How many married women who kept their last name or hyphenated..

[typeB-md]

have also proposed marriage to their husband?

i'm just curious to see if there have also been non-traditional proposals.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Allygator89]

I am keeping my last name (getting married in May).

He proposed to me. Pretty traditional.

 

[typeB-md]

I am keeping my last name (getting married in May).

He proposed to me. Pretty traditional.

did you ever think of proposing to him?

 

[pillowhead]

did you ever think of proposing to him?

neither my husband nor I proposed. we just kind of sat around talking about, and then decided we were going to get married!

being that i am relatively young to get married, i decided just take his name. It just seems easier that way and my mom and sister did, but I think it's a completely personal decision that should be worked out between the husband and wife. I don't believe anyone should expect another human being to change their name and identity they've had for a quarter century just because that's what the other person wants. Besides, changing your name really is a huge, very big, annoying pain. It takes a very very long time, requires one to make a gazillion phone calls, send even more e-mails, run around the city like a chicken with its head cut off, mail off a ton of forms, miss a lot of school and/or work, and costs a reasonable amount of money, too. Of course in the long run, it might be even more of a pain not to change your name, esp. when kids come along.

 

[typeB-md]

neither my husband nor I proposed. we just kind of sat around talking about, and then decided we were going to get married!

being that i am relatively young to get married, i decided just take his name. It just seems easier that way and my mom and sister did, but I think it's a completely personal decision that should be worked out between the husband and wife. I don't believe anyone should expect another human being to change their name and identity they've had for a quarter century just because that's what the other person wants. Besides, changing your name really is a huge, very big, annoying pain. It takes a very very long time, requires one to make a gazillion phone calls, send even more e-mails, run around the city like a chicken with its head cut off, mail off a ton of forms, miss a lot of school and/or work, and costs a reasonable amount of money, too. Of course in the long run, it might be even more of a pain not to change your name, esp. when kids come along.

well that's a personal decision, i'm just curious to see if any of these women proposed. they keep saying they are non-traditional so i'm just wondering if they broke this tradion as well.

 

[kinetic]

There are none. Women like to talk all big about how non-traditional they are, but it's all bull. Feminism is all about equality WHEN IT WORKS FOR YOU. Meaning, they'll harangue you all day and night about how it's unfair for them to take your name and how they're not your "property," but don't ask them to propose or buy the guy the ring or even ask the guy out. Some "super feminists" still want the guy to pay for dates. But nobody ever accused them of being principled.

 

[Ruban]

What happens to kids in this situation? For example, let's say that you have John Doe marrying Jane Jones, who changes her name to Jane Jones-Doe. Then the kid is Tammy Jones-Doe. And she marries Bob Stevens, making her Tammy Jones-Doe-Stevens. What happens when she gets married? Do we end up with names that are like 500 letters long?

 

[stinkycheese]

I don't know what the "right" solution is. I have actually always thought I would take my husband's name if it sounded good with my first name, but keep my own if I liked it better. Vain? Yeah. When I have kids, I want them to have ONE, non-hyphenated last name, so they'll take my husband's name and my maiden name as a middle name. Mainly because I don't like how hyphenated names sound or roll off the tongue, and I think they're a pain in the ass. I like the idea of having a family that shares a last name but also wonder why it has to be the man's name that is taken. For men, it would seem like a step back to start "giving up" their "bachelor" names, but for women, there is no great solution if you like your own name, too. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in future generations. Are we going to have people named John Davis-Jones-Matthews-Doe-Larkin-Harper? That's dumb as hell!

 

[stinkycheese]

There are none. Women like to talk all big about how non-traditional they are, but it's all bull. Feminism is all about equality WHEN IT WORKS FOR YOU. Meaning, they'll harangue you all day and night about how it's unfair for them to take your name and how they're not your "property," but don't ask them to propose or buy the guy the ring or even ask the guy out. Some "super feminists" still want the guy to pay for dates. But nobody ever accused them of being principled.

And by the way, even though I'm a self-proclaimed feminist, I kind of agree with this. I always split paying with my boyfriend, actually I paid more often because I was working while he was a student, so I had more to spend. We also shared household chores, driving, etc. But when it came to talking about marriage? Oh hells yeah you better believe I wanted him to propose to me with a rock in his hand! I wanted him to take me somewhere special or plan a meaningful night for just the two of us, and ask me then. It's just how I pictured becoming engaged. I also told him that once we were engaged, I would like to buy him an engagement present -- a ring or a watch, or whatever he wanted, so that he wasn't the only one ponying up all this cash -- or that I would pay for half of my ring. (But I still wanted him to pick it out and surprise me, I didn't want to do that "let's go pick it out together" BS). I never wanted to propose to him, not because I thought it was his responsibility or decision, but because we both knew we wanted to get married, and I wanted the tradition of it, the fairy tale, of a classic proposal and ring.

