior are going to burn in hell? Makedde's thinking is really no different, it's just more temporal. It's a way of sidestepping the golden rule. You don't want to punish them yourself, you just want them to be punished by God/nature/spirits/etc.
A prostitute doesn't deserve to get raped. But if she has unprotected sex with multiple people, she can't complain when she contracts an illness.
If women screw around and get pregnant and have abortions, then it will catch up to them. They might not be able to conceive naturally due to the abortions and you know what? I wouldn't give a toss. I didn't change my position. I simply modified my statement because no one here seems to get what I am saying, which is typical. Men can get diseases to. If they do, I don't care. Don't sleep around, you won't get an STI. It's quite simple.
I don't think sleeping around is wrong if you are single. Cheating has never made sense to me. If that person your with doesn't do it for you, do both of you a favor and leave them.
If you don't pay for sex, how do you actually go about it, if at all? Is she your first cousin??? Exactly what is the point of having a girlfriend coming from a third world country (I'm talking about distance!! as I'm fully aware as to how subserviant they are to men) when, from what I gather, you won't be marrying her?? If women from third world countries suit your lifestyle, why don't you go live in one?? What do you base all your "observations" and "knowledge" on regarding ALL women, aside from your underlying issues?
I can see by your post you are fearfull of the chance of loss of this new found freedom that woman have achieved.....I can assure you....as soon as america falls so will all this crap that woman have pushed on men! Ever heard the term men conquer and woman rule? I suggest you read up on the roman empire.....this is nothing new.....and is always temporary!
so I take it by your post you are OK with throwing kids in daycare and throwing elderly parents in nursing homes? Somehow by your posts that dont surprise me!
^^^^ notice also "ALL" civilalizations that allow this nonsence of woman's rights dont survive very long? There is a reason for this.....womn's rights "REALLY" means.....high divorce rates.....low birth rates....disfunctional childeren....and the breakdown of the family unit. Naturally you are too clueless to understand any of this.....perhaps too busy getting picked up in the bars LOL
all nations that are in the first world now including europe and japan......all have high divorce rates and low birth rates. You need more? ....read up on the roman empire including things like the roman orgies and woman gladiators......this equality crap took place then too....I am not saying this is why rome fell but I bet it was a contributing factor. Remember that woman are the nurturers to our childeren, they raise the next generation, so if you dump them in daycare and dont have time for the kids along with just the general fact that woman are all too eager to have a divorce over the stupidest reasons like if the guy loses a job. If you doubt I suggest you read up on all the countries where this equality crap exists and I guarantee you the divorce rate is way up!
I most certainly do, because as any intelligent person knows, correlation does not equal causation!! Next up, there were no women's rights in Ancient Rome, so using them as evidence is absurd. Last of all, once again, correlation does not equal causation. Divorce is often higher in developed nations. I say using your method of correlation equaling causation, that prosperity leads to high divorce rates. Therefore, we should ban prosperity!! What do you think?
Who in the heck pushed this "correlation doesn't equal causation" crap? I notice it is the new favorite saying of elitists. I'm mean really. Can't you all go back to "who is they?". I would love to ring your doorbell after taking a crap on your porch, and when you answer the door and ask me why say, "you don't know if it was me--correlation doesn't equal causation!".
It is a quite simple idea. Example: Most people who get cancer have hair, therefore hair causes cancer!! It is true that most people who get cancer have hair, probably all of them have some type of hair(or at least very close to all), but there is no causal relationship between hair and cancer, even though there IS a correlative relationship between hair and cancer. This is true of millions of things in the world. You attributing this bit of sound reasoning to elitists is absurd, unless you mean elitists as in people who have elite abilities. In that case, they probably would say that. Researcher go to a lot of trouble to isolate a variable in order to show that causal effects exist, not just correlative ones. What is to be mocked about this idea?
LOL. I have seen you use it, and others who are extremely elitist, for the free trade and our collapsing economy argument, as if 10s of millions of jobs leaving wouldn't have any bearing on our economy, lmao, and now saying the liberalization of women doesn't impact the family structure. And then using an example of someone saying hair causes cancer? Give me a break. I've said it before and I'll say it again. If all college was for was to teach you sophisticated ways to dodge using your own brain and having serious rebuttals to things you claim to believe in when someone sates the obvious, you need to ask for a refund.
This is where your argument fails miserably!! Very few things in politics are obvious. You can present persuasive arguments and evidence to support your conclusions, but those conclusions are rarely obvious. Which is exactly why understanding that correlation does not equal causation is so important!! To look at something and say, X happened at the same time a Y, therefore X caused Y is not logical unless you can show that link. Similarly if you say X happened before Y, therefore X caused Y, the same thing is true. You need to provide evidence and argument to support your assertions, and you need some way of isolating variables so that you can say among the millions of variables interacting in our society, variable A caused outcome B. If you cannot do that, then you are simply offering your unsubstantiated opinion, not a self-evidently obvious truth!! When you understand that, you will understand a great deal that will lead to your improvement as a debater. Because the fact that you don't have evidence or argument to support your conclusion, doesn't mean your conclusion is wrong. You just need to get to the point where you understand debate well enough that you can support your conclusions, no matter what they are. PS. You understand what an example is, correct? The cancer example was to show how obviously silly it is to equate correlation with causation, unless some causal link can be shown to exist. You do the same thing, only in a slightly more sophisticated manner.
So, what prevented you from accomplishing the same thing, even with sex being involved? In my opinion, if there was friendship material there, you could have taken "advantage" of it regardless, only you wouldn't have needed to be single as much if that was not what you really wanted.
