# 10 Things Every Intersectional Feminist Should Ask On a First Date



## EllisRedding

IDK, maybe it is time I just unplug from the internet completely. Lara Witt, who describes herself per the following [as an intersectional feminist writer, the managing editor of Wear Your Voice Magazine and a digital media consultant based in Philadelphia. She writes about self-care, pop culture and deconstructing systems of oppression. Her work has been featured in Teen Vogue, Harper’s Bazaar, BUST Magazine, ELLE and more]. According to her, feminists actually date, but these 10 questions need to be asked on the first date in order to determine compatibility ... 



> 1. Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?
> 
> 2. What are your thoughts on gender and sexual orientation?
> 
> 3. How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?
> 
> 4. What are your thoughts on sex work?
> 
> 5. Are you a supporter of the BDS movement?
> 
> 6. What is your understanding of settler colonialism and indigenous rights?
> 
> 7. Do you think capitalism is exploitative?
> 
> 8. Can any human be illegal?
> 
> 9. Do you support Muslim Americans and non-Muslim people from Islamic countries?
> 
> 10. Does your allyship include disabled folks?


Is this really what has become of feminism these days, or is this just an outlier? Could just be me, but this seems more like a list of how not to get a date ... 

Feeling a little daring right now, so decided to play with fire and post in the Ladies Lounge


----------



## Yag-Kosha

I better not. Even joking will get people fuming these days.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

EllisRedding said:


> Could just be me, but this seems more like a list of how not to get a date ...


Like any real man would ever date a feminist. The only thing a feminist could get are those white nights eunuchs you see marching the streets with them. The problem is no woman wants one of those things either.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Yag-Kosha said:


> I better not. Even joking will get people fuming these days.


Dude, your answer was hilarious! "Only in February" I found particularly funny.


----------



## EleGirl

EllisRedding said:


> IDK, maybe it is time I just unplug from the internet completely. Lara Witt, who describes herself per the following [as an intersectional feminist writer, the managing editor of Wear Your Voice Magazine and a digital media consultant based in Philadelphia. She writes about self-care, pop culture and deconstructing systems of oppression. Her work has been featured in Teen Vogue, Harper’s Bazaar, BUST Magazine, ELLE and more]. According to her, feminists actually date, but these 10 questions need to be asked on the first date in order to determine compatibility ...
> 
> 
> 
> Is this really what has become of feminism these days, or is this just an outlier? Could just be me, but this seems more like a list of how not to get a date ...
> 
> Feeling a little daring right now, so decided to play with fire and post in the Ladies Lounge


Make up anything, and you will find some site on the internet that supports it.


----------



## EleGirl

Yag-Kosha said:


> I better not. Even joking will get people fuming these days.


>


----------



## EleGirl

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Like any real man would ever date a feminist. The only thing a feminist could get are those white nights eunuchs you see marching the streets with them. The problem is no woman wants one of those things either.


There is no one definition of "feminism". At it's core it means something very simple: legal, social and financial equality for all. That's it.

Using that definition, most women today are feminist. I don't know any woman who disagrees with that definition.

Unfortunately, the fruit cakes are the move visible. It's always that way. 

Those who want to discredit something as simple as "legal, social and financial equality for all" will use the fruit cakes to do it.


----------



## Red Sonja

She is an outlier amongst feminists and humans in general. Post a link to the article please? I feel like having some fun if they have a comment section.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

EleGirl said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like any real man would ever date a feminist. The only thing a feminist could get are those white nights eunuchs you see marching the streets with them. The problem is no woman wants one of those things either.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no one definition of "feminism". At it's core it means something very simple: legal, social and financial equality for all. That's it.
> 
> Using that definition, most women today are feminist. I don't know any woman who disagrees with that definition.
> 
> Unfortunately, the fruit cakes are the move visible. It's always that way.
> 
> Those who want to discredit something as simple as "legal, social and financial equality for all" will use the fruit cakes to do it.
Click to expand...

I don't know any men who don't believe in "legal, social and financial equality for all" either for the record. So I'm not talking about normal humans, im poking fun of the "fruit cakes" as you say. True feminism is dead. The fight for equality has shifted to a fight for preferential treatment by the self proclaimed feminists of today.


----------



## uhtred

If you judge any group by its extremists, you will see some very scary people.

The question though are interesting. I'm happy to discuss any of them, and would not be at all offended if a date asked. It would be a great test - can she discussion highly politically charged issues in a rational well thought-out fashion?

I like talking about politics so its important to know the answer.


----------



## wild jade

uhtred said:


> If you judge any group by its extremists, you will see some very scary people.
> 
> The question though are interesting. I'm happy to discuss any of them, and would not be at all offended if a date asked. It would be a great test - can she discussion highly politically charged issues in a rational well thought-out fashion?
> 
> I like talking about politics so its important to know the answer.


I agree. I don't think I would ever ask those specific questions, especially as they are framed, but I don't really see anything wrong with them either. 

If you don't agree on some of those issues, there's no point in attempting any kind of relationship, IMHO.


----------



## ConanHub

1. Um yes. About 25% of my family has dark skin.

2. This ones easy! I have a penis and I put it in your vagina!

3. Show her how well I give women spankings! Truthfully, I am very good at it!😉 

4. Screwing people for money is pathetic. Paying someone to screw you is beyond pathetic. Hey! Are you "working" right now??!!?

5. Grunt???

6. Head.....hurting....

7. Check please! I know the food didn't come yet! 

8. I am thinking about calling the police. You are scaring me...

9. I have a hard enough time supporting myself!

10. I don't have any ship, much less one with handicap access.

Now to go kill my "friend" that set me up!!!😈

Unless she enjoys having sex with troglodytes, she will never have to worry about birth control!


----------



## uhtred

I think that they are fun to discuss, but not typical first date questions. Some are very interesting. 

What are your opinions of colonialism vs indigenous rights? In particular how long do settlers need to be somewhere in order to be "indigenous"? 





wild jade said:


> I agree. I don't think I would ever ask those specific questions, especially as they are framed, but I don't really see anything wrong with them either.
> 
> If you don't agree on some of those issues, there's no point in attempting any kind of relationship, IMHO.


----------



## RandomDude

Lol! I wanna play! 



> 1. Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?
> *No, I believe all lives matter... most lives anyway*
> 
> 2. What are your thoughts on gender and sexual orientation?
> *Don't care*
> 
> 3. How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?
> *It's a part of life, encourage people to rise above it*
> 
> 4. What are your thoughts on sex work?
> *It is their choice and should not be judged for it*
> 
> 5. Are you a supporter of the BDS movement?
> *No, but I believe consumers have the responsibility to vote with their wallets to influence market forces positively*
> 
> 6. What is your understanding of settler colonialism and indigenous rights?
> *The country was stolen, but giving hand-outs keeps them your slaves*
> 
> 7. Do you think capitalism is exploitative?
> *It can be, yes*
> 
> 8. Can any human be illegal?
> *Yes, legality is relative*
> 
> 9. Do you support Muslim Americans and non-Muslim people from Islamic countries?
> *I only see 2 religions, one tolerant and the other not. I only tolerate the former.*
> 
> 10. Does your allyship include disabled folks?
> *Of course*


Did I pass?


----------



## GusPolinski

Saw this a few minutes ago.

So many LOLs.


----------



## FrenchFry

This is how the kids I hang around talk these days. Bellyaching about it means you have crossed over to old--which is a blessing. 😄 I'm an old too which means all these damn kids are just too radical for me but honestly, I like the cut of their job in a lot of ways. 

I wouldn't seriously date anyone with whom I disagreed with politically. I liked to find out relatively quickly before any potential investment so I would be a bit of an interrogator but from what I understand you can filter a lot out just by online dating in a smart fashion. 

The fact is, this list would be effective for a certain dater. Anyone who would be turned off I'm sure they don't care.


----------



## Faithful Wife

FrenchFry said:


> This is how the kids I hang around talk these days. Bellyaching about it means you have crossed over to old--which is a blessing. ? I'm an old too which means all these damn kids are just too radical for me but honestly, I like the cut of their job in a lot of ways.
> 
> I wouldn't seriously date anyone with whom I disagreed with politically. I liked to find out relatively quickly before any potential investment so I would be a bit of an interrogator but from what I understand you can filter a lot out just by online dating in a smart fashion.
> 
> The fact is, this list would be effective for a certain dater. Anyone who would be turned off I'm sure they don't care.


I was dating before the last election. One of my get to know you questions was "what are your thoughts on Trump". Their answer was always an immediate "thanks, nice not knowing you" or a "pass, but keep checking for other incompatibility signs as necessary."

You can tell a lot about someone by having enough conversations with them. Sometimes you need those conversations to know what to probe a little further. You don't need the list of questions (whatever they would be to determine a basic compatibility) you just need to be a very good objective listener.


----------



## RandomDude

Faithful Wife said:


> I was dating before the last election. One of my get to know you questions was "what are your thoughts on Trump". Their answer was always an immediate "thanks, nice not knowing you" or a "pass, but keep checking for other incompatibility signs as necessary."
> 
> You can tell a lot about someone by having enough conversations with them. Sometimes you need those conversations to know what to probe a little further. You don't need the list of questions (whatever they would be to determine a basic compatibility) you just need to be a very good objective listener.


Ha! What if they respond; "He's entertainment!"


----------



## NextTimeAround

I think it's good to have your checklist of need to knows when dating. Just don't sound like an interrogator when you do.

I've also noticed it's best to divide things up in separate conversations. That way they can't see which you're going with the answers.


----------



## Faithful Wife

RandomDude said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was dating before the last election. One of my get to know you questions was "what are your thoughts on Trump". Their answer was always an immediate "thanks, nice not knowing you" or a "pass, but keep checking for other incompatibility signs as necessary."
> 
> You can tell a lot about someone by having enough conversations with them. Sometimes you need those conversations to know what to probe a little further. You don't need the list of questions (whatever they would be to determine a basic compatibility) you just need to be a very good objective listener.
> 
> 
> 
> Ha! What if they respond; "He's entertainment!"
Click to expand...

Then I'd ask if they were voting for him or not.


----------



## RandomDude

Faithful Wife said:


> Then I'd ask if they were voting for him or not.


Wow, persistent 

And if they say they didn't vote?


----------



## Faithful Wife

RandomDude said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then I'd ask if they were voting for him or not.
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, persistent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if they say they didn't vote?
Click to expand...

Would depend on why they didn't vote.


----------



## RandomDude

Faithful Wife said:


> Would depend on why they didn't vote.


Lol, poor guys - they have no escape!!! 

Atta girl


----------



## Faithful Wife

ConanHub said:


> 1. Um yes. About 25% of my family has dark skin.
> 
> 2. This ones easy! I have a penis and I put it in your vagina!
> 
> 3. Show her how well I give women spankings! Truthfully, I am very good at it!?
> 
> 4. Screwing people for money is pathetic. Paying someone to screw you is beyond pathetic. Hey! Are you "working" right now??!!?
> 
> 5. Grunt???
> 
> 6. Head.....hurting....
> 
> 7. Check please! I know the food didn't come yet!
> 
> 8. I am thinking about calling the police. You are scaring me...
> 
> 9. I have a hard enough time supporting myself!
> 
> 10. I don't have any ship, much less one with handicap access.
> 
> Now to go kill my "friend" that set me up!!!?
> 
> Unless she enjoys having sex with troglodytes, she will never have to worry about birth control!


This would be an auto-no for me. Nice meeting you!


----------



## marriageontherocks2

I would be heading out the back door past the bathroom by question 3. Definitely a hard pass and not compatible if I'm assaulted with nonsense like that over a cup of coffee or something.


----------



## RandomDude

Makes me wonder what if guys start interrogating women on their first dates too, how would that fly?


----------



## RandomDude

Anyway, IMO best way to find information about a person is to talk about it rather than to question about it. FW's example of straight up asking a political question, if the answers are so important to her, there are better / more accurate ways to 'extract' information that information without being scary 

Like why not make a statement about Trump instead, see their reaction, do they agree/disagree - how do they agree/disagree - what does their body language tell you, etc etc...


----------



## JericaP

uhtred said:


> I think that they are fun to discuss, but not typical first date questions. Some are very interesting.
> 
> What are your opinions of colonialism vs indigenous rights? In particular how long do settlers need to be somewhere in order to be "indigenous"?


Can't happen... because they're just _not _indigenous. Now, they can be, you know, 8th generation locals to the area they've been living ... since whenever their ancestors settled there... however many generations ago. They gotta be native to the place—and their ancestors must be, too—in order to call something indigenous. Two different things, settlers and indigenous people.


----------



## Laurentium

_1. Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?_
It's complicated - I abhor simple "yes" or "no" questions and answers. Broadly yes on this one, but that doesn't mean I agree with everything said by anyone who associates themselves with that tag. 

_2. What are your thoughts on gender and sexual orientation?_
"What are your thoughts...." I like that kind of question better. I'd say the two are strongly correlated but not identical. 

_3. How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?_
"Dismantle" - that's an interesting choice of metaphor. It seems to suggest that they were constructed. I guess that's nicer than "how do you fight..."

_4. What are your thoughts on sex work?_
I have no experience of it. I imagine it covers a very wide range of circumstances, so I am reluctant to generalise. 