I think the problem with integrating feminism into the greater culture and society is that there are some traditions that many women and men hold dear, like the engagement ring and the taking of the man's last name. The question is how to integrate a greater equality while also recognizing that we have to accept that these traditions may either fall by the wayside, or continue to be a part of the dichotomous nature of gender "roles".

 

[pillowhead]

I think unmarried women should have their original first, middle, and last names. Married women should simply have a fourth name. First, original middle, maiden, and new last. Children take the dad's last name as usual. It seems like that would be a pretty simple solution to me. I would love to do it that way. You don't lose the old name, you get to take the new name, and no one has to deal with hypenated stuff. And kids get normal names.

I'm all for four names with marriage.

 

[typeB-md]

And by the way, even though I'm a self-proclaimed feminist, I kind of agree with this. I always split paying with my boyfriend, actually I paid more often because I was working while he was a student, so I had more to spend. We also shared household chores, driving, etc. But when it came to talking about marriage? Oh hells yeah you better believe I wanted him to propose to me with a rock in his hand! I wanted him to take me somewhere special or plan a meaningful night for just the two of us, and ask me then. It's just how I pictured becoming engaged. I also told him that once we were engaged, I would like to buy him an engagement present -- a ring or a watch, or whatever he wanted, so that he wasn't the only one ponying up all this cash -- or that I would pay for half of my ring. (But I still wanted him to pick it out and surprise me, I didn't want to do that "let's go pick it out together" BS). I never wanted to propose to him, not because I thought it was his responsibility or decision, but because we both knew we wanted to get married, and I wanted the tradition of it, the fairy tale, of a classic proposal and ring.

I think the problem with integrating feminism into the greater culture and society is that there are some traditions that many women and men hold dear, like the engagement ring and the taking of the man's last name. The question is how to integrate a greater equality while also recognizing that we have to accept that these traditions may either fall by the wayside, or continue to be a part of the dichotomous nature of gender "roles".

it seems like these values of tradition are somewhat one-sided. i don't really believe that many men want to fork out $$$ on a silly ring.

and you are fine with a 'fairy tale' setting yet that is the most anti-feminine situation ever. The knight in shining armor, the helpless princess.. aren't these the gender roles that we've been trying so hard to abolish?

you see, i don't really care what someone does, but i just think that if you say you are one way (i.e. non-traditional) then you should stick by your guns and not selectively choose which traditions are good and bad.

 

[beriberi]

Kinetic often posts about how all he knows are hypocrital girls who want to keep their last name and get a big ring. One could draw the following conclusions: all women who claim to be feminists have been met by kinetic and they are lying OR there are lots of women with a lot of feminist integrity who have no interest in meeting kinetic and sharing with him their life's story. Or maybe, kinetic doesn't realize that you can have your feminist integrity and make your own choices about which cultural baggage to accept and which to reject and that progress comes in steps.

I have my own last name, no engagement ring, and a long repetoire of funny stories about how hard it was to have a wedding that was balance and reflected our belief system and the way we live. Skipping the engagement ring is not for the faint of heart. Though I strongly believed it was the right thing to do, I got a lot of crap about it (from strangers--unlike keeping my own name, where people have to know me to give me crap about that.)

To answer to OP's question, I think about 50% of the women I know in medicine do not change their last name when they are married (including attendings many years my senior). Which means you should do what you think is right--you will be in good company either way.

 

[kinetic]

Or maybe, kinetic doesn't realize that you can have your feminist integrity and make your own choices about which cultural baggage to accept and which to reject and that progress comes in steps.

I like how you can have your "feminist integrity" and choose to accept "cultural baggage." Translation: I get to decide what is acceptable equality and what isn't. And, man, if you get in my way, I have absolutely no problem in calling you out as a macho chauvanist pig repressor, but you also better do the "cultural baggage" stuff that I like or else you're a macho chauvanist pig who doesn't understand how wimmen are complex. Whatever, Little Miss Feminist.

 

[pillowhead]

I like how you can have your "feminist integrity" and choose to accept "cultural baggage." Translation: I get to decide what is acceptable equality and what isn't. And, man, if you get in my way, I have absolutely no problem in calling you out as a macho chauvanist pig repressor, but you also better do the "cultural baggage" stuff that I like or else you're a macho chauvanist pig who doesn't understand how wimmen are complex. Whatever, Little Miss Feminist.

please show me a thread where a woman wanting to keep her last name has called someone a "chauvinist pig repressor." and you if started the name calling with "Little Miss Feminist," it doesn't count. Clearly you are not interested in have a mature discussion and actually listening to women who have been through these experiences. many many people do not fully reject whatever traditional system they have and accept only parts of it, i.e. pro-Choice Catholics, Muslim women who don't wear hijab, Jews who work on Saturday. why is it so hard for you to understand that rejecting some traditions doesn't mean one has to reject all? If a boyfriend wants to buy his girlfriend a ring and she wants to keep her last name, who are you to judge? If she absolutely insists on a huge four carat ring he can't afford, then maybe they should both re-evaluate the relationship, but I'd say that's just a someone with a personality flaw. Not someone representative of all feminist women.

