Is it possible to be a female surgeon and still have/raise a family?

[badgergirl]

---

Members don't see this ad.

hmmm... maybe you should go about this a different way, like picking a surgical specialty that doesn't have too much call. for instance... ENT (Early Nights of Tennis)... but who am i kidding. i don't play tennis. 😉

okay, in all seriousness. my vision of my life has changed so much throughout this process. i get scared i won't be able to be a soccer mom and a doctor, or that i'll never find a man who actually understands and supports me. i ask all the women who interview me about this balancing act, and i've gotten answers varying from "i don't have time for a husband, let alone children" (OB/GYN) to "we're going to adopt in a few years" (OPTH) to "I have 4 kids, 2 dogs, and a guinea pig, and i and my doctor husband work 3-4 days a week" (both ER). it's doable, you'll just have to find your own solution. for me, no, i'm not going to be someone's housewife, but i'm not going to be the ever-unavailable parent/wife either. i just need to work on my tennis game, start memorizing the head and neck, and maybe things with this phy-ed major i'm seeing will work out... 😉 you never know...

 

[irlandesa]

I know many female doctors and some med students who are parents. I think having a large family however, may not be realistic, especially as a surgeon. Unless you get in to your state school and/or have a husband who makes a good salary, finances are going to be a potential problem. As someone who is going to one of the most expensive schools in the country (and one that doesn't give much institutional aid), I will be $110K-$200K in debt depending on whether or not I get an NHSC scholarship this year. I have decided that I'm going to have no more than 2 children (unless I get more surprises) b/c I want to be able to provide for them and spend time with them. I will be 31 when I finish residency, which doesn't give me that much time in terms of childbearing years. Anyway, these are all considerations and just one person's perspective; everyone is in a different situation I'm sure. BTW, breastfeeding helps you lose weight after pregnancy, which is a nice bonus🙂

 

[surge]

Originally posted by pillowhead
it's well known that as a woman's education goes up, her chances of marriage go down.

I've seen it and heard it plenty of times not to question the validity of this statement (hey, energygirl). But, I'll be damned if I ever understand.

I mean, WOW, I want a woman who is at least as smart as me. Why would I ever settle for anybody else? Am I not trying to find someone to share my life with, someone who can and does see things the way I see them, who laughs when I laugh and cries when I cry, who is an equal partner, who constantly challenges me, who I can always teach and learn from, who I support as she supports me?

If I were to have children, I would consider myself an equal to my partner. I think that to claim that women are better parents than men is about as valid as saying that men are better surgeons than women. Unless I felt willing and able to provide as much support, time and guidance to my children, as well as take on the same responsibilities as my wife, I would not have children. We're in it together. I could never even be attracted to a woman who thought that being a stay-at-home mom was even an option.

manicmaven, will you marry me? 😀

 

[kcol22]

WOW-- This thread has really got my hear racing. On the one hand, I am totally disgusted with the sexism that has been unleashed here, and on the other hand, I am glad that I read this thread, if only to remind myself that women still have a long way to go in our struggle for equality. There is absolutely no reason to think that a woman can not be a surgeon and have a family, when men have been doing this very thing for as long as surgery has been in existence. People minimize the importance of a father in childrens' lives because of a deeply-rooted social construct that has only recently begun to evolve. I find Mike's argument, that women who have the AUDACITY to actually become physicians should limit themselves to general practice instead of challenging specialties, particularly pathetic. It makes sense that he would say this, since women have been shoveled into lower-paying jobs since their first emergence into the workforce. Just think of how many women even in recent years were streared away from medical school and encouraged to become nurses instead because it's more suitable "for a woman." (Like my mom). Just think how much talent and genius throughout has been muted due to sexism. How many more cures for disease or innovative surgical techniques would exist today if the medical establishment had been considered suitable for a woman? I can't wait for Mike and others like him to have their asses kicked on the board exams by women everywhere. To the ladies, go where your goals take you... Don't ever let a man tell you that his career is more important than your own.