_5. Are you a supporter of the BDS movement?_
Never heard of it. Something to do with bondage and discipline? (Or Balls-Deep Sports?)

_6. What is your understanding of settler colonialism and indigenous rights?_
Complicated - as someone else said, how many generations is it before someone is indigenous? I'm told that humans all came from Africa, so around here, we're all settlers. 

_7. Do you think capitalism is exploitative?_
Can you tell me how you define capitalism? Then I can answer. 

_8. Can any human be illegal?_
Well, the law can be whatever it is! But generally I understand it's acts that are illegal, rather than people. So for example, an "illegal immigrant" is someone who has illegally immigrated. But I'm sure you understood that already. What were you getting at? 

_9. Do you support Muslim Americans and non-Muslim people from Islamic countries?_
Muslim meaning the religion? Or the culture? And support _in what way_? I certainly can't support (or even know about) all their actions or all their opinions. 

_10. Does your allyship include disabled folks?_
Is "allyship" a word? I've never heard it before. But basically, same answer as for Muslims in Q9, it's a very fuzzy category, and I can neither endorse nor condemn everything about them, that would be absurd. 

Really, your questions suggest a rather black-and-white way of thinking, as if someone either simply "is" or "is not" for example "indigenous" or "disabled" or "feminist".

*Now my questions for you:*

1. Where do you stand on prescriptivism versus descriptivism? 

2. Free will versus determinism? Or compatibilism?

3. Freud or Klein? Or Jung?

4. I still want to know how you define "capitalism". 

5. Vegetarianism - okay yes I guessed you were - but _why?_

6. How do you define human rights? Who decides what they are? 

7. How would you define the word "God"? 

8. Is it OK to use the phrase "black and white thinking"?


----------



## sokillme

Laurentium said:


> _1. Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?_
> It's complicated - I abhor simple "yes" or "no" questions and answers. Broadly yes on this one, but that doesn't mean I agree with everything said by anyone who associates themselves with that tag.
> 
> _2. What are your thoughts on gender and sexual orientation?_
> "What are your thoughts...." I like that kind of question better. I'd say the two are strongly correlated but not identical.
> 
> _3. How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?_
> "Dismantle" - that's an interesting choice of metaphor. It seems to suggest that they were constructed. I guess that's nicer than "how do you fight..."
> 
> _4. What are your thoughts on sex work?_
> I have no experience of it. I imagine it covers a very wide range of circumstances, so I am reluctant to generalise.
> 
> _5. Are you a supporter of the BDS movement?_
> Never heard of it. Something to do with bondage and discipline? (Or Balls-Deep Sports?)
> 
> _6. What is your understanding of settler colonialism and indigenous rights?_
> Complicated - as someone else said, how many generations is it before someone is indigenous? I'm told that humans all came from Africa, so around here, we're all settlers.
> 
> _7. Do you think capitalism is exploitative?_
> Can you tell me how you define capitalism? Then I can answer.
> 
> _8. Can any human be illegal?_
> Well, the law can be whatever it is! But generally I understand it's acts that are illegal, rather than people. So for example, an "illegal immigrant" is someone who has illegally immigrated. But I'm sure you understood that already. What were you getting at?
> 
> _9. Do you support Muslim Americans and non-Muslim people from Islamic countries?_
> Muslim meaning the religion? Or the culture? And support _in what way_? I certainly can't support (or even know about) all their actions or all their opinions.
> 
> _10. Does your allyship include disabled folks?_
> Is "allyship" a word? I've never heard it before. But basically, same answer as for Muslims in Q9, it's a very fuzzy category, and I can neither endorse nor condemn everything about them, that would be absurd.
> 
> Really, your questions suggest a rather black-and-white way of thinking, as if someone either simply "is" or "is not" for example "indigenous" or "disabled" or "feminist".
> 
> *Now my questions for you:*
> 
> 1. Where do you stand on prescriptivism versus descriptivism?
> 
> 2. Free will versus determinism? Or compatibilism?
> 
> 3. Freud or Klein? Or Jung?
> 
> 4. I still want to know how you define "capitalism".
> 
> 5. Vegetarianism - okay yes I guessed you were - but _why?_
> 
> 6. How do you define human rights? Who decides what they are?
> 
> 7. How would you define the word "God"?
> 
> 8. Is it OK to use the phrase "black and white thinking"?


I can tell already you are way to smart for this women.

She would probably just call you misogynist, through her drink at you and storm out. 

That's easier then being challenged.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Laurentium said:


> _1. Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?_
> It's complicated - I abhor simple "yes" or "no" questions and answers. Broadly yes on this one, but that doesn't mean I agree with everything said by anyone who associates themselves with that tag.
> 
> _2. What are your thoughts on gender and sexual orientation?_
> "What are your thoughts...." I like that kind of question better. I'd say the two are strongly correlated but not identical.
> 
> _3. How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?_
> "Dismantle" - that's an interesting choice of metaphor. It seems to suggest that they were constructed. I guess that's nicer than "how do you fight..."
> 
> _4. What are your thoughts on sex work?_
> I have no experience of it. I imagine it covers a very wide range of circumstances, so I am reluctant to generalise.
> 
> _5. Are you a supporter of the BDS movement?_
> Never heard of it. Something to do with bondage and discipline? (Or Balls-Deep Sports?)
> 
> _6. What is your understanding of settler colonialism and indigenous rights?_
> Complicated - as someone else said, how many generations is it before someone is indigenous? I'm told that humans all came from Africa, so around here, we're all settlers.
> 
> _7. Do you think capitalism is exploitative?_
> Can you tell me how you define capitalism? Then I can answer.
> 
> _8. Can any human be illegal?_
> Well, the law can be whatever it is! But generally I understand it's acts that are illegal, rather than people. So for example, an "illegal immigrant" is someone who has illegally immigrated. But I'm sure you understood that already. What were you getting at?
> 
> _9. Do you support Muslim Americans and non-Muslim people from Islamic countries?_
> Muslim meaning the religion? Or the culture? And support _in what way_? I certainly can't support (or even know about) all their actions or all their opinions.
> 
> _10. Does your allyship include disabled folks?_
> Is "allyship" a word? I've never heard it before. But basically, same answer as for Muslims in Q9, it's a very fuzzy category, and I can neither endorse nor condemn everything about them, that would be absurd.
> 
> Really, your questions suggest a rather black-and-white way of thinking, as if someone either simply "is" or "is not" for example "indigenous" or "disabled" or "feminist".
> 
> *Now my questions for you:*
> 
> 1. Where do you stand on prescriptivism versus descriptivism?
> 
> 2. Free will versus determinism? Or compatibilism?
> 
> 3. Freud or Klein? Or Jung?
> 
> 4. I still want to know how you define "capitalism".
> 
> 5. Vegetarianism - okay yes I guessed you were - but _why?_
> 
> 6. How do you define human rights? Who decides what they are?
> 
> 7. How would you define the word "God"?
> 
> 8. Is it OK to use the phrase "black and white thinking"?


I would give this a pass and enthusiastically answer all of these questions, hoping for excellent conversation to ensue.


----------



## Faithful Wife

RandomDude said:


> Makes me wonder what if guys start interrogating women on their first dates too, how would that fly?


Some guys do interrogate. Some do it with a fun flair, and I always enjoyed that.


----------



## RandomDude

Faithful Wife said:


> Some guys do interrogate. *Some do it with a fun flair, and I always enjoyed that.*


And hence, I'm sure you would understand why I encourage the same for women as well


----------



## MJJEAN

1. Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?

*Honestly, I don't think any lives matter. We live, we die, the world doesn't really notice. *

2. What are your thoughts on gender and sexual orientation?

*Gender is a thing determined at the moment of conception. What you do with it after that is your business.*

3. How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?

*I don't. I give zero ****s.
*
4. What are your thoughts on sex work?

*I think all sex work should be legal and taxed like everyone else's job.*

5. Are you a supporter of the BDS movement?

*As often as possible. Wait... you said BDSM, right?*

6. What is your understanding of settler colonialism and indigenous rights?

*I understand winner takes all.*

7. Do you think capitalism is exploitative?

*Yes. And I'm ok with that.*

8. Can any human be illegal?
*
If they're in a country without that country's government's permission, yup.*

9. Do you support Muslim Americans and non-Muslim people from Islamic countries?

*Nope. I have a hard enough time seeing to my own backyard and figure the Muslims can support and police each other.*

10. Does your allyship include disabled folks?
*
My mother was severely disabled at birth. Only her head and torso were normally formed. She'd barf at these questions. I miss my mom. She was so...hardcore. Zero patience for stupidity.*


----------



## Faithful Wife

RandomDude said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some guys do interrogate. *Some do it with a fun flair, and I always enjoyed that.*
> 
> 
> 
> And hence, I'm sure you would understand why I encourage the same for women as well
Click to expand...

Yes I've never had a guy take offense to my asking questions in order to get to know him. I live in a mostly liberal area, so it would be rare to come up on a date with a guy who couldn't pass the Trump test for me, and I always knew that going in. If I had ever ended up on a date with someone with opposite political views from me, I wouldn't banter or be silly. I would assess the sitch immediately and so would he, and we would politely make chit chat until the date was over. Then thanks, nice meeting you.

This was true with sexual topics as well.


----------



## Satya

Ahh, the old clipboard dating checklist is reborn.


----------



## FrazzledSadHusband

Could we please instead talk about getting rid of Feminist Toilets?

You know, the ones that are perfectly round, and so short from front to back that the only way a guy can use them is to have your goods squished up against the cold porcelian, and they also usually have a high water level so your walnuts get wrinkler too!


----------



## EleGirl

Ok, I had to look up the definition of "BDS Movement" ... here it is.

_
The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement (also known as BDS and the BDS Movement) is a global campaign attempting to increase economic and political pressure on Israel to end what it describes as violations of international law. The BDS campaign calls for "various forms of boycott against Israel until it meets its obligations under international law".[1] The stated goals of BDS are:[2] the end of Israel's occupation and settler colonization of Palestinian land and the Golan Heights, full equality for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and acknowledgement of the right of return of Palestinian refugees.​_

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycott,_Divestment_and_Sanctions


----------



## RandomDude

EleGirl said:


> Ok, I had to look up the definition of "BDS Movement" ... here it is.
> 
> _
> The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement (also known as BDS and the BDS Movement) is a global campaign attempting to increase economic and political pressure on Israel to end what it describes as violations of international law. The BDS campaign calls for "various forms of boycott against Israel until it meets its obligations under international law".[1] The stated goals of BDS are:[2] the end of Israel's occupation and settler colonization of Palestinian land and the Golan Heights, full equality for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and acknowledgement of the right of return of Palestinian refugees.​_
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycott,_Divestment_and_Sanctions


-.-

I like MJJEAN's definition better


----------



## sokillme

The questions could really be summed up in one question. Are you a liberal progressive?

Personally I hate ideological tests. Truthfully it's all just a modern religion anyway. No different then any other religion, and with any religion heretics must be thrown out and persecuted. I don't find these type of people progressive as the word is defined at all. Actually they remind me of the evangelicals that I grew up around who told me the devil was speaking to me through rock music if you played it backwards. I have seen this all before. It's just that the far left is doing it now. 

Besides all that people who are partizans are in my mind the most intellectually lazy. I'm convinced the reason they are this way is it's easier to have a core set of beliefs that are never really challenged, like a template to follow which requires no thought (kinda like lots of very conservative religious people, not all by the way). Probably they think this way because they are just plain stupid and couldn't hold up to the debate. it's safe to just say what you have heard others say. An intellectually honest person can acknowledge there is often more then one way to solve a problem. Which means political questions are often not black and white But even worse and just plain sad then seeing someone you know is smart arguing something you know THEY KNOW is not true just because it's the party line. Talk about selling your soul. Even so it's too bad the stupid people lead the discourse though. 

Also having a party line just forces you to accept immoral things because both sides are wrong about stuff and both parties only care about one thing getting votes. By the way always remember he primary function of any political party is to get votes, that's it. It has nothing to do with changing anything. Votes is what they strive and work for. And because of this it affects the morality of ones positions. An example would be Bill Clinton and Roy Moore. Both men are seemingly not good men however depending on which lawn sign you have you are forced to defend one of them, or at least ignore their behavior. Well at least the party you are a part of does. What does that really say about the two party system or or us as people? A very strong case can be made that men like these thrive because of the two party system, because half of the country is going to defend the indefensible because it's better for there chances to win. Which makes the whole thing immoral to me. Better to abandon your political religion and say right is right and wrong is wrong then to sell your soul for a seat at the table. There can be not right and wrong when it is tied to which color tie you wear on election night. The whole thing is an abomination actually.

George Washington was right when he talked about the dangers of the two party system. (look it up, if you don't know about it reading it will do you some good)

@Faithful Wife how would that go over on a first date? >


----------



## MJJEAN

Satya said:


> Ahh, the old clipboard dating checklist is reborn.


My dating checklist included things like

"Do you have a steady job? Does it involve fries?"

"Do you live with your mother/grandmother?"

"Do you have a car? Is it in good working order, registered, and insured?"