Ever heard of throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

 

[kinetic]

Lame analysis. What's the analysis here? "Gee, unless you quote someone, it's never happened before"? There have been multiple "name change" threads in the forums over the years and usually there's outrage about how expecting a name change is chauvanistic. You want to pretend otherwise, that's fine. Moreover, what's your point? I suppose if I dug up a quote, the response would be "oh, so [x number of people] said it; that's hardly representative of how MOST people think!" So now we're being asked to accept the theory that feminists have NO problem with changing their names. If anyone wants to bite, go right ahead.

P.S. Your analogies are all flawed because they don't deal with the rejection of the CENTRAL ISSUE of the movement. In other words, feminists are devoted ostensibly (although not in fact) to equality, but apparently are quite OK with LACK OF EQUALITY when it suits them. The parallel analogy would be a Christian/Jew/Muslim who was fine with being atheistic when it suited them. Moreover, nobody has any problem whatsoever with calling out hypocrisy in the religious when it occurs; apparently, the feminist movement is "hands off." Another instance of hypocrisy.

 

[stinkycheese]

it seems like these values of tradition are somewhat one-sided. i don't really believe that many men want to fork out $$$ on a silly ring.

and you are fine with a 'fairy tale' setting yet that is the most anti-feminine situation ever. The knight in shining armor, the helpless princess.. aren't these the gender roles that we've been trying so hard to abolish?

you see, i don't really care what someone does, but i just think that if you say you are one way (i.e. non-traditional) then you should stick by your guns and not selectively choose which traditions are good and bad.

I don't think being a feminist is being "non-traditional", and I don't think the categories are that delineated. Believing in the equality of women doesn't mean that I'm completely without sentimentality. But I agree that these traditions are imbalanced and that in some ways, women ask for it all. But when you consider that men have "had it all" for some time -- ie, have been able to balance a family life and a fulfilling career -- the question of how to integrate feminist principles into a culture that places a lot of value on traditional gender roles is puzzling. I never said my feelings weren't hypocritical, and of course, if the man I was to marry didn't propose with a ring, I would still marry him.

ETA: my "fantasy" is not about being a helpless princess or having a knight in shining armor. It's about having a man who wants to marry me and who asks me in a thoughtful and special way. I think it is wholly possible to do this without an engagement ring. But the reason I want one is because I like the symbolism of showing the world that you are promised to someone. It wouldn't have to be expensive or even a diamond, just the token is what I appreciate. Additionally, I would like to make my own new tradition, by giving my man an engagement ring or watch or piece of jewelry or whatever he wants. So it's not all about money and jewels; but I do like having a symbol of the engagement. It doesn't mean i feel the need to be "rescued", so don't read into that.

 

[stinkycheese]

P.S. Your analogies are all flawed because they don't deal with the rejection of the CENTRAL ISSUE of the movement. In other words, feminists are devoted ostensibly (although not in fact) to equality, but apparently are quite OK with LACK OF EQUALITY when it suits them. The parallel analogy would be a Christian/Jew/Muslim who was fine with being atheistic when it suited them. Moreover, nobody has any problem whatsoever with calling out hypocrisy in the religious when it occurs; apparently, the feminist movement is "hands off." Another instance of hypocrisy.

My question is, what about an engagement ring signifies a lack of equality?

 

[kinetic]

My question is, what about an engagement ring signifies a lack of equality?

Two things:

1) The fact that it is tied into the proposal (i.e., that's when you present it), which is an unequal affair. Even if you "exchange" rings, there's an expectation that the man do the whole "here's the ring" thing FIRST, along with making the proposal.

2) There is also an expectation on the female's part in most cases that the ring COST a certain amount commensurate with the finances of the man. Sure, sure, I know every woman here is going to say, "oh, no, I don't care how cheap the ring is, so you're just making that up!!" Whatever.

 

[beriberi]

I like how you can have your "feminist integrity" and choose to accept "cultural baggage." Translation: I get to decide what is acceptable equality and what isn't. And, man, if you get in my way, I have absolutely no problem in calling you out as a macho chauvanist pig repressor, but you also better do the "cultural baggage" stuff that I like or else you're a macho chauvanist pig who doesn't understand how wimmen are complex. Whatever, Little Miss Feminist.

I apologize for being unclear. I have a stance that I am willing to defend (I don't believe that commitment is symbolized by changing one's name, I believe that engagement rings symbolize a one-sided, anachronistic, chauvanistic tradition, and more--it is quite complex,as is any well-thought out philosophy.)

I am willing to defend every aspect of the way I live my life and the beliefs that I hold. (That is the feminist integrity part). However, I am not willing to judge other women who live differently than I do (that is the cultural baggage part).

