You must sign in to send 79 a message
fox news opinion section: bringing you the very best in idiots
the "question" posed in this piece is whether women need husbands. the answer it gives is "yes, definitely, because women want X and men want Y".
i won't insult the women here by even bothering to ask whether something like this:
‘Round and ’round we go, asking how women can gain more control over their lives. How can they spend more time with their children? How can they make time for exercise or even a social life? How can they keep their houses in order and still have time to cook? The answer is obvious.
Lean on your husband.
is reasonable. unless anyone has any objections, i'd kinda like to skip the whole outcry over whether dear Vanessa Gathers has two neurons to bump together (or just lacks anything resembling empathy or compassion), and even the damage this article might cause by enabling men (and some women) to justify being assholes.
instead, there's some stuff in here about men that really ticked me off (well, i was already ticked off, so i didn't really notice at first, but anyway...)
Unlike women, a man’s identity is inextricably linked to his paycheck. That’s how most men feel a sense of purpose.
i believe it was xkcd which put my basic response into words quite well: "FUCK. THAT. SHIT." if my sense of purpose is ever "inextricably linked to [my] paycheck", please shoot me. sure, it's important to me - because a paycheck enables me to pursue my purpose.....it is not my purpose in itself.
here's another bit:
So why not let husbands bring home the bulk of the bacon so women can have the balanced lives they seek? There’s no way to be a wife, a mother and a full-time employee and still create balance. But you can have balance by depending on a husband who works full-time and year-round.
apparently, as a male i am not supposed to desire that nice, balanced trifecta either: full time employee, husband, and father.
feminism has definitely benefited men as well, since we are no longer required to be this absent money-making entity who is incapable of being an involved father because, well, it's not as important as the next promotion.
woah, hey, does samp not work anymore?
emphasis. i use it instead of i, because i'm weird
blah blah blah
etc. see link.