Define a REAL Woman.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I don't understand it myself really. I don't see it comparable to wearing a burkha and it's an eye opener for me that expecting a woman to enjoy cooking is just as bad as forcing them to wear a burkha.

I guess you must have missed that Feminist movement thing we had about forty years ago.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Thank you Aneeshm.

I don't understand it myself really. I don't see it comparable to wearing a burkha and it's an eye opener for me that expecting a woman to enjoy cooking is just as bad as forcing them to wear a burkha.

I guess you've never heard a muslim woman defend the burka. Same arguments.

[Imran Siddiqui]

expecting a woman to enjoy cooking

Damn straight... women should enjoy cooking! That's where they belong!

Why is it wrong for men in some countries to expect a woman to appreciate the wearing of a burka then?

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

If the division of household labour has been such that she is responsible for cooking dinner, then he has a right to be annoyed if it isn't ready on time.

I do tend to find it interesting though that in the "division of household labour", it usually ends up that the woman is responsible for cooking dinner and doing the laundry.

Plenty of studies have found that even when women are working outside the home, they are expected to also pull most of the weight doing the household chores.

I'm thinking that the division of household chores shouldn't necessarily be one set in stone... ie, you always cook dinner.

Note the qualifier "if". Had it been Ben who had taken up that commitment, his wife would be justified in being annoyed at him for a delay, the same way he would be had she taken up the commitment.

Let me re-state that to make it clearer.

We have two partners, X and Y. We have N things to be done, numbered 1 to N. It is worked out that X will to things 1 to K, and Y will do things K+1 to N (1
If X does not do one of those things as worked out, Y is justified in not liking it, or being annoyed about it.

Similarly and symmetrically, if Y does not do one of those things as worked out, X is justified in not liking it, or being annoyed about it.

Does that clarify things somewhat?

Now to move to the next part of what you were saying - that most women end up expected to do two things. Again, this is something people have to work out for themselves. If the woman is fine with it, I see no problem. And if she is not, and she has a way to quit if she wants, then that is also a no-problem situation. It is when coercion enters the picture that there is a problem. But as I see none of that here, I don't think there is anything wrong here. Also, nobody is setting things in stone, either.

Ben here merely expressed a preference. He is not imposing it on anyone. If you are going to try to use emotional tactics to try to either change his views, or pretend to change them, then we are veering into the dangerous territory of making it wrong (or rather, taboo) to express some thoughts, or even to have them - thoughtcrime. I don't think that is something any of us want.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Also, why are you personally attacking him? He merely expressed a preference for a certain type of person. If he finds a person like that who likes people like him, and both are happy, why are you getting so worked up about it

This is quite rich coming from you.

I'll quote Wezil:

This reminds me of the burka debate with muslim males. "She wants to wear the Burka..."

Why do you get all worked up about the treatment of women in Muslim societies. If they are both happy and the woman wants to wear the burka, why do you get so upset?

I think there is one very important difference here - the Muslim woman is coerced into wearing the burkha.

For instance, some women in Kashmir have had acid thrown at their face because they did not wear the burkha, with the Islamic group that did it announcing that such attacks would continue on women who went around on the streets unveiled.

Ben is simply looking for a partner of a certain type. He is not forcing everyone else to confirm to his idea of what he wants. There is no coercion involved.

Don't you think that that is a crucial difference? Are the two cases even comparable?

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Note the qualifier "if". Had it been Ben who had taken up that commitment, his wife would be justified in being annoyed at him for a delay, the same way he would be had she taken up the commitment.

Honestly, I can't imagine such a situation coming up with a partner I really loved. Get annoyed because some household thing didn't get done? Come on.

[Spec]

Originally posted by Lorizael


Honestly, I can't imagine such a situation coming up with a partner I really loved. Get annoyed because some household thing didn't get done? Come on.

Whats the longest relashionship you have been in?

Have you ever lived with a gf for more than 3 or 4 years atleast?

At some point, one or the other partner takes the other one for granted and thats when that kind of shlt starts. Its usualy the female that complains about that kind of stuff.

Spec.

[Lorizael]

Clearly, my experience is limited. My longest relationship was a few months over two years and I've never lived with a romantic partner.

But I have lived with my family, and now I've got two housemates I've lived with as well. And I know how I react to these sorts of things. It just seems so stupid to get upset over dishes or chores or what have you. There are more important things in life.