Attack me, and my beliefs, if you choose. Don't ask me to defend/condemn other people's practices.

 

[erin682]

My question is, what about an engagement ring signifies a lack of equality?

Don't bother arguing with people who are hopelessly stuck in their vision of the world and unable/unwilling to see things from the perspective of another. Its not worth the time or energy and you will never convince them of anything.

In my opinion its simply and issue of choice. Each couple is 2 individuals who come from different upbringings and bring different issues to the relationship. The best couples communicate where each of them are and what each of them need to decide whats right for them as a couple. Personally, I have no problems with changing my name. I like my last name but in the long run its just easier to change it. I may keep my last name professionally if I have already begun private practice before I get married. Feminism isn't really about equality its about choice. Its about women being able to choose the life style they want to live. I make my choices other make theirs.

 

[kinetic]

Don't bother arguing with people who are hopelessly stuck in their vision of the world and unable/unwilling to see things from the perspective of another. Its not worth the time or energy and you will never convince them of anything.

Wow, speaking of which ...

Also, I like how "feminism is not about equality, it's about choice." I get to choose when I want things to be equal and when I want them to be unequal. Yes!!

 

[Ypo.]

you see, i don't really care what someone does, but i just think that if you say you are one way (i.e. non-traditional) then you should stick by your guns and not selectively choose which traditions are good and bad.

Why not? If certain traditions are good, and others are bad, why shouldn't you selectively keep some and do away with others?

 

[stinkycheese]

Two things:

1) The fact that it is tied into the proposal (i.e., that's when you present it), which is an unequal affair. Even if you "exchange" rings, there's an expectation that the man do the whole "here's the ring" thing FIRST, along with making the proposal.

I don't feel like it demeans women or men to have a man propose, if that is what the couple wants and how they want to do it. In most good relationships, the topic of marriage will have been discussed before a formal proposal takes place, so at that point, it's about the tradition of it -- making a formal statement of promising yourself to another.

2) There is also an expectation on the female's part in most cases that the ring COST a certain amount commensurate with the finances of the man. Sure, sure, I know every woman here is going to say, "oh, no, I don't care how cheap the ring is, so you're just making that up!!" Whatever.

most of the women with whom I have discussed this agree: we want a nice ring, but the cost is not significant. And none of us would be averse to giving our betrothed an engagement gift as well. most men I know like the idea of giving their woman an engagement ring when they propose marriage because it is a classic symbol of commitment; I've never met a man who had such scorn for the idea as you apparently do.

 

[jeff2005]

I asked my husband to marry me, though he had asked me first 6 months before I broke up with him. So, once i got him back, I asked him. I took his name without hesitation. We did nothing fancy to celebrate and I didn't want a ring (Why do people like shiny rocks so much?). Our wedding was 3 months later and cost under $5k. If it had been up to me we would have eloped. After I finish residency my husband wants to be a stay-at-home dad, and I think that's going to be awesome. How's that for nontraditional?

 

[erin682]

I asked my husband to marry me, though he had asked me first 6 months before I broke up with him. So, once i got him back, I asked him. I took his name without hesitation. We did nothing fancy to celebrate and I didn't want a ring (Why do people like shiny rocks so much?). Our wedding was 3 months later and cost under $5k. If it had been up to me we would have eloped. After I finish residency my husband wants to be a stay-at-home dad, and I think that's going to be awesome. How's that for nontraditional?

See thats what I mean about choice. Both the man and the woman choose what works best for them as individuals and their relationship. It means not being constrained with cultural expectations that don't work for you and creating a relationship that makes sense for you. If what works for you is completely traditional then thats great and just as good as being completely non-traditional or anything in between.

 

[delchrys]

the entire process of getting married and having children is unequal. women expect a disproportionately expensive engagement ring, a wedding shower, and later, baby showers. don't forget the wedding dress, or the flowers. add it all up, and the dollar signs boggle the mind. more to the point of this post, the costs are 95% attributable to the woman alone. some guys may want flowers, or a multi-thousand dollar ring, or to choose what goes into the gift registry for the wedding, the shower, and the baby shower, but they are the exception.

i've said this before, and i'll say it again--the entire cultural phenomenon of marriage is a bunch of fancy dressing for the very simple truth: the man pays a large sum of money for a lifetime supply of vagina, and the woman promises the lifetime supply of vagina in return for financial security. there are always exceptions, and you can bet your ass i won't date a non-exception, but i'm describing the norm here.

that is why women dress in revealing clothes and men dress and act in a way to demonstrate their wealth. that is why you see fat ugly guys with blonde bimbos on their arms. it's why women get so catty and negative towards the woman in the room who is "dressed like a slut"--they fear the competition. they want the lifetime supply of vagina THEY have to offer to be highly valued by all men, so any women who might offer their vagina at a lower price, or who might have a more desireable vagina, are seen as the enemy. it's why guys work their asses off for expensive cars and why women take note of which guys drive what, and look at a guys shoes and nails--grooming implies money. the wedding is the ultimate result of this cultural dance--the woman finally finds a buyer for the lifetime supply of vagina, and the man finally doesn't have to put any effort into getting new vagina.