----------



## EllisRedding

MJJEAN said:


> My dating checklist included things like
> 
> "Do you have a steady job? *Does it involve fries?"*
> 
> "Do you live with your mother/grandmother?"
> 
> "Do you have a car? Is it in good working order, registered, and insured?"


So you are one of those gals who expect free fries the rest of your life??? :grin2:


----------



## EllisRedding

To me, that list of questions is a sure fire way to end up single with 50 cats, but anyway... :grin2:

Would be interesting to hear, but I am guessing the "author" would expect all 10 questions to be answered "appropriately", or do you only need maybe a 70% grade to pass on to the next phase (I can only imagine what that would be lol)

I do find it interesting/fascinating these days all these people who seem to use political beliefs as a gauge for compatibility (i.e. Trump being the obvious case now).


----------



## Laurentium

I wonder if it's an age thing? The extreme certainty of the young.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Laurentium said:


> I wonder if it's an age thing? The extreme certainty of the young.


Though I would never use a literal list, and definitely wouldn't ask the specific questions on the list in this thread...I do try to poke around and find out if we are compatible. And I'm nowhere near young. 

I just know what kinds of topics will not be fun for me and what kinds will be so I try to test some of those out from the get go. I also don't mind any such questions coming from a guy. It's really all about not wasting time if we aren't going to get along.


----------



## Faithful Wife

sokillme said:


> The questions could really be summed up in one question. Are you a liberal progressive?
> 
> Personally I hate ideological tests. Truthfully it's all just a modern religion anyway. No different then any other religion, and with any religion heretics must be thrown out and persecuted. I don't find these type of people progressive as the word is defined at all. Actually they remind me of the evangelicals that I grew up around who told me the devil was speaking to me through rock music if you played it backwards. I have seen this all before. It's just that the far left is doing it now.
> 
> Besides all that people who are partizans are in my mind the most intellectually lazy. I'm convinced the reason they are this way is it's easier to have a core set of beliefs that are never really challenged, like a template to follow which requires no thought (kinda like lots of very conservative religious people, not all by the way). Probably they think this way because they are just plain stupid and couldn't hold up to the debate. it's safe to just say what you have heard others say. An intellectually honest person can acknowledge there is often more then one way to solve a problem. Which means political questions are often not black and white But even worse and just plain sad then seeing someone you know is smart arguing something you know THEY KNOW is not true just because it's the party line. Talk about selling your soul. Even so it's too bad the stupid people lead the discourse though.
> 
> Also having a party line just forces you to accept immoral things because both sides are wrong about stuff and both parties only care about one thing getting votes. By the way always remember he primary function of any political party is to get votes, that's it. It has nothing to do with changing anything. Votes is what they strive and work for. And because of this it affects the morality of ones positions. An example would be Bill Clinton and Roy Moore. Both men are seemingly not good men however depending on which lawn sign you have you are forced to defend one of them, or at least ignore their behavior. Well at least the party you are a part of does. What does that really say about the two party system or or us as people? A very strong case can be made that men like these thrive because of the two party system, because half of the country is going to defend the indefensible because it's better for there chances to win. Which makes the whole thing immoral to me. Better to abandon your political religion and say right is right and wrong is wrong then to sell your soul for a seat at the table. There can be not right and wrong when it is tied to which color tie you wear on election night. The whole thing is an abomination actually.
> 
> George Washington was right when he talked about the dangers of the two party system. (look it up, if you don't know about it reading it will do you some good)
> 
> @Faithful Wife how would that go over on a first date? >


I would probably think you talk too much and are not interested in my opinion or what I have to say.


----------



## Blondilocks

Look at y'all. Acting as though you know what an 'intersectional feminist' is. LOL:grin2:


----------



## alexm

I wasn't around in the '60's, but I've never seen this kind of division, ever. I imagine it was similar back then, too, but then some of you guys can chime in about that.

The reality is that this plays in to what the politicians WANT. They want divisiveness and anger and, yes, fighting.

Regardless of what side you're on - you're doing exactly what they want. They don't WANT you to get along. Keep the masses fighting amongst themselves, and the less they pay attention to what you're doing.

I blame the internet for this. Everything is public now. Things are "leaked". The curtain has been pulled back, and there's nowhere to hide. That's not a bad thing on the surface, but what's that old saying about how hot dogs are made?

Gone are the days of good-natured, healthy political discussion. Now, it seems, you can't even keep company with someone who has differing points of view on things.


----------



## wild jade

The more I read, the more I'm loving these questions. As for the counter questions? I say, bring it.

Every first date should be a mutual interrogation of the epic sort. Get rid of all the giggling and bs small talk, ditch all the material wealth and social ranking assessments, forget about "best behavior", and just have a down and dirty good old fashioned heart to heart on core values and philosophies.

Gosh, it almost makes me even like the idea of dating again.


----------



## Faithful Wife

alexm said:


> I wasn't around in the '60's, but I've never seen this kind of division, ever. I imagine it was similar back then, too, but then some of you guys can chime in about that.
> 
> The reality is that this plays in to what the politicians WANT. They want divisiveness and anger and, yes, fighting.
> 
> Regardless of what side you're on - you're doing exactly what they want. They don't WANT you to get along. Keep the masses fighting amongst themselves, and the less they pay attention to what you're doing.
> 
> I blame the internet for this. Everything is public now. Things are "leaked". The curtain has been pulled back, and there's nowhere to hide. That's not a bad thing on the surface, but what's that old saying about how hot dogs are made?
> 
> Gone are the days of good-natured, healthy political discussion. Now, it seems, you can't even keep company with someone who has differing points of view on things.


Discussion with colleagues and friends and relatives is one thing. Dating or being in a relationship with someone with drastically different political views is something else.

More power to ya if you could be in that type of relationship but I never could. I'm not very political in general but I could not tolerate listening to a trump supporter in my space on a regular basis. 

Can I listen to Uncle Conservative go off about politics? Sure, I don't care. I'm not even fully listening, I'm just letting him rant without interruption. 

But that doesn't mean I could stand to hear it from a partner, ugh.


----------



## Faithful Wife

wild jade said:


> The more I read, the more I'm loving these questions. As for the counter questions? I say, bring it.
> 
> Every first date should be a mutual interrogation of the epic sort. Get rid of all the giggling and bs small talk, ditch all the material wealth and social ranking assessments, forget about "best behavior", and just have a down and dirty good old fashioned heart to heart on core values and philosophies.
> 
> Gosh, it almost makes me even like the idea of dating again.


Yeah it was kinda like this for me this last round of dating.

Except we were mostly interrogating each other trying to find sexual compatibility, not political. The politics and human rights stuff was easy.....from there to finding out if they have any mojo or not wasn't always as easy but was necessary intel I had to gather


----------



## ConanHub

Faithful Wife said:


> This would be an auto-no for me. Nice meeting you!


Well. I'm not a good little boy and I would not run into this in the first place.

It was tongue in cheek.

A woman like this wouldn't get past my radar and I don't do blind dates anyway.


----------



## Faithful Wife

ConanHub said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> This would be an auto-no for me. Nice meeting you!
> 
> 
> 
> Well. I'm not a good little boy and I would not run into this in the first place.
> 
> It was tongue in cheek.
> 
> A woman like this wouldn't get past my radar and I don't do blind dates anyway.
Click to expand...

Never dated a good boy in my life so not sure what that means.


----------



## wild jade

Yeah, I wouldn't date someone who didn't share core values in certain key areas. Of course we don't have to agree on everything -- my husband and I argue all the time about all kinds of stuff. But it's incidental stuff, specific issues of interest, and we have a ton of common ground on issues of social justice.

I also wouldn't stay with someone I wasn't compatible with in other areas too. At least the important ones. 

Compromise is grand, but relationships require some serious compatibility, IMHO.


----------



## EllisRedding

Red Sonja said:


> She is an outlier amongst feminists and humans in general. Post a link to the article please? I feel like having some fun if they have a comment section.


You could probably find easily with a Google search of the thread title (that is the actual title from one of the articles quoting). I prefer not to direct any more traffic then necessary to this nutjob  She is also the person who posted "also white people are evil. Whiteness is evil."


----------



## Rhubarb

I agree with Lara Witt. Please ask these questions so the rest of us normal people can be clued in to run away as fast as possible.


----------



## EllisRedding

Blondilocks said:


> Look at y'all. Acting as though you know what an 'intersectional feminist' is. LOL:grin2:


I assumed it is what happens when feminist drivers all come to an intersection and need to decide who has the right of way :grin2:


----------



## ConanHub

M


Faithful Wife said:


> Never dated a good boy in my life so not sure what that means.


My apologies FW! I had about 3 hours of sleep and only a half cup of nasty coffee 🍵 today!

I should wake the hell up before I start posting!


----------



## Andy1001

ConanHub said:


> Well. I'm not a good little boy and I would not run into this in the first place.
> 
> It was tongue in cheek.
> 
> A woman like this wouldn't get past my radar and I don't do blind dates anyway.


I would tell her she has mistaken me for someone who gives a ****.


----------



## NextTimeAround

RandomDude said:


> Makes me wonder what if guys start interrogating women on their first dates too, how would that fly?


Men do.


----------



## EllisRedding

NextTimeAround said:


> Men do.


----------



## Faithful Wife

ConanHub said:


> M
> 
> 
> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Never dated a good boy in my life so not sure what that means.
> 
> 
> 
> My apologies FW! I had about 3 hours of sleep and only a half cup of nasty coffee ? today!
> 
> I should wake the hell up before I start posting!
Click to expand...

Good morning!


----------



## Amplexor

I read the ten questions during my morning constitutional today. I think my non-verbal responses summed up my opinion pretty well.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Amplexor said:


> I read the ten questions during my morning constitutional today. I think my non-verbal responses summed up my opinion pretty well.


Yeah, I have a feeling you think higher of what you dropped off in the toilet this morning than you do any woman who would ask you those dumba$$ questions.


----------



## farsidejunky

EllisRedding said:


>


This!


----------



## samyeagar

alexm said:


> I wasn't around in the '60's, but I've never seen this kind of division, ever. I imagine it was similar back then, too, but then some of you guys can chime in about that.
> 
> The reality is that this plays in to what the politicians WANT. They want divisiveness and anger and, yes, fighting.
> 
> Regardless of what side you're on - you're doing exactly what they want. They don't WANT you to get along. Keep the masses fighting amongst themselves, and the less they pay attention to what you're doing.
> 
> *I blame the internet for this.* Everything is public now. Things are "leaked". The curtain has been pulled back, and there's nowhere to hide. That's not a bad thing on the surface, but what's that old saying about how hot dogs are made?
> 
> Gone are the days of good-natured, healthy political discussion. Now, it seems, you can't even keep company with someone who has differing points of view on things.


I blame the human condition for this. I don't think the base human nature has changed at all. The internet just provides an avenue for the average person to show their inner nature.

The internet removes perhaps the two most important natural firebreaks to the flow of information that have existed for thousands of years of human civilization...time and space. There are now billions of people who can quite literally communicate with billions of people virtually instantaneously, anything they want, anywhere they want, at any time they want.

Even the smallest echo chambers that were once relatively limited by geography are now worldwide and are coming into direct contact with other echo chambers that otherwise never would have comingled...and that's not always a good thing.

Bullying has gotten exponentially worse, not because kids are worse today than ever before, but because they now have the tools to bully more efficiently, non stop, day and night from anywhere. There is no safe space to escape to after school any more, and rather than a handful of kids seeing the embarrassment in the school hallway, and hearing things through the rumor mill, thousands of kids can watch it unfold real time through social media, and with the feelings of anonymity and lack of accountability the screen provides, piling on has never been easier and free of consequence.


----------



## RandomDude

You can't stop progress.


----------



## NextTimeAround

RandomDude said:


> You can't stop progress.



yeah, some good things have come wit the internet as well.


----------



## sokillme

Faithful Wife said:


> I would probably think you talk too much and are not interested in my opinion or what I have to say.


Nice. Your loss.

I'm a good dancer.


----------



## FrenchFry

wild jade said:


> The more I read, the more I'm loving these questions. As for the counter questions? I say, bring it.
> 
> Every first date should be a mutual interrogation of the epic sort. Get rid of all the giggling and bs small talk, ditch all the material wealth and social ranking assessments, forget about "best behavior", and just have a down and dirty good old fashioned heart to heart on core values and philosophies.
> 
> Gosh, it almost makes me even like the idea of dating again.


I'm telling you, these kids are onto something. It's going to be very interesting seeing how this plays out.


----------



## samyeagar

RandomDude said:


> You can't stop progress.


Progress is in the eye of the beholder. I think more precisely, you can't stop change. All you can do is hope to cope and adapt.


----------



## Blondilocks

'Intersectional Feminist' - going where no man has gone before. Oh wait, that would be an 'interstellar feminist'. I give up.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> RandomDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then I'd ask if they were voting for him or not.
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, persistent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if they say they didn't vote?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Would depend on why they didn't vote.
Click to expand...

Well I've never voted, so how is this answer... because I think the whole thing is rigged to a large extent. I've always felt the candidates in the two party system were chosen for us, not by us to a large degree. Ive always had this suspicion based of news coverage disproportionately covering select candidates from the get go. This years DNC debacle concerning Bernie and Hillary pretty much confirmed suspicions ive had all along in my own mind for myself. Add in the fact that in my adult lifetime I've only ever heard "worst president in history" regarding every single one that has been in office. From Clinton to Trump. I don't want to contribute any of my personal time, thoughts, or resources to invest in the next "worst of all time" President. Seems like a giant waste of my time. 

