Why do feminists accuse house duties as "being domesticated" , but conveniently think of men as ATM ?

[Sat1]

On 6/29/2020 at 11:11 PM, jkvlondon said:

Oh Ajeet,

still complaining about the Mrs ? how is the new mother?btw plenty of females do work to help with family costs  AS WELL AS doing the 'domestic' stuff , this is the modern necessity in the West because of high cost of living . But also Men don't want to hold onto old stereotyped roles and often WANT to help with the kids , help them with schoolwork, feed them, even change nappies as part and parcel of the whole 'this is my family' scenario . Not everyone wants to lord over the Other half . Remember two halves makes a whole future.

Men and women are Equal. Just as Races are Equal and Humans are Equal

[Sat1]

On 6/30/2020 at 2:05 PM, MisterrSingh said:

The studies and anecdotal evidence from other sources would suggest otherwise.

In our seemingly humble little community, a young woman (with her best years ahead of her) earning £45,000 would never deign to lower herself by agreeing to marry a male making "only" £35,000. Women on £100k would only ever marry a partner with a lower salary out of absolute desperation for obvious ticking-clock related reasons. And those aren't even the types who are content to embrace the spinster life. 

No. Like I said, I’ve known plenty of women on high salaries considering and marrying men in a lower wage. One woman was married to a rich man who treated her like dirt and now considers men on a way lower wage than her for marriage. 
 

[Sat1]

On 6/30/2020 at 3:47 PM, AjeetSingh2019 said:

Males are always considered as disposables.

No, you have just had negative experiences probably. It’s not true for all males.

[MisterrSingh]

3 minutes ago, Sat1 said:

No. Like I said, I’ve known plenty of women on high salaries considering and marrying men in a lower wage. One woman was married to a rich man who treated her like dirt and now considers men on a way lower wage than her for marriage. 
 

Lol, exactly what I said: she only lowered her standards once she'd experienced hardship. So, out of desperation not to be left on the shelf she stumped for a guy who made less than her. Had she not been treated poorly and the first relationship hadn't gone sour, she would never argue for dating or marrying anyone earning less than her. 

[Sat1]

5 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Lol, exactly what I said: she only lowered her standards once she'd experienced hardship. So, out of desperation not to be left on the shelf she stumped for a guy who made less than her. Had she not been treated poorly and the first relationship hadn't gone sour, she would never argue for dating or marrying anyone earning less than her. 

No. You’re twisting my post, she was one example. Plenty of high salaried women I have known have gone for men at times with literally hardly any money. Because they recognize the men to be Human Beings, and that your work, job and money, doesn’t make your soul. 
 

Guru Nanak often times had very little money. And good souls didn’t treat him like dirt and discard him for that. Love is blind and knows no limit, plenty of women falling in love with/ marrying men with not much, for its the soul that matters, not what you have. Not every woman is as materialistic as you make out, Just as every man is not as bad as some may make out. 
 

[MisterrSingh]

2 minutes ago, Sat1 said:

No. You’re twisting my post, she was one example. Plenty of high salaried women I have known have gone for men at times with literally hardly any money. Because they recognize the men to be Human Beings, and that your work, job and money, doesn’t make your soul. 
 

Guru Nanak often times had very little money. And good souls didn’t treat him like dirt and discard him for that. Love is blind and knows no limit, plenty of women falling in love with/ marrying men with not much, for its the soul that matters, not what you have. Not every woman is as materialistic as you make out, Just as every man is not as bad as some may make out. 
 

No, I'm not. Your anecdotal accounts are about as valid as mine, yet the wider assessment on this subject view minus any emotional prejudice you possess contradicts your view on this issue.

And people aren't Guru Nanak so don't even go there with that bukwaas.

[Sat1]

10 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

No, I'm not. Your anecdotal accounts are about as valid as mine, yet the wider assessment on this subject view minus any emotional prejudice you possess contradicts your view on this issue.

And people aren't Guru Nanak so don't even go there with that bukwaas.