the part that strikes me as kind of odd is how the man's role in this seems to me, undoubtedly from social conditioning, to be less "dirty," as he is simply paying for a service, whereas the woman's role comes off as the penultimate *****, albeit the monogamous *****.

curiously (and perhaps hypocritically), i would like my partner to take my last name should we marry. i guess to me, refusing to do so is a sign that she doesn't want to be identified with me any more than necessary. ultimately, i'll be okay with whatever she decides--it's her life and her decision.

here's a question for everyone--why is "cheating on someone" bad? i'm not talking about the romantic fling, or the fantasy love that one might form for the "other" person outside of the relationship, but just SEX. why is it bad if i go and have sex with some woman, wearing a condom throughout, just for the sake of augmenting my sex life and helping satiate my sex drive, as long as i only love my wife? this is not intended to be argumentative, it is intended to get some dialogue going about a very basic thing that most people take for granted as true ("cheating is wrong")--i just want to know WHY people think it is wrong, or are we all just on autopilot here?

 

[kaikai128]

I am traditional, boring, and believe in most of those things that everyone on here is fighting against. I would love to have a big strong man around that likes to make most of the decisions. The only "non-trad" part of my thinking here is that I'm pretty positive I want to keep a career at the point in time that I have a family rather than staying at home.

So, give me his last name, let him generally make the decisions, let him make me "feel" like a girl, and heck..I'll take the ring and the rest of the fairy tale too...that is just fine with me.

Just call me Mrs. Traditional.

 

[delchrys]

I don't feel like it demeans women or men to have a man propose, if that is what the couple wants and how they want to do it. In most good relationships, the topic of marriage will have been discussed before a formal proposal takes place, so at that point, it's about the tradition of it -- making a formal statement of promising yourself to another.



most of the women with whom I have discussed this agree: we want a nice ring, but the cost is not significant. And none of us would be averse to giving our betrothed an engagement gift as well. most men I know like the idea of giving their woman an engagement ring when they propose marriage because it is a classic symbol of commitment; I've never met a man who had such scorn for the idea as you apparently do.

well, now you've met another man who fits that, though kinetic and i are often not even close to "agreement" with each other.

"it's about the tradition of it -- making a formal statement of promising yourself to another." no, it's not--a proposal is asking another if they will marry you, which is a one-way street. men being social required to ask women means that, based on your explanation, men should make this formal statement of promising themselves to their women, but where is the equality or reciprocity there? nowhere, not until marriage.

why did the dowry tradition stop--where the parents of the bride pay for EVERYTHING until the wedding is over AND pay money to the groom as thanks for (literally) taking the bride off their hands and burdening himself with her? i'd like to see that one continue as long as i'm expected to buy a woman a 5k+ ring just because i have a penis and she has a vagina.

 

[kinetic]

I don't feel like it demeans women or men to have a man propose, if that is what the couple wants and how they want to do it.

That's a convenient way of putting. "I get to decide which inequality demeans women. If I don't like the inequality, I'll say that it demeans women. Otherwise, the inequality is OK."

 

[stinkycheese]

the part that strikes me as kind of odd is how the man's role in this seems to me, undoubtedly from social conditioning, to be less "dirty," as he is simply paying for a service, whereas the woman's role comes off as the penultimate *****, albeit the monogamous *****.

Would you please write a book on women's studies? You obviously have it all figured out

In all seriousness, what a gross post! I don't know what happened in your life that makes you have such contempt towards women, but I sure do feel sorry for you.

 

[stinkycheese]

That's a convenient way of putting. "I get to decide which inequality demeans women. If I don't like the inequality, I'll say that it demeans women. Otherwise, the inequality is OK."

You still haven't made a convincing argument as to why a marriage proposal is demeaning to women

 

[kinetic]

Actually, it would be more accurate to say that you are willing to accept certain inequalities but not others.

 

[stinkycheese]

Actually, it would be more accurate to say that you are willing to accept certain inequalities but not others.

i don't consider the tradition of a man proposing to a woman to be an inequality. they promise themselves to each other, there is nothing one-sided about it. it's my belief and i have a right to that; it doesn't invalidate anything else about my belief system. believe it or not, not everything in life is extreme, kinetic.

 

[kinetic]

Right. You don't consider it to be an inequality, so therefore it isn't. Apparently, having an expectation that the MAN must propose is not inequality. Because it works out for the WOMAN. But since it doesn't demean WOMEN, it's acceptable. Great logic!

 

[pillowhead]

2) There is also an expectation on the female's part in most cases that the ring COST a certain amount commensurate with the finances of the man. Sure, sure, I know every woman here is going to say, "oh, no, I don't care how cheap the ring is, so you're just making that up!!" Whatever.