That, and I've never cared who the president is or was. It has never had any direct impact on how I choose to live my life. I think if you are the type to get all worked up over things outside of your control, you are wasting energy better spent elsewhere on things you actually can control in your life. 

Regarding Trump personally, he is a self serving POS to put it nicely. He doesn't care about the American people. But I'm not sure how that makes him different from any other president we've had in my lifetime. So what does it really matter?

Now, may I enter into thee vigina m'lady?


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RandomDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then I'd ask if they were voting for him or not.
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, persistent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if they say they didn't vote?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Would depend on why they didn't vote.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well I've never voted, so how is this answer... because I think the whole thing is rigged to a large extent. I've always felt the candidates in the two party system were chosen for us, not by us to a large degree. Ive always had this suspicion based of news coverage disproportionately covering select candidates from the get go. This years DNC debacle concerning Bernie and Hillary pretty much confirmed suspicions ive had all along in my own mind for myself. Add in the fact that in my adult lifetime I've only ever heard "worst president in history" regarding every single one that has been in office. From Clinton to Trump. I don't want to contribute any of my personal time, thoughts, or resources to invest in the next "worst of all time" President. Seems like a giant waste of my time.
> 
> That, and I've never cared who the president is or was. It has never had any direct impact on how I choose to live my life. I think if you are the type to get all worked up over things outside of your control, you are wasting energy better spent elsewhere on things you actually can control in your life.
> 
> Regarding Trump personally, he is a self serving POS to put it nicely. He doesn't care about the American people. But I'm not sure how that makes him different from any other president we've had in my lifetime. So what does it really matter?
> 
> Now, may I enter into thee vigina m'lady?
Click to expand...

Having read your other threads...I have a sense that even if I like your reason for not voting, some other things would come up that would point out to me that you are bitter and angry at your wife (and presumably women, if you were newly divorced) and therefore...if I was attracted to you I would say something like "give me a call when you are over your baggage".


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> EllisRedding said:
> 
> 
> 
> Could just be me, but this seems more like a list of how not to get a date ...
> 
> 
> 
> Like any real man would ever date a feminist. The only thing a feminist could get are those white nights eunuchs you see marching the streets with them. The problem is no woman wants one of those things either.
Click to expand...

OOPS wait....just saw this one. Not hard to see the problem here...clearly you don't want to date a feminist so what difference would your vote answer make? Check please.


----------



## EllisRedding

Faithful Wife said:


> OOPS wait....just saw this one. Not hard to see the problem here...clearly you don't want to date a feminist so what difference would your vote answer make? Check please.


Delete, not directed at me, sorry about that, I was included in the quote but it was to the response of my quote.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> Having read your other threads...I have a sense that even if I like your reason for not voting, some other things would come up that would point out to me that you are bitter and angry at your wife (and presumably women, if you were newly divorced) and therefore...if I was attracted to you I would say something like "give me a call when you are over your baggage".


I see. Well my response would be we are all on this site for one reason or another. We all have baggage. But with that we all have baggage carts as well. Perhaps our carts are built in a way to help each other carry the load so to speak. Or maybe your own baggage is something I can relieve you from, as you might be capable of doing the same for me. Or perhaps not. 

I don't think I'm any harder on women than I am on men for the record. I just have a mans pov on things. Perhaps you disagree? I tease women for their womanlyness, just the same as women tease men for their manliness. That doesn't mean I'm bitter about women, I fiercely love you guys. I hate the mgtow crowd. I think they are nothing but a bunch of woman hating losers. The reaction from all the man hating loser females out there. Both are insufferable.

You work from a woman's perspective in life. Surely you are hard on men for one reason or another. Do you feel you are harder on men then women? If the answer is no, I would bet some men would disagree with you. Tis part of life. We can only give perspectives from our own povs. Men and women's povs are always going to be different. A man will always feel woman take sides the same as women feel men take sides. I wouldn't define that as baggage, I would define that as life. 

Also ive only ever started one thread. Did you read that one too? I think it shows I am more than willing to work through hard times with my lovely lady. I come here to vent frustrations. With frustrations come irrational thoughts. With those thoughts on display comes criticisms of my mindset from other people. With those criticisms comes self reflection for me, which means a chance to grow as a person. Isn't that what we all signed up for here?


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I see. Well my response would be we are all on this site for one reason or another. We all have baggage. But with that we all have baggage carts as well. Perhaps our carts are built in a way to help each other carry the load so to speak. Or maybe your own baggage is something I can relieve you from, as you might be capable of doing the same for me. Or perhaps not.
> 
> I don't think I'm any harder on women than I am on men for the record. I just have a mans pov on things. Perhaps you disagree? I tease women for their womanlyness, just the same as women tease men for their manliness. That doesn't mean I'm bitter about women, I fiercely love you guys. I hate the mgtow crowd. I think they are nothing but a bunch of woman hating losers. The reaction from all the man hating loser females out there. Both are insufferable.
> 
> You work from a woman's perspective in life. Surely you are hard on men for one reason or another. Do you feel you are harder on men then women? If the answer is no, I would bet some men would disagree with you. Tis part of life. We can only give perspectives from our own povs. Men and women's povs are always going to be different. A man will always feel woman take sides the same as women feel men take sides. I wouldn't define that as baggage, I would define that as life.
> 
> Also ive only ever started one thread. Did you read that one too? I think it shows I am more than willing to work through hard times with my lovely lady. I come here to vent frustrations. With frustrations come irrational thoughts. With those thoughts on display comes criticisms of my mindset from other people. With those criticisms comes self reflection for me, which means a chance to grow as a person. Isn't that what we all signed up for here?


I meant read your posts, not necessarily just threads you have started.

Like the last one of yours I quoted. I don't wear a feminist badge, yet I wouldn't date a guy who would just flat out not want to date a feminist. That would be a red flag to me. Because if a man just assumed being a feminist in itself also meant a woman was some kind of man hating nazi, I would know he wasn't up to speed on topics that matter to me. 

Not that I would have to date or marry someone who held exactly the same beliefs that I do...but if he outright hated anything called feminism that wouldn't work for me. There would be no argument with me about it, it would just be a simple thanks but no thanks.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EllisRedding said:
> 
> 
> 
> Could just be me, but this seems more like a list of how not to get a date ...
> 
> 
> 
> Like any real man would ever date a feminist. The only thing a feminist could get are those white nights eunuchs you see marching the streets with them. The problem is no woman wants one of those things either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OOPS wait....just saw this one. Not hard to see the problem here...clearly you don't want to date a feminist so what difference would your vote answer make? Check please.
Click to expand...

Did you see this exchange as well?


TheDudeLebowski said:


> EleGirl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like any real man would ever date a feminist. The only thing a feminist could get are those white nights eunuchs you see marching the streets with them. The problem is no woman wants one of those things either.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no one definition of "feminism". At it's core it means something very simple: legal, social and financial equality for all. That's it.
> 
> Using that definition, most women today are feminist. I don't know any woman who disagrees with that definition.
> 
> Unfortunately, the fruit cakes are the move visible. It's always that way.
> 
> Those who want to discredit something as simple as "legal, social and financial equality for all" will use the fruit cakes to do it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't know any men who don't believe in "legal, social and financial equality for all" either for the record. So I'm not talking about normal humans, im poking fun of the "fruit cakes" as you say. True feminism is dead. The fight for equality has shifted to a fight for preferential treatment by the self proclaimed feminists of today.
Click to expand...

By that very definition, I am a feminist myself. I have a wife a daughter after all. Of course I want equality for women, but I also want it for men. Today's feminist movement I feel has morphed into something quite different than that of equality. If it were really about that, wouldn't you think more women would stand up for the inequalities on both sides? Or do you truly feel men never receive the shaft in a lot of situations?


----------



## NobodySpecial

It saddens me that the internet and social media makes these topics such fodder for derision. I would certainly not devise a checklist of questions for a dating prospect. That is not to say I would not like to understand, over time, what a prospect thinks on these topics and of they are compatible with my views. There is no direct "right" answer but is useful to talk about and explore. I chuckle wryly to myself when men say that no "real men" would date a feminist. It seems most frequent on the internet to come from guys struggling mightily with their own relationships. In my life, in my marriage, with my mono friends and my poly lifestyle who are real men in every sense of the word. And they engage with their female partners and acquaintances like they are ... gasp... humans.

What these real men recognize is that while all lives matter, some lives have been systematically held down and back, economically, socially and emotionally based on gender, orientation, race, skin color. Hiding one's head in the sand and pretending that this is no longer the case is foolish. White people do not have to teach their kids not to get righteously pissed at being stopped on suspicion of being black nor how to respond to routine traffic stops. How to NOT engage in the same behavior at their white counterparts if they don't want a conviction.

I have a BFF (male) who was recently in a college "sensitivity" class. Stupid name. Of course everyone groaned at what a useless POS this class was going to be. My open minded friend's attitude was readjusted when the teacher asked the men what actions they took on a daily basis to keep themselves safe. Crickets. When the women were asked, the litany of these activities was cut short after an hour.

Real men are not bread earners trading their income for a sexual partner. Real men can even have... gasp... feelings! Holy mole, vulnerability! They an also have strength. They can apply their strength to muscling and controlling others. Or they can apply it to compassion, effectiveness. etcetera. Deaf ears this will fall upon. I'm ok with that.


----------



## Buddy400

EleGirl said:


> There is no one definition of "feminism". At it's core it means something very simple: legal, social and financial equality for all. That's it.
> 
> Using that definition, most women today are feminist. I don't know any woman who disagrees with that definition.


Using that definition, most men today are feminist. I don't know of any man who disagrees with that definition.


----------



## NobodySpecial

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Did you see this exchange as well?
> 
> 
> By that very definition, I am a feminist myself. I have a wife a daughter after all. Of course I want equality for women, but I also want it for men. Today's feminist movement I feel has morphed into something quite different than that of equality. If it were really about that, wouldn't you think more women would *stand up for the inequalities on both sides*? Or do you truly feel men never receive the shaft in a lot of situations?


Like what and where? I think pretty much everyone agrees that men are treated unfairly in family court. I have never once seen a feminist advocate for continued inequality in family court. That said, neither do I see men doing any grass root advocacy for it either. I have many activist engagements that are near and dear to me. Men's rights are not currently on the list since there is no movement to get behind. I am not going to spearhead that charge since I have more immediate concerns affecting my family. 

That is really the only area that I see systemic disadvantage for men. If there are others, I would love to know about them. I am not overjoyed about the execution failures of equal opportunity laws. But that does not seem to have systemic ill affect. So where else do men systemically get shafted?


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Did you see this exchange as well?
> 
> 
> By that very definition, I am a feminist myself. I have a wife a daughter after all. Of course I want equality for women, but I also want it for men. Today's feminist movement I feel has morphed into something quite different than that of equality. If it were really about that, wouldn't you think more women would stand up for the inequalities on both sides? Or do you truly feel men never receive the shaft in a lot of situations?


It was the "the only thing a feminist could get are those white knight eunuchs you see marching in the streets with them" comment that was a dead end for me. I think it's really distasteful when men mock other men in this manner. I feel it is just bravado for no reason. Another mans choice of who he wants to be with shouldn't make him a mockery by any man who has a solid sense of self. Name calling just makes one look weak and like they are bitter about something. At that point it's no longer about feminism at all, it's about lack of simple kindness to others.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

I will also point out my first response was meant to ruffle feathers and was worded appropriately for that very purpose. It makes for a more colorful conversation on what is a rather ridiculous discussion to begin with. I cant picture a man who wouldn't run away from a woman asking those questions on a first date.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Buddy400 said:


> Using that definition, most men today are feminist. I don't know of any man who disagrees with that definition.


I find all men agree with the definition in principle. The difference appears when their actions are challenged.


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I will also point out my first response was meant to ruffle feathers and was worded appropriately for that very purpose. It makes for a more colorful conversation on what is a rather ridiculous discussion to begin with. I cant picture a man who wouldn't run away from a woman asking those questions on a first date.


Agreed that most men would be like "whaaaaa....?" But I do know some men who would quickly get into it and be fascinated by the questions. Men like this are really interesting, IMO.

But as I said earlier I personally would not ask these questions. My questions (after passing the trump test) were mostly about sexual compatibility. :laugh:


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you see this exchange as well?
> 
> 
> By that very definition, I am a feminist myself. I have a wife a daughter after all. Of course I want equality for women, but I also want it for men. Today's feminist movement I feel has morphed into something quite different than that of equality. If it were really about that, wouldn't you think more women would stand up for the inequalities on both sides? Or do you truly feel men never receive the shaft in a lot of situations?
> 
> 
> 
> It was the "the only thing a feminist could get are those white knight eunuchs you see marching in the streets with them" comment that was a dead end for me. I think it's really distasteful when men mock other men in this manner. I feel it is just bravado for no reason. Another mans choice of who he wants to be with shouldn't make him a mockery by any man who has a solid sense of self. Name calling just makes one look weak and like they are bitter about something. At that point it's no longer about feminism at all, it's about lack of simple kindness to others.
Click to expand...