 

[surge]

Originally posted by kcol22
WOW-- This thread has really got my hear racing. On the one hand, I am totally disgusted with the sexism that has been unleashed here, and on the other hand, I am glad that I read this thread, if only to remind myself that women still have a long way to go in our struggle for equality. There is absolutely no reason to think that a woman can not be a surgeon and have a family, when men have been doing this very thing for as long as surgery has been in existence. People minimize the importance of a father in childrens' lives because of a deeply-rooted social construct that has only recently begun to evolve. I find Mike's argument, that women who have the AUDACITY to actually become physicians should limit themselves to general practice instead of challenging specialties, particularly pathetic. It makes sense that he would say this, since women have been shoveled into lower-paying jobs since their first emergence into the workforce. Just think of how many women even in recent years were streared away from medical school and encouraged to become nurses instead because it's more suitable "for a woman." (Like my mom). Just think how much talent and genius throughout has been muted due to sexism. How many more cures for disease or innovative surgical techniques would exist today if the medical establishment had been considered suitable for a woman? I can't wait for Mike and others like him to have their asses kicked on the board exams by women everywhere. To the ladies, go where your goals take you... Don't ever let a man tell you that his career is more important than your own.

Perfectly put.
I didn't even want to dignify mike's and other's comments with a response. I'm ashamed that there are men who still feel this way.

 

[ndi_amaka]

Hi. I was the thread starter. I didn't realize this would spark such debate. Well let me add my two cents.

My background is probably more traditional than alot of yours, Lotanna can vouch for that I'm sure. I have never been one for feminism. I think that the pro feminist movement did a lot more harm than good, in fact.

As a future doctor, I would love to have it all. I would love to be the chief doc at a major hospital, saving lives, and changing the face of healthcare. But that is not a realistic goal for me because I plan to have a healthy marriage and alot of kids (and unlike what wack said, yes, the world will greatly profit from any offspring that I produce. 🙂 ).

Alot of women on this site see it as unfair that a woman has to be the caretaker which i don't understand. i always thought my mother had the better end of the stick. She is a nurse but she got to stay home with us alot more than my Dad. he was the one who had to deal with the business world and all of the crap it carries. Why is it that so many women see it as demeaning and almost a jail sentence that they have to care for their kids? I think the fact that aiding in a child's development is not valued in this society certainly explains some of the problems we face.

I guess I am one of the few females who would, infact, change their career goals to provide for my family. My mother AND father did the same for me and my siblings and I think we turned out great because of it.

And yes, women have an intrinsic nurturing ability that many men simply do not carry. A child needs both of his parents for different purposes and it is necessary that a mother be present to cultivate the child's needs.

Being realistic, i know that I can't have it all. But I do realize that what I can have, I better value to the fullest and do my best job at.

I know this is long so thanks for taking time out to read this.

 

[kam730]

I second that. I always knew that the medical profession was on the conservative side, but I am shocked by many of the comments on here. It is kinda making me dread med school next year. I just hope there arent people in my class who ascribe to these beliefs (wishful thinking I am afraid, though.

Originally posted by kcol22
WOW-- This thread has really got my hear racing. On the one hand, I am totally disgusted with the sexism that has been unleashed here, and on the other hand, I am glad that I read this thread, if only to remind myself that women still have a long way to go in our struggle for equality. There is absolutely no reason to think that a woman can not be a surgeon and have a family, when men have been doing this very thing for as long as surgery has been in existence. People minimize the importance of a father in childrens' lives because of a deeply-rooted social construct that has only recently begun to evolve. I find Mike's argument, that women who have the AUDACITY to actually become physicians should limit themselves to general practice instead of challenging specialties, particularly pathetic. It makes sense that he would say this, since women have been shoveled into lower-paying jobs since their first emergence into the workforce. Just think of how many women even in recent years were streared away from medical school and encouraged to become nurses instead because it's more suitable "for a woman." (Like my mom). Just think how much talent and genius throughout has been muted due to sexism. How many more cures for disease or innovative surgical techniques would exist today if the medical establishment had been considered suitable for a woman? I can't wait for Mike and others like him to have their asses kicked on the board exams by women everywhere. To the ladies, go where your goals take you... Don't ever let a man tell you that his career is more important than your own.

 

[shamthis]

Kam,

I apologize if I offended you. Rest assured I am not a conservative; I am a scientist and realist. Do I believe in change and cultural evolution? Yes! But for now I state it as it is.