Clearly you are absolutely unwilling to listen to others. You've already predicted the answer to your own question and have already discredited that answer before anyone has even given it! You're ridiculous. My eldest sister's engagement ring cost $15,000. My other sister's engagement ring was about $12,000. Wanna know how much mine was? About $100. My husband wanted to spend that--I didn't really care because we are dirt poor. He absolutely insisted on it. We're both students and so obviously have no money. He didn't really propose but wanted something as a token to recognize our engagement. So please, some of us really don't care how expensive a ring is. Plenty of men out there are just as into buying the most expensive ring possible so they can brag and show how much they can throw around for their woman. Don't act as if it's all one sided with the woman scheming to get as much money as possible out of her husband because it's not like that in mutually loving and respectful relationship.

And to the person who said marriage was all about exchanging lifetime financial security in exchange for vagina...have you ever actually loved someone or been in a real relationship? I'm not denying that's what is about for some people, esp. very visible celebrity relationships, but there are plenty of women married to poor men and plenty of women who earn as much of more than their husbands yet have fine relationships.

 

[kinetic]

I'm just curious: did you read the words "commensurate with his finances" or not?

 

[delchrys]

And to the person who said marriage was all about exchanging lifetime financial security in exchange for vagina...have you ever actually loved someone or been in a real relationship? I'm not denying that's what is about for some people, esp. very visible celebrity relationships, but there are plenty of women married to poor men and plenty of women who earn as much of more than their husbands yet have fine relationships.

are you actually so naive as to think that the high-minded motivations and rationalizations we ascribe to our behaviors as humans is NOT based in evolutionary biological and phsychological principles???!!! "plenty" of women are married to poor men, yes, and interestingly, most of them are rather unattractive (women's primary social attribute), and simultaneously true, most rich men, attractive or not, are with physically attractive women.

and yes, if you want to make this personal, i'm over 30 and have been in 5 serious relationships as well as had a decent number of sexual encounters outside of the relationship universe. my comments are not the words of a guy living in his mom's basement and playing dungeons and dragons all day, but of a person who has spent his life observing behavior in addition to living and loving life.

let me ask you this: why is it, do you think, that as a general rule women dress so as to reveal skin, or so as to accent what is not revealed, while men do not? i'm wondering--will you deny that it's the case, which would immediately destroy any chance of this dialogue having value while you lie to protect your possibly false understanding of the world? will you acknowledge that it's true, but proffer an explanation that is without real meaning (e.g., "women dress like that to feel sexy")? or will you actually THINK about the question and maybe cross some mental streams you've never come to before?

 

[stinkycheese]

Right. You don't consider it to be an inequality, so therefore it isn't. Apparently, having an expectation that the MAN must propose is not inequality. Because it works out for the WOMAN. But since it doesn't demean WOMEN, it's acceptable. Great logic!

No, I understand that you disagree with me and am trying to understand why. Would you explain it to me?

 

[typeB-md]

Why not? If certain traditions are good, and others are bad, why shouldn't you selectively keep some and do away with others?

well if you reject one practice as being unfair due to inequalities yet accept another practice with similar inequalities, that's where my problem is.

if you choose two unrelated practices, that is fine. but to reject one idea and embrace the other, when there is a central ideology (in this case differential gender roles) then i see a problem.

and to restate... i am fine with anyone's decision. i just think that there should be continuity of theme.

 

[pillowhead]

let me ask you this: why is it, do you think, that as a general rule women dress so as to reveal skin, or so as to accent what is not revealed, while men do not? i'm wondering--will you deny that it's the case, which would immediately destroy any chance of this dialogue having value while you lie to protect your possibly false understanding of the world? will you acknowledge that it's true, but proffer an explanation that is without real meaning (e.g., "women dress like that to feel sexy")? or will you actually THINK about the question and maybe cross some mental streams you've never come to before?

omigod!! it's never ever occurred to me before that women dress sexily to attract men! wow, thanks for opening up my eyes...apparently I've been living in a world of lies my whole life!

SOME women dress to reveal skin because they think that men will only be attracted to them if they do so. SOME women dress to reveal skin because that's just what they see other women do (esp women plastered on magazine covers) and want to fit in. SOME women dress to reveal skin because they think they're all that. You know, women aren't like homogenous creature that have a unified mind that all do the same thing for the same reason. When have I ever said NO woman has EVER dressed revealingly to attract a guy? Of course many do! But the evolutionary biology crap that people try to throw around to justify the way men and women treat each other is bull. (and I have taken evolutionary biology courses in college. I absolutely believe in evolution, but too many times people have used "evolutionary psychology" theories to justify immoral behavior...eugenics anyone?) I don't deny there's something to it, but as intelligent human beings with large forebrains and morals, we don't blindly obey our evolutionary instincts to screw every attractive person in sight. people can be attracted to others because of their minds, too. Relationships would never last if people weren't.