Forgive me for having unkind words towards those who only fight for equality for one gender and utterly dismiss the inequalities on the other side. To me, that isn't a fight for equality, it is a fight for preferential treatment. I will always call those people names. If that means a red flag for you, I understand and check please indeed. 

Would it make me a misogynistic dinosaur if as a man I request to pay for dinner? I believe I would owe you as much for such a wonderful conversation.


----------



## marriageontherocks2

I would have no issue dating a woman who truly just believes that men and women are equal and should be treated with respect and be partners (I treat my wife like that and expect my daughter to be treated like that). But that isn't what feminism is today at all, and most people understand that. The word "feminism" itself is ruined, and now too loaded to be taken seriously. 

I also agree that most men who proclaim to be "feminists" are typically manipulative little ****s thinking if they pander enough to women they'll eventually have sex with them.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

NobodySpecial said:


> Buddy400 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Using that definition, most men today are feminist. I don't know of any man who disagrees with that definition.
> 
> 
> 
> I find all men agree with the definition in principle. The difference appears when their actions are challenged.
Click to expand...

The same can be said for women. Lets be fair here now. The thing that I see that happens with men and women the most is women think a good man is hard to find. Men think a good woman is hard to find. I agree with both of those. But women think a good woman is easier to find than a good man, and men think a good man is easier to find than a good woman. 

So we are both in gridlock here aren't we?


----------



## Buddy400

alexm said:


> I wasn't around in the '60's, but I've never seen this kind of division, ever. I imagine it was similar back then, too, but then some of you guys can chime in about that.
> 
> The reality is that this plays in to what the politicians WANT. They want divisiveness and anger and, yes, fighting.
> 
> Regardless of what side you're on - you're doing exactly what they want. They don't WANT you to get along. Keep the masses fighting amongst themselves, and the less they pay attention to what you're doing.
> 
> I blame the internet for this. Everything is public now. Things are "leaked". The curtain has been pulled back, and there's nowhere to hide. That's not a bad thing on the surface, but what's that old saying about how hot dogs are made?
> 
> Gone are the days of good-natured, healthy political discussion. Now, it seems, you can't even keep company with someone who has differing points of view on things.


I was around in the '60's; it's much worse now.

I disagree that it's the people doing what the politicians want.

In fact, I believe that it's exactly the other way around.

When Ben Carson was up for HUD before the appropriate sub-committee, Elizabeth Warren voted to confirm him. Of course, she wasn't a fan but she realized that the administration gets to pick their cabinet and Carson didn't say anything egregiously wrong during his testimony.

Warren's vote was lambasted by her progressive supporters. I think she's unlikely to make that mistake again.

Voters for both parties are insisting that their representatives be intolerant of the opposition.


----------



## samyeagar

Setting aside the specifics, in a more general sense, I see the nature of that list of questions as those of a social activist. I have no interest in being involved with an activist of any nature.


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you see this exchange as well?
> 
> 
> By that very definition, I am a feminist myself. I have a wife a daughter after all. Of course I want equality for women, but I also want it for men. Today's feminist movement I feel has morphed into something quite different than that of equality. If it were really about that, wouldn't you think more women would stand up for the inequalities on both sides? Or do you truly feel men never receive the shaft in a lot of situations?
> 
> 
> 
> It was the "the only thing a feminist could get are those white knight eunuchs you see marching in the streets with them" comment that was a dead end for me. I think it's really distasteful when men mock other men in this manner. I feel it is just bravado for no reason. Another mans choice of who he wants to be with shouldn't make him a mockery by any man who has a solid sense of self. Name calling just makes one look weak and like they are bitter about something. At that point it's no longer about feminism at all, it's about lack of simple kindness to others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Forgive me for having unkind words towards those who only fight for equality for one gender and utterly dismiss the inequalities on the other side. To me, that isn't a fight for equality, it is a fight for preferential treatment. I will always call those people names. If that means a red flag for you, I understand and check please indeed.
> 
> Would it make me a misogynistic dinosaur if as a man I request to pay for dinner? I believe I would owe you as much for such a wonderful conversation.
Click to expand...

I always offer to pay on the first date because I don't see paying for a date as something just men should do. I'm just as happy paying the bill as having you pay it.

Perhaps in this case we would split it and consider it an entertaining evening.


----------



## samyeagar

Buddy400 said:


> I was around in the '60's; it's much worse now.
> 
> I disagree that it's the people doing what the politicians want.
> 
> In fact, I believe that it's exactly the other way around.
> 
> When Ben Carson was up for HUD before the appropriate sub-committee, Elizabeth Warren voted to confirm him. Of course, she wasn't a fan but she realized that the administration gets to pick their cabinet and Carson didn't say anything egregiously wrong during his testimony.
> 
> Warren's vote was lambasted by her progressive supporters. I think she's unlikely to make that mistake again.
> 
> Voters for both parties are insisting that their representatives be intolerant of the opposition.


Looking at the political discourse over the past couple of decades, I see our representatives in government to be a fairly accurate representation of the people who put them there.


----------



## sokillme

NobodySpecial said:


> Like what and where? I think pretty much everyone agrees that men are treated unfairly in family court. I have never once seen a feminist advocate for continued inequality in family court. That said, neither do I see men doing any grass root advocacy for it either. I have many activist engagements that are near and dear to me. Men's rights are not currently on the list since there is no movement to get behind. I am not going to spearhead that charge since I have more immediate concerns affecting my family.
> 
> That is really the only area that I see systemic disadvantage for men. If there are others, I would love to know about them. I am not overjoyed about the execution failures of equal opportunity laws. But that does not seem to have systemic ill affect. So where else do men systemically get shafted?


They have a shorter life expectancy. Die on the job in much greater numbers. More likely to be murdered. So on an so forth. None of this takes class into the equation which is just as important at least in my mind. That's not to say i disagree with your previous assessment I actually do, for instance I am all for quota's and a partial safety net, though with some requirements. 

Finally I don't think Women understand how lonely most men are, I don't think men do either. I think if they did there would be more empathy for them.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

marriageontherocks2 said:


> I would have no issue dating a woman who truly just believes that men and women are equal and should be treated with respect and be partners (I treat my wife like that and expect my daughter to be treated like that). But that isn't what feminism is today at all, and most people understand that. The word "feminism" itself is ruined, and now too loaded to be taken seriously.


Bingo. 



marriageontherocks2 said:


> I also agree that most men who proclaim to be "feminists" are typically manipulative little ****s thinking if they pander enough to women they'll eventually have sex with them.


Oh we're bringing the white knights back up again? I thought we were done with those guys. This is what I'm talking about ladies. Men know what these guys are doing. Just like you ladies can spot a manipulative woman way quicker then us guys can. Your utter disdain for those women is equal to a guys utter contempt of those kinds of men.


----------



## Buddy400

samyeagar said:


> Looking at the political discourse over the past couple of decades, I see our representatives in government to be a fairly accurate representation of the people who put them there.


Of course. Politicians want, above all else, to get elected.

Therefore, it's incumbent upon them to say whatever we want them to say in order to achieve their goal.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> I always offer to pay on the first date because I don't see paying for a date as something just men should do. I'm just as happy paying the bill as having you pay it.
> 
> Perhaps in this case we would split it and consider it an entertaining evening.


Lord I think I'm falling in love here. I agree, the split in this case is perfect. 

You sure you don't want to go on that second date? I sure had fun! You didn't?
How boring would a relationship be if you always agreed with one another after all? 

Tell you what, instead of you giving me your number, ill give you mine. If you're ever bored, give me a call. I'd be happy to toss a little spice in your life


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> This is what I'm talking about ladies. Men know what these guys are doing. Just like you ladies can spot a manipulative woman way quicker then us guys can. Your utter disdain for those women is equal to a guys utter contempt of those kinds of men.


Having known personally a number of "these guys", and known them over a span of years so as to see their actions over time and who they end up partnering with....none of them were just skeevy orbiters who were trying to get laid. All of them were truly following their own ideals (many were into causes above and beyond equality) and all of them ended up with loving women who share their ideals.

One of "these guys" is my adult son. He is kind, loving, manly, fun, funky, enlightened, understands why #metoo is relevant in our times, he is an athlete and also a dancer...and he has no shortage of gorgeous babes clamoring to be with him. He is currently dating just one girl, who is lovely, educated, brilliant, also a dancer and a musician, comes from a wonderful family, bi-racial (he is white), a feminist, and most of all....just loves him to the core.

When other men refuse to see this reality and immediately assume all of "these guys" are just simpering manginas, I can only look away and think "so sorry you don't understand what is really happening here" and move on.


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Lord I think I'm falling in love here. I agree, the split in this case is perfect.
> 
> You sure you don't want to go on that second date? I sure had fun! You didn't?
> How boring would a relationship be if you always agreed with one another after all?
> 
> Tell you what, instead of you giving me your number, ill give you mine. If you're ever bored, give me a call. I'd be happy to toss a little spice in your life


I would take the number and consider calling, if I wanted some spice (and nothing more). :laugh:

You'd still have already had to pass the Trump test though! :grin2:


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Lord I think I'm falling in love here....


And I didn't even get around to talking about my Superbird yet....:wink2:


----------



## EllisRedding

Not to interrupt the FW dating thread but ... :grin2:

Part of the issue with this "list of dating requirements" is the author points it as something every feminist should be asking. First, I don't see a lot of feminism in here, and as Samyeager pointed out, this is more a list of a social activist. Maybe this is the question though, what exactly is feminism these days? Fortunately (or unfortunately) thanks to the internet everyone, even this wackjob, has a voice (heck, on most days TAM lets me post here ). Is this 10 question list really a symbol of what Feminism has become (hopefully the answer is no but who the heck knows these days)?


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lord I think I'm falling in love here. I agree, the split in this case is perfect.
> 
> You sure you don't want to go on that second date? I sure had fun! You didn't?
> How boring would a relationship be if you always agreed with one another after all?
> 
> Tell you what, instead of you giving me your number, ill give you mine. If you're ever bored, give me a call. I'd be happy to toss a little spice in your life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would take the number and consider calling, if I wanted some spice (and nothing more).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You'd still have already had to pass the Trump test though!
Click to expand...

Well did I pass? I don't know that I got a definitive answer on that one or not. Ive never voted for potus, and explained why. 

If I did pass, we can move on to the next topic you seemed interested in, as I think that would be another fun topic to discuss for sure  certainty more fun than Trump or any other potus discussion could ever be.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lord I think I'm falling in love here....
> 
> 
> 
> And I didn't even get around to talking about my Superbird yet....
Click to expand...

Be still my beating heart. If that car is a reflection of you, you just might be my ideal woman. Classic beauty, aggressive, fast, loud, able to hold your own against anyone, and unapologetic for your own sense of style and uniqueness. Lord I hope I passed that Trump test.


----------



## Faithful Wife

EllisRedding said:


> Not to interrupt the FW dating thread but ... :grin2:
> 
> Part of the issue with this "list of dating requirements" is the author points it as something every feminist should be asking. First, I don't see a lot of feminism in here, and as Samyeager pointed out, this is more a list of a social activist. Maybe this is the question though, what exactly is feminism these days? Fortunately (or unfortunately) thanks to the internet everyone, even this wackjob, has a voice (heck, on most days TAM lets me post here ). Is this 10 question list really a symbol of what Feminism has become (hopefully the answer is no but who the heck knows these days)?


Ellis - - I just thought the list was interesting. I'd like to see more lists like this just to be entertained by them and think about the answers. Or even look things up if I didn't know what they meant. In the case of this list, is it the wave of the future? Not sure but I like that new concepts are making their way into the national consciousness (in the US) and are being discussed at all.

Perhaps some TAM guys could put together a list that they would ideally want to ask a woman on the first date, no holds barred, just straight up and to the point. That may be fascinating!! (Will it really be all just about "what kind of bjs are you willing to give"?)


----------



## sandcastle

sokillme said:


> Finally I don't think Women understand how lonely most men are, I don't think men do either. I think if they did there would be more empathy for
> 
> 
> 
> What?


----------



## tropicalbeachiwish

MJJEAN said:


> My dating checklist included things like
> 
> "Do you have a steady job? Does it involve fries?"
> 
> "Do you live with your mother/grandmother?"
> 
> "Do you have a car? Is it in good working order, registered, and insured?"





EllisRedding said:


> So you are one of those gals who expect free fries the rest of your life??? :grin2:


She must really like french fries.


----------



## sokillme

sandcastle said:


> sokillme said:
> 
> 
> 
> Finally I don't think Women understand how lonely most men are, I don't think men do either. I think if they did there would be more empathy for
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> 
> 
> My point is there are a great deal of men suffering. No one cares.
Click to expand...


----------



## EllisRedding

OK, I found an article posted in response to this 10 question list lol.



> 5 Questions Every Man Should Ask On A First Date To Weed Out The Man-Hating Feminists (Matt Walsh)
> 
> 1. Do you think unborn babies are people?
> 
> 2. Have you ever taken steps in your own life to make a sandwich for a man?
> 
> 3. Have you ever used the word “patriarchy” unironically?
> 
> 4. Have you ever called a Disney princess “problematic”?
> 
> 5. Are you viscerally disgusted by the thought of depending on a man for anything?