Sham

 

[Mike59]

Originally posted by kcol22
WOW-- I find Mike's argument, that women who have the AUDACITY to actually become physicians should limit themselves to general practice instead of challenging specialties, particularly pathetic.

Couple of things:

Lola,
By full time mom, I did not mean literally "stay at home mom". A person can be a full time employee and full time parent in my intended sense of the term.

Kcol22,
Before flying off the handle, I think you need to learn how to read before criticizing what I said so harshly. You have me all wrong. My argument WAS that IT IS BEST FOR THE CHILDREN IF women who wish to juggle family and medical life choose more flexible specialties.

I am very tolerant and accepting of females in prominent medical positions, whether they be a professor, chief of staff, surgeon general, whatever.

All I was saying is that it would be in the best interest of a child to have a physician mother that is availble to them. Is that so outrageous and sexist an argument?

For you to not recognize my point with a tad of maturity is disappointing, and I hope that as a physician, you take time to understand a situation, argument, or concern before rushing to judgements as rapidly as you did here. Get off your high horse and learn to read🙄

 

[kcol22]

Surge, thanks for restoring my faith in men.😍

 

[kcol22]

Originally posted by Mike59




All I was saying is that it would be in the best interest of a child to have a physician mother that is availble to them. Is that so outrageous and sexist an argument?


Yes, Mike, it is. The reason it is sexist is that you don't seem to think that the same type of availability is necessary from a physician father. Maybe YOU would feel a tad offended too if ignorant people were constantly telling you what is best for you and your future family. It may be difficult to understand that since you have never had to deal with gender discrimination.

 

[Mike59]

Originally posted by kcol22

Maybe YOU would feel a tad offended too if ignorant people were constantly telling you what is best for you and your future family. It may be difficult to understand that since you have never had to deal with gender discrimination.

I am deeply, no, terribly sorry to express AN OPINION about what I think a family should be. I aplogize for speaking and yield to the superiority of your ideal family, which is obviously the ONLY way, and the RIGHT way.

My main concern at this point however, is the object that must have been shoved way up your ass before you entered this thread. Not only must it be awful sharp, it must have been prepared a few minutes too long in the fire.

Hugs and Kisses,
Mike59😍

 

[Mike59]

Originally posted by ndi_amaka
Hi. I was the thread starter. I didn't realize this would spark such debate. Well let me add my two cents.

Alot of women on this site see it as unfair that a woman has to be the caretaker which i don't understand.

I guess I am one of the few females who would, infact, change their career goals to provide for my family. My mother AND father did the same for me and my siblings and I think we turned out great because of it.

And yes, women have an intrinsic nurturing ability that many men simply do not carry. A child needs both of his parents for different purposes and it is necessary that a mother be present to cultivate the child's needs.

Being realistic, i know that I can't have it all. But I do realize that what I can have, I better value to the fullest and do my best job at.

I know this is long so thanks for taking time out to read this.

ndi_amaka,

Hopefully you gained some valuable input from our opinoins before the thread took a nasty turn

Before signing off on this thread, I wanted to say that I totally support everything you said above, and I think you'll be just fine with your open mindset.🙂

(no more posts from me on this thread😉 )

 

[BOOYAH]

So here's my situation.

My girlfriend and I are both first year med students at Columbia. We've been dating for over 2 years. We are both thinking about going into surgical subspecialties (I'm interested in Orthopedics and/or Trauma, she's not sure yet but is interested in surgery). I'd like to have a rich family life and want to have fun outside of my career. She wants 4 (!!) kids someday or a little less.

I've been reading this forum and talking to some surgical residents, and I know it's hard enough just being a doctor/doctor couple or even a surgeon/doctor couple. Is it ridiculous to even think about both doing surgery while maintaining a happy relationship AND having kids who won't become delinquent from neglect? My brother in law, a cardiothoracic surgery resident, knows of only one surgeon/surgeon couple and they do not have children.

Damn, all this serious talk is depressing. This ain't as funny as the poop hot dog!

booyah

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Originally posted by lola
blitzkrieg & mike59,
why do you want your wives to be full-time mothers? would you want them to be even if they wanted to work part-time or full-time? most women these days don't want to be full-time moms.