 

[myfavred]

I am planning to keep my maiden name (it is part of my culture that woman keeps the maiden name) and 100% of the time men propose for the marriage. I don't see a big deal in keeping your maiden name.

 

[typeB-md]

I am planning to keep my maiden name (it is part of my culture that woman keeps the maiden name) and 100% of the time men propose for the marriage. I don't see a big deal in keeping your maiden name.

and your culture is? not american, correct?

 

[typeB-md]

i don't consider the tradition of a man proposing to a woman to be an inequality. they promise themselves to each other, there is nothing one-sided about it. it's my belief and i have a right to that; it doesn't invalidate anything else about my belief system. believe it or not, not everything in life is extreme, kinetic.

see, from this post i can tell that you are being hypocritical. i've already said that each person can have their beliefs but to say that a proposal is not "one-sided" is completely infactual. you just said the "man proposing to the woman"... how is this not one sided? you didn't say "if a man or woman proposes marriage to his/her significant other"

i'm not looking to argue with you, but what you said is in fact contradictory. it's like a chemical rxn. if it goes only one way, there is in fact inequality there.

 

[Ypo.]

the entire process of getting married and having children is unequal. women expect a disproportionately expensive engagement ring, a wedding shower, and later, baby showers. don't forget the wedding dress, or the flowers. add it all up, and the dollar signs boggle the mind. more to the point of this post, the costs are 95% attributable to the woman alone. some guys may want flowers, or a multi-thousand dollar ring, or to choose what goes into the gift registry for the wedding, the shower, and the baby shower, but they are the exception.

i've said this before, and i'll say it again--the entire cultural phenomenon of marriage is a bunch of fancy dressing for the very simple truth: the man pays a large sum of money for a lifetime supply of vagina, and the woman promises the lifetime supply of vagina in return for financial security. there are always exceptions, and you can bet your ass i won't date a non-exception, but i'm describing the norm here.

that is why women dress in revealing clothes and men dress and act in a way to demonstrate their wealth. that is why you see fat ugly guys with blonde bimbos on their arms. it's why women get so catty and negative towards the woman in the room who is "dressed like a slut"--they fear the competition. they want the lifetime supply of vagina THEY have to offer to be highly valued by all men, so any women who might offer their vagina at a lower price, or who might have a more desireable vagina, are seen as the enemy. it's why guys work their asses off for expensive cars and why women take note of which guys drive what, and look at a guys shoes and nails--grooming implies money. the wedding is the ultimate result of this cultural dance--the woman finally finds a buyer for the lifetime supply of vagina, and the man finally doesn't have to put any effort into getting new vagina.

the part that strikes me as kind of odd is how the man's role in this seems to me, undoubtedly from social conditioning, to be less "dirty," as he is simply paying for a service, whereas the woman's role comes off as the penultimate *****, albeit the monogamous *****.

curiously (and perhaps hypocritically), i would like my partner to take my last name should we marry. i guess to me, refusing to do so is a sign that she doesn't want to be identified with me any more than necessary. ultimately, i'll be okay with whatever she decides--it's her life and her decision.

here's a question for everyone--why is "cheating on someone" bad? i'm not talking about the romantic fling, or the fantasy love that one might form for the "other" person outside of the relationship, but just SEX. why is it bad if i go and have sex with some woman, wearing a condom throughout, just for the sake of augmenting my sex life and helping satiate my sex drive, as long as i only love my wife? this is not intended to be argumentative, it is intended to get some dialogue going about a very basic thing that most people take for granted as true ("cheating is wrong")--i just want to know WHY people think it is wrong, or are we all just on autopilot here?

Wow. Your views on relationships are really cynical, to say the least. I think they are also unhealthy and unbalanced. If you get married with views like that, then I don't expect a very fulfilling outcome for you-even 'if' you do find one of those exceptions. Personally I couldn't stand being married to someone with views such as this. You are basically looking at your woman as if she was nothing more than a *****, and that your relationship is an exchange of services you provide for her in exchange for sex and companionship.

Be careful with generalizations, Delchrys. I'm a woman, and I don't want or expect a big fancy wedding, or ring, or even a baby shower. I've been to enough baby showers to know that they make me sick. But there is nothing wrong with wanting to follow tradition and rituals, nothing at all. Most men and women are perfectly happy to do so.

 

[Elysium]

I'm honest really curious (not a facetious way) if both kinetic and delchrys plan on ever getting married. Is it something that's important to you guys? Do you want to be in that kind of relationship or do you see yourselves as being single? The reason why I ask is because I'm wondering how you guys will approach the concept of marriage with your SO given your obviously strong feelings about this issue. Will you propose or give a ring? Do you want a "traditional" wedding, etc.

And no, I'm really not looking for a fight.