[Spec]

Originally posted by Lorizael
Clearly, my experience is limited. My longest relationship was a few months over two years and I've never lived with a romantic partner.

But I have lived with my family, and now I've got two housemates I've lived with as well. And I know how I react to these sorts of things. It just seems so stupid to get upset over dishes or chores or what have you. There are more important things in life.

Probably because you're not the one thats always cleaning up for the others. When I had roomates, I always cleaned up for the others and it pissed me off that no one was lifting a finger to do shlt while I was cleaning THEM up. The only reason the house was clean was because of me.

Maybe you and your roomates dont care if its dirty, now thats another matter.

Spec.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Spec
Probably because you're not the one thats always cleaning up for the others.

Nope. Wrong assumption. There are certainly times when I'm doing more cleaning work than others in the house, but I just don't care. Why would I let such a minor thing have a negative impact on my life?

[Spec]

Originally posted by Lorizael


Nope. Wrong assumption. There are certainly times when I'm doing more cleaning work than others in the house, but I just don't care. Why would I let such a minor thing have a negative impact on my life?

Does it really not bother you or you'd rather not say anything?

I can understand that you'd rather not say anything, but always doing everybody elses chores without minding, I have trouble believing that.

Take this for example. Its saturday afternoon, you just cleaned up everything and now you are getting ready for a date. You go pick the girl up, go out for a nice dinner, than a drink somewhere, the you take her back to your place the very same night and its like you never ever cleaned anything. You would'nt mind? I do.

Thats disrespect.

Spec.

[Lorizael]

Please think of a realistic scenario, Spec.

[Spec]

Yay, I marked a point.

Spec.

[Lorizael]

I avoid such situations through careful planning. Simply put, I wouldn't live with a slob. If I trust that the people I'm living with aren't slobs, then I am willing to put up with occasional messiness because I know it's not indicative of anything more.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Similarly and symmetrically, if Y does not do one of those things as worked out, X is justified in not liking it, or being annoyed about it.

Now to move to the next part of what you were saying - that most women end up expected to do two things. Again, this is something people have to work out for themselves. If the woman is fine with it, I see no problem. And if she is not, and she has a way to quit if she wants, then that is also a no-problem situation. It is when coercion enters the picture that there is a problem. But as I see none of that here, I don't think there is anything wrong here. Also, nobody is setting things in stone, either.

What do you consider coercion? Or coercive activity? If the woman is going to work and then coming back and cleaning and cooking, it seems that societal coercion has made her seem ok with doing two jobs while the man has one. And before you argue it doesn't exist (which is absolutely foolish), think about where the traditional notion of where the woman belonged was and how women who wanted to work early in the last century were treated.

Listen, there have been many cases where people of a looked down on minority was happy with their place. That doesn't mean there was no coercion there. Social norms can be very coercive (especially when they dictate what is proper for people to do).

And an expectation that the woman should enjoy cooking to be a real woman seems to embody that disgusting social coercion that woman belong in the kitchen.

Ben here merely expressed a preference. He is not imposing it on anyone. If you are going to try to use emotional tactics to try to either change his views, or pretend to change them, then we are veering into the dangerous territory of making it wrong (or rather, taboo) to express some thoughts, or even to have them - thoughtcrime. I don't think that is something any of us want.

A bigotting preference is still bigotted. He can believe whatever he wants, but, I'm sure you wouldn't say its a thoughtcrime to yell at someone who said Indians are inherently lesser than whites. That's merely a preference. What's the difference?

I think there is one very important difference here - the Muslim woman is coerced into wearing the burkha.

Many times the only coercion is just social norms and stigma. People throwing acid in the face is a rare activity. Remember some of the biggest supporters of the Iranian Islamic Revolution were women who marched in the streets wearing burkas.

Ben is simply looking for a partner of a certain type. He is not forcing everyone else to confirm to his idea of what he wants. There is no coercion involved.

I suggest you actually read what the OP is about. This isn't what is your preference in a partner thread. This is defining a "real woman". Completely different.

[Spec]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

I suggest you actually read what the OP is about. This isn't what is your preference in a partner thread. This is defining a "real woman". Completely different.

Booya!

I was wondering when someone would notice that.

Spec.