----------



## Faithful Wife

EllisRedding said:


> OK, I found an article posted in response to this 10 question list lol.


The last question confuses me. Do men *want* women to depend on them, specifically financially? And would they refuse to date a woman who didn't want to depend on him that way? It gets confusing because men who "hate feminists" seem to hate them no matter which way they respond. If we want to be financially supported, we are gold diggers. If we don't, we are femi-nazis who have no family values.

Personally, I would love to be financially supported by a man, even though I don't need to be. I have never been financially supported by anyone other than parents in childhood, so I say, sure bring it on if you have so much wealth that it would be an insult if I didn't let you support me! :laugh:


----------



## marriageontherocks2

sokillme said:


> sandcastle said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is there are a great deal of men suffering. No one cares.
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly why should they? Everyone has their own problems. If some men are sad, lonely, bitter, or angry it's up to them to find the solution to their problems, not the worlds.
> 
> My wife and I divorce? I tell you tomorrow I quit my ulcer inducing executive job and replace it with something easy like a systems administrator, project manager, etc... for a few years and downsize. I use that extra time to dedicate to hobbies and other relationships. Focus on the silver linings.
> 
> If my wife divorces me, in 5 years I'll run my own business, climb Denali, take a 3 month sabbatical to Bali or something. Do all the **** I can't do now while the role of provider and earner has been placed squarely on my shoulders. The last thing I would be doing is pining over someone who doesn't give a **** about me, I'd get on with it and go live life and take advantage of the situation.
Click to expand...


----------



## Faithful Wife

sokillme said:


> sandcastle said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is there are a great deal of men suffering. No one cares.
> 
> 
> 
> Speak for yourself. I care about all human suffering.
> 
> If I could start or join an activist movement that could end suffering for any group, I would do so. I don't see how that would be possible, but I'd be there, for sure. Meanwhile, I and others I know do volunteer, for example with homeless persons (who are mostly male).
> 
> My female veteran cousin has a non profit org that helps suffering (for many different reasons) veterans, (who are mostly male).
> 
> People care about human (of all genders) suffering. Whether we can actually do anything about it is another issue.
> 
> (edit: the above quote is from sokillme, but I don't know how to change it)
Click to expand...


----------



## EllisRedding

Faithful Wife said:


> The last question confuses me. Do men *want* women to depend on them, specifically financially? And would they refuse to date a woman who didn't want to depend on him that way? It gets confusing because men who "hate feminists" seem to hate them no matter which way they respond. If we want to be financially supported, we are gold diggers. If we don't, we are femi-nazis who have no family values.
> 
> Personally, I would love to be financially supported by a man, even though I don't need to be. I have never been financially supported by anyone other than parents in childhood, so I say, sure bring it on if you have so much wealth that it would be an insult if I didn't let you support me! :laugh:


Looking at the list, a couple to expand on from the author:

1. This is clearly a pro/anti abortion question. The author (Matt Walsh) is Pro Life, so there is where the basis of the question is coming from, although I don't see whether you are pro life or pro choice necessarily having to do with feminism

2. Just trying to get a reaction (i.e. if her head explodes at what is supposed to be a joke, run for the hills lol)

5. Your questions specifically FW, here is Walsh's exact quote:



> A man wants a woman who will care for him. He also wants a woman he can provide for and protect. He wants to be depended upon. I never feel more like a man than when I walk in the door of the house I bought, having earned my paycheck for the day, and find my wife and three children inside. I know that I’ve done something for them. I’ve been productive. I’ve brought home the bacon, as they used to say. I've labored for the sake of someone other than myself.
> 
> Again, this is something men innately desire. But they are made to be ashamed of it. They are made, ultimately, to accept a falsely egalitarian marriage and family life, where they serve no unique purpose and have nothing special to do. They pretend to be happy about it, but inside they feel deeply unfulfilled and emasculated. Affairs and divorces are almost certain to follow. A man who feels that he is not needed and respected in his home will be tempted to go out and find someone who will need and respect him. That does not excuse his adultery, of course, but it does explain his motivations.


----------



## Faithful Wife

From Ellis's post: "A man wants a woman who will care for him. He also wants a woman he can provide for and protect. He wants to be depended upon. I never feel more like a man than when I walk in the door of the house I bought, having earned my paycheck for the day, and find my wife and three children inside. I know that I’ve done something for them. I’ve been productive. I’ve brought home the bacon, as they used to say. I've labored for the sake of someone other than myself.

Again, this is something men innately desire. But they are made to be ashamed of it. They are made, ultimately, to accept a falsely egalitarian marriage and family life, where they *serve no unique purpose and have nothing special to do.* They pretend to be happy about it, but inside they feel deeply unfulfilled and emasculated. Affairs and divorces are almost certain to follow. A man who feels that he is not needed and respected in his home will be tempted to go out and find someone who will need and respect him. That does not excuse his adultery, of course, but it does explain his motivations."

Well alrighty then! If someone ever asks me on a date if I would like to financially depend on him if we were to get into a relationship, I'll say yes please!

I'd have to say though the bolded....um, any man I'm with would always have a unique purpose and something special to do. In my pants.


----------



## marriageontherocks2

What man in his right mind would want a woman fully dependent on him financially in today's world? With divorce, adultery, walking away, and other marital abandonment by women so prevalent, you need a grown ass woman as a dependent like a hole in the head.

The world's changed. I earn more than my wife by a good amount, but in a divorce she has a job and education to support herself no problem. If she were a SAHM, I would be ****ed for eternity in a divorce. Not to mention if your only unique value in the family is to be a beast of burden and bring home money, you're selling yourself short.


----------



## samyeagar

In the question:



> 5. Are you viscerally disgusted by the thought of depending on a man for anything?


The word that stood out to me was "viscerally" implying something at a subconscious level, a reflex reaction. Being viscerally disgusted by anything to do with a potential partner is going to be a problem moving forward in a relationship. In any relationship, there will be times where each partner depends upon the other for various things, and if one is disgusted at a visceral level by something their partner innately is, then they really ought not be in a relationship with anyone who possess that innate quality.


----------



## NobodySpecial

TheDudeLebowski said:


> The same can be said for women.


Of course. 
[/quote]
Lets be fair here now. The thing that I see that happens with men and women the most is women think a good man is hard to find. Men think a good woman is hard to find. I agree with both of those. But women think a good woman is easier to find than a good man, and men think a good man is easier to find than a good woman. 

So we are both in gridlock here aren't we? [/QUOTE]

No. Not really. Good men and women don't think that good men and women are hard to find in my experience.


----------



## EllisRedding

marriageontherocks2 said:


> What man in his right mind would want a woman fully dependent on him financially in today's world? With divorce, adultery, walking away, and other marital abandonment by women so prevalent, you need a grown ass woman as a dependent like a hole in the head.
> 
> The world's changed. I earn more than my wife by a good amount, but in a divorce she has a job and education to support herself no problem. If she were a SAHM, I would be ****ed for eternity in a divorce. Not to mention if your only unique value in the family is to be a beast of burden and bring home money, you're selling yourself short.


I have no issues with my W being fully dependent on me financially. She is a SAHM now. Prior to our 3rd kid she did work full time, and if need be, could easily get back in the workforce. Maybe I am old school (I am not really all that old lol) but I love the idea of being able to provide so that my W doesn't have to work if we determine that is the best option for our family currently.


----------



## NobodySpecial

sokillme said:


> sandcastle said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is there are a great deal of men suffering. No one cares.
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of people care. Lots of people care about all kinds of suffering. There are lots and lots. Many of us direct our voices and our activism to suffering caused by systemic and prevalent cultural and legal abuse. That seems right to me.
Click to expand...


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> From Ellis's post: "A man wants a woman who will care for him. He also wants a woman he can provide for and protect. He wants to be depended upon. I never feel more like a man than when I walk in the door of the house I bought, having earned my paycheck for the day, and find my wife and three children inside. I know that I’ve done something for them. I’ve been productive. I’ve brought home the bacon, as they used to say. I've labored for the sake of someone other than myself.
> 
> Again, this is something men innately desire.


I don't think that desire is innate. I think it is cultural. I think there is nothing wrong with that desire. I just don't think it is a whole a lot of men want to be pigeon ed into. They should not have to be.


----------



## NobodySpecial

sokillme said:


> They have a shorter life expectancy. Die on the job in much greater numbers. More likely to be murdered. So on an so forth.


None of these are systemic realities but statistical realities. I am not sure what activism or vocalization would make sense here. Statistically women are more likely to die in childbirth. Black men are more likely to contract type 2 diabetes. I am not sure what activism or vocalization one would put forth for these issues either.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

NobodySpecial said:


> No. Not really. Good men and women don't think that good men and women are hard to find in my experience.


In general terms, absolutely. In a relationship setting, I have to disagree. I think the numbers are overwhelmingly against you in that regard. There might be 1% of women on earth that would put up with me, and likewise 1% of women I would do anything for in a relationship. 

It seems I've already struck out with FW for example. She may not think of me as a bad guy, but I have no shot


----------



## NobodySpecial

sandcastle said:


> sokillme said:
> 
> 
> 
> Finally I don't think Women understand how lonely most men are, I don't think men do either. I think if they did there would be more empathy for
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think "most" men ARE that lonely. I see so many happy people around me in my family, friends, extended family, charitable circles. I just don't see this great manly woe that is self selected on boards such as these.
Click to expand...


----------



## NobodySpecial

TheDudeLebowski said:


> In general terms, absolutely. In a relationship setting, I have to disagree. I think the numbers are overwhelmingly against you in that regard. There might be 1% of women on earth that would put up with me, and likewise 1% of women I would do anything for in a relationship.
> 
> It seems I've already struck out with FW for example. She may not think of me as a bad guy, but I have no shot


There is only a very small handful of people who would be compatible matches with me also. So what? That does not mean those people are not good. Why would you want a "shot" at someone for whom you would not be compatible? That makes no sense.

ETA: What is a relationship "setting"?


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> From Ellis's post: "A man wants a woman who will care for him. He also wants a woman he can provide for and protect. He wants to be depended upon. I never feel more like a man than when I walk in the door of the house I bought, having earned my paycheck for the day, and find my wife and three children inside. I know that I’ve done something for them. I’ve been productive. I’ve brought home the bacon, as they used to say. I've labored for the sake of someone other than myself.
> 
> Again, this is something men innately desire.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think that desire is innate. I think it is cultural. I think there is nothing wrong with that desire. I just don't think it is a whole a lot of men want to be pigeon ed into. They should not have to be.
Click to expand...

I was quoting Ellis who was quoting something on the internet. Just to be clear that I myself am not saying men innately desire to provide.

I don't really know if it is innate for men or not. I have always just assumed that for some men it is, and for some it isn't, and that circumstances could change and make a man shift from one to the other.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> I was quoting Ellis who was quoting something on the internet. Just to be clear that I myself am not saying men innately desire to provide.
> 
> I don't really know if it is innate for men or not. I have always just assumed that for some men it is, and for some it isn't, and that circumstances could change and make a man shift from one to the other.


Definition of innate: "inborn; natural." If inborn, it strikes me as immutable. The only thing that matters to me is that men can choose to be what they want in this regard and not forced into a male stereotype by virtue of the fact that it is not an innate characteristic if maleness like testosterone ... or penises.


----------



## marriageontherocks2

EllisRedding said:


> I have no issues with my W being fully dependent on me financially. She is a SAHM now. Prior to our 3rd kid she did work full time, and if need be, could easily get back in the workforce. Maybe I am old school (I am not really all that old lol) but I love the idea of being able to provide so that my W doesn't have to work if we determine that is the best option for our family currently.


I do get what you're saying. But the risk you're inheriting is enormous. In your situation your wife transfers from an equal partner sharing the financial burden, to essentially a dependent of you in the eyes of the law. In any potential litigation you would be raked over the coals. Between maintenance, child support, medical bills, etc... The monthly nut you would be hit with would be shocking to you I think. It's not a risk I would suggest any young man take on at this point in time.

Hopefully it's never a worry and you're married 80 years.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

NobodySpecial said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> In general terms, absolutely. In a relationship setting, I have to disagree. I think the numbers are overwhelmingly against you in that regard. There might be 1% of women on earth that would put up with me, and likewise 1% of women I would do anything for in a relationship.
> 
> It seems I've already struck out with FW for example. She may not think of me as a bad guy, but I have no shot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is only a very small handful of people who would be compatible matches with me also. So what? That does not mean those people are not good. Why would you want a "shot" at someone for whom you would not be compatible? That makes no sense.
> 
> ETA: What is a relationship "setting"?
Click to expand...

Well that is what im talking about and what is implied when you hear a woman say "a good man is hard to find" they are talking about a compatible partner, not a general statement about men. Have you not heard that saying before? 

Of course I dont want a shot with her, I'm happily married. Just messing around. I don't think you read our back and forth. 

Relationship setting meaning bf/gf husband and wife.