BTW, kinetic, mega is at her interview right now (at my school. She's staying at my house) and I think everything is going well so far.

 

[kinetic]

I have no problem with the traditions of marriage. I think what you're failing to notice is that all I'm questioning is how principled the feminist movement really is. I never said that I had a problem with the man proposing -- simply that feminists should. Therefore, as I always say, my opinion is meaningless here -- I could be totally AGAINST proposals or totally FOR them, but that's not the issue at hand.

 

[kinetic]

BTW, kinetic, mega is at her interview right now (at my school. She's staying at my house) and I think everything is going well so far.

Cool. Hope she does well.

 

[Elysium]

I have no problem with the traditions of marriage. I think what you're failing to notice is that all I'm questioning is how principled the feminist movement really is. I never said that I had a problem with the man proposing -- simply that feminists should. Therefore, as I always say, my opinion is meaningless here -- I could be totally AGAINST proposals or totally FOR them, but that's not the issue at hand.

Well, I think the problem is that people have disperate feelings related to things of the heart. People are inherently complex, and I think women are even more so (sometimes to the annoyance of men!). We want to be independent and yet we want to feel loved and needed. We want to have a career and yet we want to feel "taken care of" (though I mean emotionally, and not financially). Personally, as I'm sure you know, I'm one of those chicks that wants to keep their name but I would also like to have a proposal. Don't really give too much of a crap about the ring, as I'm not into jewelry and I think a lot of the trappings of "ohhh, how many carats is that?" is total horsesh1t. It's totally nauseating. I'd like a wedding that's personal and not too big, something that symbolizes what's important to both my SO and I. I hate the idea of some huge froo froo nightmare with like yards of lace and drunken relatives and kissing people you don't know, blah blah blah. A lot of women like the idea of being a princess for a day and dream about the perfect wedding because it's their one oppurtunity to live out the fairy tale. Personally, I don't buy into that, but I don't begrudge them that either. I see what your point is, but realize that adhering to strict political (eg feminist) ideology is sometimes unrealistic when it comes to emotional issues. I think women can be "feminists" (though how I abhor that label) and still maintain some basic traditions, if that's what they're comfortable with.

 

[delchrys]

Wow. Your views on relationships are really cynical, to say the least. I think they are also unhealthy and unbalanced. If you get married with views like that, then I don't expect a very fulfilling outcome for you-even 'if' you do find one of those exceptions. Personally I couldn't stand being married to someone with views such as this. You are basically looking at your woman as if she was nothing more than a *****, and that your relationship is an exchange of services you provide for her in exchange for sex and companionship.

Be careful with generalizations, Delchrys. I'm a woman, and I don't want or expect a big fancy wedding, or ring, or even a baby shower. I've been to enough baby showers to know that they make me sick. But there is nothing wrong with wanting to follow tradition and rituals, nothing at all. Most men and women are perfectly happy to do so.

You must have chosen to miss the part where i said that there are exceptions, and that i only date exceptions. i most certainly do NOT look at my woman as though she's anything other than an amazing person whose company i enjoy to the exclusion of any other activity.

show me a relationship between a man and a woman where the woman buys the man a ring that is half a year's income for her, and where the guy chooses everything that goes into the registry, and where the guy is the one who throws the wedding showers, and i'll eat my words. but i have yet to see ONE example of this, let alone see it about half the time. what's your explanation for why the tradition is the way it is?

 

[Ypo.]

You must have chosen to miss the part where i said that there are exceptions, and that i only date exceptions. i most certainly do NOT look at my woman as though she's anything other than an amazing person whose company i enjoy to the exclusion of any other activity.

No, I didn't choose to ignore it-I did read it. If anything, I would say that you have chosen to ignore it-and to look at a complicated situation in white and black, rather than shades and colors. It doesn't matter if you date one of the so-called 'exceptions' if you have such a gross view of relationships, imo-what matters more is what is on the inside. That would be a huge turn-off for me, thats all I'm saying.

show me a relationship between a man and a woman where the woman buys the man a ring that is half a year's income for her, and where the guy chooses everything that goes into the registry, and where the guy is the one who throws the wedding showers, and i'll eat my words. but i have yet to see ONE example of this, let alone see it about half the time. what's your explanation for why the tradition is the way it is?

Britney Spears pretty much footed the bill for everything didn't she?
btw-I don't want you to have to eat your words. Just reading them is enough to make most people sick.

I think you need to look at the history behind traditions. People love their traditions and hold onto them, even when they cease to serve a useful purpose. Most people get married because they want to, and most get excited about the wedding. A lot of people forgo a big expensive wedding, and many people get engaged with more simple rings, or ones they can afford. You have a cynical view of relationships. I wonder what ever happened to you that is so terrible? You don't have to give into all these societal pressures that you seem to be feeling. I don't have a problem with breaking traditions, but I did find your views to be...well, just plain warped. And it really grossed me out. Luckily, I'm not married to you!