Has women independence created an imbalance in relationships?

I think all new homes should have enough space and built in plumbing etc for a dishwasher.
Then we wouldn't have any problems.

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

The career-embracing bra-burner in most women gets harshly deflated when you go to the doctor for a repeat prescription for your asthma inhaler, or something equally incongruous, at the age of 29 and the doctor says "Have you thought about having children yet?"

Are you discriminating against asthmatics now?:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

I think a lot of the men vs women debate is hi-jacked by the hurt/anger of spurned suitors who are going through the essential "I hate all men/women/animals" phase post-relationship. if you actually step back and think about it both sides do a lot of stupid things which are driven by selfish,immature, and frankly stupid impulses.

Example, as a guy I often encounter sexism from females in that half the catalogue of social airs and graces are female-exclusive. As many people have said women can oogle guys as much as they want and it's fine, if men do the same thing we're perverts. Similarly if a guy has many sexual partners he's some kind of legend (:D) if a woman does the same she's often viewed as a slapper.

Thing is,
1) In many cases there is/was a reasonable historical/biological basis for the roots of what has evolved into the gender imbalances we see nowadays. Taking the obvious issue of gender roles in contemporary society, it made more sense centuries ago for women to be the primary caregivers while men were the primary breadwinners.

Even today if you're part of a family unit intending to have children the same logic applies to an extent. Even with the best support, compromise, and professional flexibility if a couple are having a child the woman is going to be "off the books" for the best part of a year. That's not sexism, that's just how reproduction works for us. In many cases a woman staying at home to mind the kids is a choice she is happy to make, not an obligation imposed by her partner. In that sense there's nothing wrong with a situation where a man is the primary breadwinner while a woman is the primary caregiver. The problem arises where idiots (male and female) bring those roles, or standards into other situations and use them out of context to demean their opposite numbers.

Simple examples are women whining about having to endure child birth and having children in general, attempting to make off like they're heroes for this. To which I have to say "no-one's forcing you to have kids, and if you're stupid enough to have children for any reason other than wanting them then youre not a hero you're a muppet". Similarly when you have guy playing the whole "woman's place is in the home" card, same problem, roles taken out of context with the free will element removed, and used to demean the opposite gender.

2) We all crave stability. We want it in every signel avenue of life, and to that end we embrace idiotic paradigms for every single social interaction. Hence retarded notions like, the man should always make the first move, I have to wait 3 days before calling, and all of this garbage. Women, in my experience, are schooled to think all men want is to get into their pants, and with that in mind their whole social interaction mechanism is geared toward assessing every single thing guys do in a wasted effort to establish some kind of "not a wanker" guarantee. There's a certain amount of acceptable reason to that. Why should anyone put thmselves out there to be disabused by someone else. Problems arise because women do exactly the same thing to men in the process. the sheer amount of disrespect and ignorance doled out by a great many women is mindnumbinly unreal, and it seems they either don't realise what they're doing, or just don't care.

Similarly, men want sex. there's no denying that. Sure guys wil come on here and say "oh I'd prefer a solid relationship over sex blahblahblah" and that's fine. But most guys will happily choose sex over committment. And that's fine, it's perfectly normal, it's how we're wired. We don't need stability/security the way women do. Our biological imperative is to sow oats with abandon. Which obviously creates huge friction because it grates against women's basic need for the kind of security we shun.

Anyway I'm rambling on, and I think I'm wandering off on tangents. I guess my overall point is that any debate about gender imbalances comes down to the stereotypical "us vs them" debate between the genders. And the source of the subsequent imbalances is simply two sets of polarised goals coupled with msot peoples basic immaturity/insecurity.

In fairness, if we were all the informed open-minded people we wish we were then professional status wouldn't factor into social encounters the way it does.

someone said earlier in this thread that men need women more than women need men...i dont believe this is the case any longer. modern women cannot cook, clean or knit. they cannot bake you a pie and they no longer give us something warm to cling to, when nights are cold and lonely.