----------



## EllisRedding

marriageontherocks2 said:


> I do get what you're saying. But the risk you're inheriting is enormous. In your situation your wife transfers from an equal partner sharing the financial burden, to essentially a dependent of you in the eyes of the law. In any potential litigation you would be raked over the coals. Between maintenance, child support, medical bills, etc... The monthly nut you would be hit with would be shocking to you I think. It's not a risk I would suggest any young man take on at this point in time.
> 
> Hopefully it's never a worry and you're married 80 years.


No doubt, and I do understand the other side of the equation. The plan is for as the kids get older she will start working again (she actually is doing some small work with the school district). For the time being though, it is worth the risk IMO (her income is not needed and she hated the job she had, so worth taking the risk instead of her continuing to work a job she hated and throwing the kids in someone else's hands to help raise).


----------



## sokillme

NobodySpecial said:


> None of these are systemic realities but statistical realities. I am not sure what activism or vocalization would make sense here. Statistically women are more likely to die in childbirth. Black men are more likely to contract type 2 diabetes. I am not sure what activism or vocalization one would put forth for these issues either.


You are really comparing murder to diabetes?


----------



## sokillme

NobodySpecial said:


> sandcastle said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think "most" men ARE that lonely. I see so many happy people around me in my family, friends, extended family, charitable circles. I just don't see this great manly woe that is self selected on boards such as these.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you don't. No self respecting man is going to let you see that.
> 
> Besides that you don't strike me as very empathetic to Men's suffering. Just saying.
Click to expand...


----------



## NobodySpecial

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Well that is what im talking about and what is implied when you hear a woman say "a good man is hard to find" they are talking about a compatible partner, not a general statement about men. Have you not heard that saying before?


Sure. I think it says more about the woman saying it than it does about "men", and I definitely don't think they mean it as compatibility. I think they are guilty of judging a gender rather than people.



> Of course I dont want a shot with her, I'm happily married. Just messing around. I don't think you read our back and forth.
> 
> Relationship setting meaning bf/gf husband and wife.


Use the words you mean then. A setting is a place.


----------



## NobodySpecial

sokillme said:


> You are really comparing murder to diabetes?


Am I really that hard to understand? No. I am comparing systemic injustice to statistical injustice and reality. I think I said that.


----------



## NobodySpecial

sokillme said:


> NobodySpecial said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you don't. No self respecting man is going to let you see that.
> 
> 
> 
> So I should think my good friends, family and partners are basically lying to me? why? Because I am female? would they tell my husband a different story? They don't.
Click to expand...


----------



## NobodySpecial

sokillme said:


> NobodySpecial said:
> 
> 
> 
> Besides that you don't strike me as very empathetic to Men's suffering. Just saying.
> 
> 
> 
> I am empathetic to anyone's suffering. I am active around systemic suffering. I don't think activism can eradicate all suffering. My husband and male friends and family find me very sympathetic and empathetic. I am generally the first person they call on for support.
Click to expand...


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

NobodySpecial said:


> Sure. I think it says more about the woman saying it than it does about "men", and I definitely don't think they mean it as compatibility. I think they are guilty of judging a gender rather than people.


Ive only ever heard the saying used when talking about finding a compatible partner.




NobodySpecial said:


> Use the words you mean then. A setting is a place.


 surely you knew what I meant. Do you find Drax from guardians of the galaxy a relatable character? What about Data from star trek?


----------



## sokillme

NobodySpecial said:


> sokillme said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I should think my good friends, family and partners are basically lying to me? why? Because I am female? would they tell my husband a different story? They don't.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you don't understand male culture. It has nothing to do with lying it has to do with what society feel is acceptable for men to express. Now of course you are going to make this into a feminist issue (true feminism wants everyone to be able to express whatever they feel), however it has been my experience that in practice women most of all don't like to see men do anything that makes them seem weak.
> 
> I would also say some of the ideas about men by some of the most strident feminist actually promote the idea that men and masculinity is somehow devoid of emotional intelligence and therefor does not promote it. Many Mothers believing this idea do not in fact emphasize emotional training because they are under the mistake belief that men are incapable of emotional intelligence. Which in my mind is one of the main causes of the violence we see in our society. Men are hurting and have no outlet for their pain, as they have never been taught to talk about their pain. There is are very few people who empathize with their pain in general they are taught to suck it up and "be a man". They are cups that are sold with logos on them like men's tears and all that stuff.
> 
> In general society doesn't really give a crap about men as emotional beings. It is actually afraid to think of them that way.
Click to expand...


----------



## sokillme

NobodySpecial said:


> Am I really that hard to understand? No. I am comparing systemic injustice to statistical injustice and reality. I think I said that.


I think most people feel murder is more of an injustice that sickness. In the sense that most see sickness as a passive injustice where violence or murder would be a aggressive one.


----------



## Faithful Wife

sokillme said:


> Many Mothers believing this idea do not in fact emphasize emotional training because they are under the mistake belief that men are incapable of emotional intelligence. Which in my mind is one of the main causes of the violence we see in our society.


Hmmm...this is confusing, too.

See, we are told in other literature and by other men who feel men are getting a raw deal in this society, that mothers OVER emphasize emotional training and that's what makes Nice Guys. Therefore, it is women's fault that men are disadvantaged by being made into non-manly men who aren't stepping into their grandfather's shoes, "back when everything was right in the world".

But here you are saying that mothers do NOT emphasize emotional training, and therefore mens tendency to be violent is womens fault.

Seems to be our fault no matter what (for some men). Nice.


----------



## Mr. Nail

If you just lead with "i didn't vote for Clinton" that should fix it. I'm certainly glad that I'm not even in the dating game. I had to look up several of the questions. Some I had to read through a few times just to understand them. I would like to say that on question #10 I have not had much trouble having trust relationships with disabled persons. (except my brother of course. I trust that he believes what he tells me, that doesn't mean it is factual.) it is of course important to note when asked about allyship that allyship is specifically not self-defined, therefore you cannot claim any particular allyship.


----------



## NobodySpecial

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Ive only ever heard the saying used when talking about finding a compatible partner.


Different experiences I guess. I have only heard it to lament what horrid people men were. 
<shrug>



> surely you knew what I meant.


No, I didn't. That is why I asked! Nothing more sinister than that!


> Do you find Drax from guardians of the galaxy a relatable character? What about Data from star trek?


I love Drax!


----------



## NobodySpecial

sokillme said:


> I think most people feel murder is more of an injustice that sickness. In the sense that most see sickness as a passive injustice where violence or murder would be a aggressive one.


Ok. I don't see how that changes my PoV. Maybe it is not supposed to?


----------



## Personal

Faithful Wife said:


> Seems to be our fault no matter what (for some men). Nice.


Now you're getting it. :wink2:


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

NobodySpecial said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ive only ever heard the saying used when talking about finding a compatible partner.
> 
> 
> 
> Different experiences I guess. I have only heard it to lament what horrid people men were.
> <shrug>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> surely you knew what I meant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, I didn't. That is why I asked! Nothing more sinister than that!
> 
> 
> 
> Do you find Drax from guardians of the galaxy a relatable character? What about Data from star trek?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I love Drax!
Click to expand...

Drax is great. No harm no foul. I figured you were cracking a joke at my expense. Which I have nothing against btw. Feel free to hit me with some zingers. I enjoy a good roast. I'm quite the ish talker myself.


----------



## uhtred

People want all sorts of different things.

There are couples who are happy with the husband working, the wife staying at home and raising kids. As long as both like that situation, there is nothing wrong with it. 

There are couples where both work, or where only the wife works and the husband raises the kids. 

As long as its overall fair, and both agree, then its fine in my book. My only concern is that the *options* be open to people who want them. 

Yes there is a risk - but there is some risk in any of these situations. 





marriageontherocks2 said:


> What man in his right mind would want a woman fully dependent on him financially in today's world? With divorce, adultery, walking away, and other marital abandonment by women so prevalent, you need a grown ass woman as a dependent like a hole in the head.
> 
> The world's changed. I earn more than my wife by a good amount, but in a divorce she has a job and education to support herself no problem. If she were a SAHM, I would be ****ed for eternity in a divorce. Not to mention if your only unique value in the family is to be a beast of burden and bring home money, you're selling yourself short.


----------



## Red Sonja

EllisRedding said:


> You could probably find easily with a Google search of the thread title (that is the actual title from one of the articles quoting). I prefer not to direct any more traffic then necessary to this nutjob  She is also the person who posted "also white people are evil. Whiteness is evil."


I found her. Of course, the feminist rags she writes for don't allow comments.  No surprise there. However one of the rags has a Facebook page with that article posted along with other "special snowflake" crap ... I had some fun there.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> Well alrighty then! If someone ever asks me on a date if I would like to financially depend on him if we were to get into a relationship, I'll say yes please!
> 
> I'd have to say though the bolded....um, any man I'm with would always have a unique purpose and something special to do. In my pants.


Ill be your sugar daddy. So long as you know we will be living a very modest lifestyle. Tell me, how do you feel about tent camping?


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Ill be your sugar daddy. So long as you know we will be living a very modest lifestyle. Tell me, how do you feel about tent camping?


Dang I was afraid that's what this "innate" thing meant....we gonna live in a cave literally, aren't we? sigh....:crying:

:laugh::laugh:


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ill be your sugar daddy. So long as you know we will be living a very modest lifestyle. Tell me, how do you feel about tent camping?
> 
> 
> 
> Dang I was afraid that's what this "innate" thing meant....we gonna live in a cave literally, aren't we? sigh....
Click to expand...

Oh no, I'm an avid outdoorsman. I have a whole slew of outdoors gear. 3 season tents, 4 season tents. I have a canvas hot tent with wood stove for those cold winter months. I can teach you all about wild edibles and how to set snares and deadfall traps. Ill show you friction fire techniques, and how to make cordage. We would only live out of a tent long enough for me to get a more permanent shelter built. Ill even build you a privy, because you're that special to me.


----------



## Faithful Wife

You're just as fun as the Real Dude Lebowski!! Only less kidnapping and stolen rugs!


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> You're just as fun as the Real Dude Lebowski!! Only less kidnapping and stolen rugs!


Please don't bring up my rug. Its still painful to think about. I mean it really tied the room together.


----------



## uhtred

I suspect few of our ancestors actually lived in caves - caves are pretty rare. They are really good at preserving fossils, so they give a very biased record of how early man lived.

I remember being surprised when I went to Olduvai gorge and discovering that it wasn't a gorge when humans lived there, it was flat grasslands before a huge volcanic eruption, then a million years of erosion..

OTOH some caves are pretty nice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Crystals





Faithful Wife said:


> Dang I was afraid that's what this "innate" thing meant....we gonna live in a cave literally, aren't we? sigh....:crying:
> 
> :laugh::laugh:


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> I suspect few of our ancestors actually lived in caves - caves are pretty rare. They are really good at preserving fossils, so they give a very biased record of how early man lived.
> 
> I remember being surprised when I went to Olduvai gorge and discovering that it wasn't a gorge when humans lived there, it was flat grasslands before a huge volcanic eruption, then a million years of erosion..
> 
> OTOH some caves are pretty nice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Crystals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dang I was afraid that's what this "innate" thing meant....we gonna live in a cave literally, aren't we? sigh....
Click to expand...

Would prehistoric humans have made dens or something? I assume so since animals do.

Hey Grokette, come check out my swinging den! I have a very minimalist style and a comfy bed of plants and sticks and dirt for us to populate the planet from.


----------



## ConanHub

Do people really talk like this on first dates?

I thought it was some weird outlier.

It just seems to be contrary to what first dates are about?

I'm for having fun and getting to know someone a little better.

Maybe find out a little background but that string of questions on a first date seems too calculating to be having any fun.

I can see the importance of a couple of them but maybe wait until the second or third date?

If I'm interested enough to date someone, I'm probably going to have a very good idea about them anyway.

I guess if folks are only internet dating or blind dates, maybe that list would come into play?


----------



## uhtred

Probably getting too far off topic, but

I'd guess simple shelters - branches covered with skins for example. I think there were some very early whalebone huts. 

I'm sure that when its cold and raining, that slightly leaky, smelly, vermin infested hut will seem like paradise since the alternative is dying of hypothermia. 

I can't express how much I appreciate civilization.... Which circles around to interesting questions like the original ones: when a technologically advanced civilization contacts an technologically primitive one, should the the advanced civilization attempt to "educate" the other?







Faithful Wife said:


> Would prehistoric humans have made dens or something? I assume so since animals do.
> 
> Hey Grokette, come check out my swinging den! I have a very minimalist style and a comfy bed of plants and sticks and dirt for us to populate the planet from.


----------



## Faithful Wife

ConanHub said:


> Do people really talk like this on first dates?
> 
> I thought it was some weird outlier.
> 
> It just seems to be contrary to what first dates are about?
> 
> I'm for having fun and getting to know someone a little better.
> 
> Maybe find out a little background but that string of questions on a first date seems too calculating to be having any fun.
> 
> I can see the importance of a couple of them but maybe wait until the second or third date?
> 
> If I'm interested enough to date someone, I'm probably going to have a very good idea about them anyway.
> 
> I guess if folks are only internet dating or blind dates, maybe that list would come into play?


