I know, rigsy. On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 3:22 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> I couldn't link to this, gabby. Well, I think I am part of a dinosaur > group of women who did not freak out being more traditional though > wives/mothers always worked, one could say. It changed as a model > during the woman's movement and a good deal was based on not getting > dumped with no dough after x number of years of marriage. Some- like > Betty Friedan- were upset they had given up their professional chances > by being a wife and mother. There were other ways I saw women protect > themselves via part-time work and second mortgages, debt and constant > remodeling so the women were more realistic about a man's loyalty. > Some professional women quit work during periods of having and raising > children- others hired nannies or took advantage of school programs to > babysit their children. Some women just hate being home and faint > without something on the calendar everyday. It is also pretty much > impossible to live on one salary anymore. So there are really a > multitude of reasons and situations why marriage has changed and much > is positive though often women carry a dual role anyway. My > neighborhood has seen the whole cycle from live-in help to stay-at- > home moms to professional wives. > > On Jan 6, 4:33 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > Interesting that you slide back to the donnadonne time instead of > > answering my present questions. That's vam's technique also. Next time > > you might want to go even further back and you'll find gabbydott > > before she got banned for lifetime from this group. > > > > Now, I followed rigsey's advise and waited a good 24 hours before > > replying. The adding and the subtraction business that I criticize in > > regards of relational matters have not disappeared in the meantime. > > However, this train-your-partner-to-make-yourself-a-better-American- > > wife that I found in this NYTimes article (http://www.nytimes.com/ > > 2006/06/25/fashion/25love.html) to me still is the logical predecessor > > for this sculpture-your-life by self-expansion. What had been > > subtracted in the shadow world by refusal of emotional mirroring and > > verbalization is now elsewhere and here am I expanding further... If > > this is the logic, Molly, then this would help me understand American > > problems better. That's why I asked. > > > > On 4 Jan., 12:26, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > true to form, Donna, finding argument a lesson in meaningful > > > dialogue... > > > > > On Jan 4, 5:50 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Molly, in order to enter a meaningful dialogue with Rigsy, it might > be worth > > > > acknowledging that the thesis of this article ( > http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/weekinreview/02parkerpope.html) might > lie > > > > in what is described there as "a process called "self-expansion."" > Can you > > > > see that there would be a connection to her Facebook rant then? Or > would > > > > this be a too unAmerican approach for it doesn't keep the arguments > clearly > > > > apart? > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > The thesis the article: “If your partner is helping you become a > > > > > better person, you become happier and more satisfied in the > > > > > relationship.” I fail to see a problem with that. > > > > > > > On Jan 3, 9:29 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > You are kidding! I think Facebook is another pathetic example of > our > > > > > > psychotic world! The idea is not new- it used to be hawked as the > > > > > > Communion of Souls by the Catholics or the old popularity > contest. > > > > > > It's like Lonely Hearts with "x" number of buddies in similar > straits > > > > > > or collecting friends like Green Stamps- in the past- to redeem > for a > > > > > > catalog item. How ephemeral life has become- even our finances > are > > > > > > blithe spirits! Well, Goldman Sachs has just plunked down some > dough > > > > > > for Facebook which is a great indication of its future demise! > Have > > > > > > you considered this constant agitation via tech and media will > wear > > > > > > out the human brain and make interpersonal/real body encounters > > > > > > obsolete? The NYTimes is also hawking the "Me marriage" as the > new > > > > > > paradigm so life gets goofier everyday,imho. Anyway, read some of > the > > > > > > great comments about GS via the NYTimes- at least I feel I have > my > > > > > > head screwed on properly! :-) > > > > > > > > On Jan 3, 4:11 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > To my friend minds eye > > > > > > > I decided to get rid or the people on facebook I have nothing > with in > > > > > common > > > > > > > with, ,, Please check your facebook and if I removed you by > accident > > > > > please > > > > > > > let me know and I will place you back on my list.. > > > > > > > I like following members of minds eye on face book > > > > > > > Sincerely > > > > > > > Allan > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > ( > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > I_D Allan > > > > > > > > > If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken > > > > > > > Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - >
