From: utzoo!decvax!decwrl!sun!megatest!fortune!hpda!hplabs!hao!seismo!rlgvax!guy Newsgroups: net.singles Title: Re: net.single_but_wish_the_hell_I_was_married Article-I.D.: rlgvax.188 Posted: Tue Apr 5 11:17:12 1983 Received: Thu Apr 7 03:55:53 1983 References: hou5f.256 >>Net.suicide is also composed mostly of people who want to leave it.... ------------- > Is he trying to say singles are psychotic ??????? >------------- No; there's nothing in what Glenn said that implies that. You may be inferring that is what he meant. >>Second, one of the strongest reasons for the existence of family structure has >>been economic, or so I'm learning in my women's studies class. In fact, many >>careers and lives are severely limited by trying to impose a family structure >>on top of it, when neither party involved wants to 'play house'. >------------ > I also sense a misplaced set of values from above, and in what follows. There > seems to be a greater importance placed on the financial drawbacks of being > married than in the emotional and other rewards that long term COMMITMENTS > can offer. It's no wonder Glenn that you seem to be having problems in > attaining an involvement with someone. Your cash register heart has it's > meter running at a price that extremely few women would even dare consider. ------------ He is referring to the *political* question of "why do women get married"; you are referring to *personal* matters. In a society which pays women about $.53 for every dollar they pay men, there *is* an economic advantage to marrying a man who is likely to be able to make more money than you do. He said nothing about "the financial drawbacks of being married" here; he was saying that "conventional" family life may not what best fits what the people want, but economic pressures force them into such arrangements. One of the problems with divorce is that the woman no longer has the economic advantages of being in the same household as a better-paid man (not everybody keeps up on their alimony and child-support payments, you know) but ends up having to take care of the kids AND work to support them and herself. I could go on about the economic status of women and men in our society, but I presume you know all about this... >>A radical exception and problem >>is the fact that women bear children, and usually look after them, and that >>puts them back into the position of being 'necessary in the family,' instead >>of just have earning power and applying it where it is needed. This is getting >>too long, I'll shut up. >------------ > "JUST HAVE EARNING POWER AND APPLYING IT TO WHERE IT IS NEEDED." ??? Sorry, > Glenn, there are a hell of a lot of people out here that consider a whole > lot of things a damn sight more important than MONEY !! I really feel sorry > for you and I suggest that you seek professional help and guidance. ------------ What Glenn is referring to here is that a woman does not have the same freedom as a man to choose how she wants to live. She has less freedom to work at what she wants to, and one of the reasons is that she is given the responsibility of taking care of kids, whether she wants that or not. Glenn is discussing important political, social, and economic issues about women's place in society; you are interpreting this as personal statements. I hate to disappoint you, but the political *is* important, especially in relationships between women and men. Women do not occupy an equal place in society; their options are limited by pay, by job stereotyping, and by the greater power of men to control their own - and other people's - lives. Or, to quote one Julius Marx, "Love goes out the door when money comes innuendo." Guy Harris RLG Corporation {seismo,mcnc,we13}!rlgvax!guy