Wow, what a civilized response. There are good souls out there, you are assuming that all women are materialistic monsters, and as a woman I am telling you that’s not true. I myself don’t care how much money a man has, as long as he is nice, kind and treats me well etc and we click properly. 
 

Grow up, open your mind and stop putting women into a box. Men and women are Equal. Guru Nanak called himself a lowly worm, and a sinner. He knew that all beings are Equal, that was his message, Humility , that no one is higher or lower. Do you think his sister cared about how much money a man has, or his female bhagats. Do you think that Mai Bhago cared, or any other good, unmaterialistic female in the world today cares. 
 

 

 

[MisterrSingh]

28 minutes ago, Sat1 said:

Wow, what a civilized response. There are good souls out there, you are assuming that all women are materialistic monsters, and as a woman I am telling you that’s not true. I myself don’t care how much money a man has, as long as he is nice, kind and treats me well etc and we click properly. 

Grow up, open your mind and stop putting women into a box. Men and women are Equal. Guru Nanak called himself a lowly worm, and a sinner. He knew that all beings are Equal, that was his message, Humility , that no one is higher or lower. Do you think his sister cared about how much money a man has, or his female bhagats. Do you think that Mai Bhago cared, or any other good, unmaterialistic female in the world today cares. 

I'm not putting anybody into categories. I'm acknowledging a reality in certain cases. You're arguing those exceptions DON'T exist at all. You're denying truths because they make you uncomfortable, and shine a light on certain issues you don't want to see illuminated. Again, where's Bibi Nanaki come from in this scenario? And Mai Bhago? Were they the norm or the exception to the rule? Am I, as a normal guy without divine heritage, making my way in the world, supposed to believe every woman is a latent Bibi Nanaki or Mai Bhago, and therefore worthy of the same treatment? Would I treat every male as if they were Bhai Gurdas or Baba Bidhi Chand? You're hilarious.

[learningkaur]

On 6/29/2020 at 8:34 AM, AjeetSingh2019 said:

Isn't this hypocrisy ?

no wonder today's punjabi and sikh females are so spoiled . Feminists spoil everything

Aren't you the homosexual one married to a woman? I think a poor woman being married to a man who prefers men is worse than a woman looking for a man who can financially look after her...

Most of the time women who are with someone who is financially comfortable means that the woman can pick up her kids and do their homework with them instead of them sitting in after school club every day.

There are plenty of women who are the breadwinners, I was when I met my husband! We reversed roles when we had kids! It’s called partnership.

[learningkaur]

On 6/30/2020 at 3:47 PM, AjeetSingh2019 said:

Males are always considered as disposables. When I was in punjab 3 yrs back to attend a cousin's wedding, little did I know my parents were conjuring to find a rishta for me as well. We went to a historical gurudwara for darshan , and there the girl was supposed to be shown to me. Gurudwara complex was huge and had a beautiful garden outside, so we sat there , and the girl was never shown. Only her  obviously desperate and anxious parents , and his brother who couldn't think twice about their proposal even when I told them my salary was less. 

And all of this , to get me agreed even when I haven't seen either a girl or her pic even (if I correctly remember) , I am supposed to give my assent just because I was sitting in the premises of a gurudwara. And then the girl's side had a granthi friend tried to blackmail me when I insisted on seeing the girl, with "See you're sitting in sharan of chhevi patshahi, so if you say "no" now the guru is watching ... ) 

When the girl was shown, she was a depressed lot , apparently the girls side were hiding either a previously failed marriage or something else I am not sure of . 

But since this was a surprise bomb by my parents on me to get hitched, I politely refused to the girl's family . I was furious the rest of the day for this apparent shock (esp considering my orientation history lol) . Later that night , in my nanake's house , I remember crying on the bed in front of my parents , and shrieking on them once again outside the house for reason of my refusal (they knew ! ) 

But merciful god has a very strange way of working, almost 1 year later on the same bed, in the same room I had my first night 

First night of what?