This particular list...very doubtful women would be asking it word for word. But in certain dating circles, sure maybe. Just as in certain other dating circles people might ask other questions. If it's important to you to not date people who aren't your match in any certain subject, then many questions should be asked on early dates. For other people who just want to find out if there's chemistry, they may not have any preconceived questions and just roll with how things go. Some people are mainly dating to have sex, and in those cases some may not care what another's values (other than sexual) are at all. 

Example a female I know, very hot fit and athletic. She has certain physical standards and healthy lifestyle standards that a man must meet before she will go on a second date with him. She would most likely be talking about sports and fitness on first dates, and may even jokingly ask for an arm wrestle to "test him out" she would tell him. Since she is incredibly strong but she isn't hulking huge at first glance, most men delightfully accept her challenge, and then beat her....but far less easily than they anticipated! Most step back like "daaaaaamn girl!" with respect and lust in their eyes (keeping in mind the kind of guy she dates is a gym enthusiast). 

She would eventually delve into light questions about politics or ideals, but not to the degree I and others would. Her compatibility factors are based on the fitness part first...so that's where her questions would travel.


----------



## sokillme

Faithful Wife said:


> Hmmm...this is confusing, too.
> 
> See, we are told in other literature and by other men who feel men are getting a raw deal in this society, that mothers OVER emphasize emotional training and that's what makes Nice Guys. Therefore, it is women's fault that men are disadvantaged by being made into non-manly men who aren't stepping into their grandfather's shoes, "back when everything was right in the world".
> 
> But here you are saying that mothers do NOT emphasize emotional training, and therefore mens tendency to be violent is womens fault.
> 
> Seems to be our fault no matter what (for some men). Nice.



I would say it's both Mothers and Fathers. I don't buy the Red pill bull**** by the way I think all kids should be taught to be emotionally intelligent. I do feel that there are quite a lot of young men who are overly emotional now a days and yes some who are nice guys, that doesn't make them emotional intelligent however. My over all problem is this idea that somehow women are more emotionally intelligent then men by default. The idea itself is sexiest and leaves both genders at a disadvantage. There are lots of girls who are not particularly emotionally intelligent and who are never trained because the assumption is that this is a skill that comes naturally to them. It doesn't. Boys are not trained because the thinking is they are not capable. Both ideas are wrong.

Overall I see a lot of emphasis in emotional indulgence but not a lot of training in emotional disciple. That is if there is training at all. I am not necessarily saying that this is all the fault of feminism. I actually am a fan of 2nd wave feminism in a lot of ways. Third wave feminism however is reactionary and toxic.

Whatever you ism is the biggest problem is the lack of empathy for the other side.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> This particular list...very doubtful women would be asking it word for word. But in certain dating circles, sure maybe.


I've heard these are the exact questions asked in dating circles at UC Berkeley.



Faithful Wife said:


> Some people are mainly dating to have sex, and in those cases some may not care what another's values (other than sexual) are at all.


Well now, lets make a 10 questions list for this please. I can start, but I always make sure the ladies finish first


----------



## MrsHolland

Saying this is how all woman and Feminist behave and think would be the same as saying that all men follow the red pill way of thinking.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

MrsHolland said:


> Saying this is how all woman and Feminist behave and think would be the same as saying that all men follow the red pill way of thinking.


Who is saying that? 

Btw, I can't help but think of a particular person when I see your name. You aren't Mrs Dutch Oven are you?


----------



## 269370

Faithful Wife said:


> I was quoting Ellis who was quoting something on the internet. Just to be clear that I myself am not saying men innately desire to provide.
> 
> I don't really know if it is innate for men or not. I have always just assumed that for some men it is, and for some it isn't, and that circumstances could change and make a man shift from one to the other.




I can say with certainty that it is innate for me to provide. All the wealth I accumulated over the years only matters to me as long as it is spent on family.
When I travel (for business, which is about half the time), I’m typically frugal how I spend. When it comes to family things, no expense is typically spared.
This confuses me (among other things) because it is not something I’m doing consciously: it just happens. It doesn’t feel ‘right’ to spend on myself. For example I will be more likely to buy a sandwich that is 30p cheaper for lunch for myself. This is completely insane considering I spend a few thousand per day when we go on holidays.

I have no idea how I would feel if i had to rely on my spouse to support me. I was financially independent since the age of 14-15 with no family money whatsoever. But I guess anything is possible and people adjust/adapt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Drax is great. No harm no foul. *I figured you were cracking a joke at my expense*. Which I have nothing against btw. Feel free to hit me with some zingers. I enjoy a good roast. I'm quite the ish talker myself.


Oh hell no. My style of communication is regularly mistaken for combative. When I ask questions with a genuine desire to understand, I am mistaken for making a point or challenge. Ah well. I do love Drax. Data is... well... dated.


----------



## Fozzy

I may have missed it--what is an "intersectional" feminist?


----------



## Yag-Kosha

Faithful Wife said:


> ...and may even jokingly ask for an arm wrestle to "test him out" she would tell him


That is so awesome. For me, that's an instant turn on.




Fozzy said:


> I may have missed it--what is an "intersectional" feminist?


A feminist who holds up signs at intersections maybe?


----------



## EllisRedding

Fozzy said:


> I may have missed it--what is an "intersectional" feminist?


I already answered a few pages back ...



EllisRedding said:


> I assumed it is what happens when feminist drivers all come to an intersection and need to decide who has the right of way :grin2:


----------



## Buddy400

sokillme said:


> Whatever you ism is the biggest problem is the lack of empathy for the other side.


True


----------



## samyeagar

Fozzy said:


> I may have missed it--what is an "intersectional" feminist?


https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Intersectional Feminism


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

samyeagar said:


> Fozzy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I may have missed it--what is an "intersectional" feminist?
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Intersectional Feminism
Click to expand...

Lol at the first example. "Stay up front my strong sister" hahaha


----------



## 269370

These questions are so weird...I presume they meant to make no sense but people still answer them?
Never mind.

1. Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?

I really don't like it when questions are written so clumsily. It's not 'Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?' it should be: Do you believe that Black Lives Matter matter?
otherwise it's a bit racist to ask if black lives matter! 

2. What are your thoughts on gender and sexual orientation?

What's good for the goose, is good for the gender. It's nice for people to have good orientation, sexually or otherwise.

3. How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?

With a screwdriver. I have a very strong drive. To screw.

4. What are your thoughts on sex work?

If it works, why no sex?

5. Are you a supporter of the BDS movement?

Again not clear: is it the Palestinian/Israeli thing or a bondage thing? Or a combination of both?

6. What is your understanding of settler colonialism and indigenous rights?

I don't really understand it. But I am all for it. As well as totally against it. Depends which one.

7. Do you think capitalism is exploitative?

Yes, and I know how to exploit it.

8. Can any human be illegal?

Clearly it seems that some can. Some are behind bars. Or are you asking about my own opinion?

9. Do you support Muslim Americans and non-Muslim people from Islamic countries?

in what way?

10. Does your allyship include disabled folks?

WTF is 'allyship'.


----------



## NobodySpecial

inmyprime said:


> These questions are so weird...I presume they meant to make no sense but people still answer them?
> Never mind.
> 
> 1. Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?
> 
> I really don't like it when questions are written so clumsily. It's not 'Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?' it should be: Do you believe that Black Lives Matter matter?
> otherwise it's a bit racist to ask if black lives matter!
> 
> 2. What are your thoughts on gender and sexual orientation?
> 
> What's good for the goose, is good for the gender. It's nice for people to have good orientation, sexually or otherwise.
> 
> 3. How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?
> 
> With a screwdriver. I have a very strong drive. To screw.
> 
> 4. What are your thoughts on sex work?
> 
> If it works, why no sex?
> 
> 5. Are you a supporter of the BDS movement?
> 
> Again not clear: is it the Palestinian/Israeli thing or a bondage thing? Or a combination of both?
> 
> 6. What is your understanding of settler colonialism and indigenous rights?
> 
> I don't really understand it. But I am all for it. As well as totally against it. Depends which one.
> 
> 7. Do you think capitalism is exploitative?
> 
> Yes, and I know how to exploit it.
> 
> 8. Can any human be illegal?
> 
> Clearly it seems that some can. Some are behind bars. Or are you asking about my own opinion?
> 
> 9. Do you support Muslim Americans and non-Muslim people from Islamic countries?
> 
> in what way?
> 
> 10. Does your allyship include disabled folks?
> 
> WTF is 'allyship'.


OMG OMG. Literally laughed out loud.


----------



## Laurentium

Faithful Wife said:


> ... If it's important to you to not date people who aren't your match in any certain subject, then many questions should be asked on early dates.
> ...Some people are mainly dating to have sex, and in those cases some may not care what another's values (other than sexual) are at all.


Well sure, but the things in that list didn't seem to me like "values" at all, more like shibboleths. 

Values to me would be things like Compassion, fairness, honesty, kindness, success, creativity, peace, safety, or loyalty. They are kind of "eternal" things. Those are not all "givens" for everyone, and some of them can conflict with others.

Whereas for me, on questions like "Trump, for or against" or "Israel or Palestine" these are the questions of the moment - being against (or for) Trump is not a "value", it's a result of what your values are and what you understand of the current situation. One's opinion on some of those ten questions could change tomorrow when new information came out or the situation changed. I don't call those values, I call them opinions. 

Otherwise, if someone thinks that being on one side of the above questions is a "value", then they descend into the pit of thinking that those that disagree with them must have bad (or no) values - people that disagree with them, in short, are bad or mad. Which is the kind of binary-thinking intolerance of difference that an "intersectional feminist" ought to be _against_. Choose someone with good _values_, yes, but not just someone who happens to be in your current opinion-bubble - otherwise what's going to happen in a few years, when the questions of the moment have changed, and your date now disagrees with you about one of them? Does that make it time to dump them?


----------



## 269370

RandomDude said:


> Makes me wonder what if guys start interrogating women on their first dates too, how would that fly?


I am afraid this would most likely include only one question:

What do you think about BJs?

There is no wrong answer btw. Making a woman _think_ about a BJ is mission accomplished already


----------



## 269370

NobodySpecial said:


> I don't think "most" men ARE that lonely. I see so many happy people around me in my family, friends, extended family, charitable circles. I just don't see this great manly woe that is self selected on boards such as these.


I suspect it's actually a lot to do with the fact that not many men talk openly about their ****. They would prefer anonymity.
Being a man is tough these days  (not something I would ever say in public though!)


----------



## Faithful Wife

Laurentium said:


> Well sure, but the things in that list didn't seem to me like "values" at all, more like shibboleths.
> 
> Values to me would be things like Compassion, fairness, honesty, kindness, success, creativity, peace, safety, or loyalty. They are kind of "eternal" things. Those are not all "givens" for everyone, and some of them can conflict with others.
> 
> Whereas for me, on questions like "Trump, for or against" or "Israel or Palestine" these are the questions of the moment - being against (or for) Trump is not a "value", it's a result of what your values are and what you understand of the current situation. One's opinion on some of those ten questions could change tomorrow when new information came out or the situation changed. I don't call those values, I call them opinions.
> 
> Otherwise, if someone thinks that being on one side of the above questions is a "value", then they descend into the pit of thinking that those that disagree with them must have bad (or no) values - people that disagree with them, in short, are bad or mad. Which is the kind of binary-thinking intolerance of difference that an "intersectional feminist" ought to be _against_. Choose someone with good _values_, yes, but not just someone who happens to be in your current opinion-bubble - otherwise what's going to happen in a few years, when the questions of the moment have changed, and your date now disagrees with you about one of them? Does that make it time to dump them?


values 2: a person's principles or standards of behavior; *one's judgment of what is important in life*.
"they internalize their parents' rules and values"
synonyms:	principles, ethics, moral code, morals, standards, code of behavior
"society's values are passed on to us as children"

I would disagree that compassion, fairness, honesty, etc are values. To me, those are attributes or characteristics. 

Or if a person says their values include fairness and honesty, etc, then they are not necessarily saying they are fair and honest, just that they value those qualities (usually in others).

A person may BE fair and honest, but not actually value fairness and honesty. Typically they would both be it and value it, but because they are different things, a person could be one and not the other. You could be fair and honest and simply never really think about why you are that way and hold no judgement about people who are not that way. So you could have the attribute without the value.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> values 2: a person's principles or standards of behavior; *one's judgment of what is important in life*.
> "they internalize their parents' rules and values"
> synonyms:	principles, ethics, moral code, morals, standards, code of behavior
> "society's values are passed on to us as children"
> 
> I would disagree that compassion, fairness, honesty, etc are values. To me, those are attributes or characteristics.
> 
> Or if a person says their values include fairness and honesty, etc, then they are not necessarily saying they are fair and honest, just that they value those qualities (usually in others).


Is it nit picky to say that I would call them hypocrites?


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> values 2: a person's principles or standards of behavior; *one's judgment of what is important in life*.
> "they internalize their parents' rules and values"
> synonyms:	principles, ethics, moral code, morals, standards, code of behavior
> "society's values are passed on to us as children"
> 
> I would disagree that compassion, fairness, honesty, etc are values. To me, those are attributes or characteristics.
> 
> Or if a person says their values include fairness and honesty, etc, then they are not necessarily saying they are fair and honest, just that they value those qualities (usually in others).
> 
> 
> 
> Is it nit picky to say that I would call them hypocrites?
Click to expand...

Lots of people are definitely hypocrites.


----------