In my opinion, my wife will best be happy at home with my kids; In my opinion, it will be the best thing for her, my kids, and for me...She will be very busy and involved in all aspects of my career: A good wife standing beside her husband is absolutely vital for a successful career, in my opinion. If anyone has any doubts about a stay-at-home mom being successful, look at Phyllis Schlafly. There are many women these days that want this optimal lifestyle....you just havent met them 🙂 She will have alot of cool things to do, but first and foremost, her job is to be a mother to our children....

 

[pillowhead]

Originally posted by Blitzkrieg
In my opinion, my wife will best be happy at home with my kids; In my opinion, it will be the best thing for her, my kids, and for me...She will be very busy and involved in all aspects of my career: A good wife standing beside her husband is absolutely vital for a successful career, in my opinion. If anyone has any doubts about a stay-at-home mom being successful, look at Phyllis Schlafly. There are many women these days that want this optimal lifestyle....you just havent met them 🙂 She will have alot of cool things to do, but first and foremost, her job is to be a mother to our children....

I have read Phyllis Schafley's work. Now I want you to read Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique and see what happens to women when society adopts the attitude that what's best for them is to stay home, raise the kids, clean the house, and support the hubby and that they should find ultimate happiness in all of this. I'm glad that in you're opinion your wife will be happy living this lifestyle, but quite frankly, I think her opinion is more important in the matter as it's HER life. If you find someone like that, more power to you. Just don't even begin to assume or think that's right for any other women. What's best for one is another's hell.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Originally posted by pillowhead
I have read Phyllis Schafley's work. Now I want you to read Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique and see what happens to women when society adopts the attitude that what's best for them is to stay home, raise the kids, clean the house, and support the hubby and that they should find ultimate happiness in all of this. I'm glad that in you're opinion your wife will be happy living this lifestyle, but quite frankly, I think her opinion is more important in the matter as it's HER life. If you find someone like that, more power to you. Just don't even begin to assume or think that's right for any other women. What's best for one is another's hell.

I'll marry a woman who has an opinion like mine..and I didnt assume that every woman has to do it (Read my posts). I think that Phyllis is a great example for women to follow, though...I know what happens whenever women are feminists..I think we all know (check out society today)....but I digress.

 

[pillowhead]

Originally posted by shamthis
Pillowhead,

For what it's worth, I majored in Animal Behavior at Cornell, and I'd like to believe I learned a good bit about what controls and contorts the chemical reaction that is animal life. And as much as you'd like to believe that we're all autonomous, spiritual demi-gods, we're not. We're only animals, and we have a purpose to serve. Stop trying to prove your worth and accept that we're all ingredients in a heavenly Pyrex earth reaction, all of us predetermined to accomplish unique goals. Not goals like medicine or law, goals like propagation of genes. Think of genes as replicators; our bodies are vehicles for replicators and move and decide things based on what will maximize the chances of our replicators' persistence through time.

Try not to question the essence of humanity- There's no fixed formula that says you'll be a superior or lesser doc than I. However, youre slated to be the superior caregiver. All this might sound ignorant to you because you've been brainwashed by the excessive political correctness that is so much a part of present-day America.

End of discussion
Sham

Well since you said end of discussion, it must be so. First of all, anyone who knows me knows that i am hardly the epitome of political correctness. That had nothing to do with the argument at hand. Second of all, what separates humans from the rest of the animal world is that we have the ability to distinguish between good and evil and to resist instinctual impulses. If we were just animals and our bodies for vehicles of gene propagation, well then, I guess rape must be justified. i mean, it's only natural for men to spread their seed to as many women as possible, right? They can't be expected to actually resist their animal impulses.

So science today says women are better caretakers and better nurturers. Well, science one hundred years ago had proved that women were naturally inferior because of their brain science. Black women were scientifically proven to be more promiscuous because of their body type. Behavioral science is hardly set in stone, and is constantly being revised. So please, don't preach some animal behavior dogma to me when historically, it just changes to fit what's allowable and politically correct for the times.

And trust me, I'm not trying to "prove my worth" here. I don't even want to be a surgeon. But dammit, that's my decision to make and the decision on how and when to have a family resides with me and my husband. I will not do anything because society and "science" is convinced that my staying home is better for the world at large.

 

[pillowhead]

Originally posted by Blitzkrieg
I'll marry a woman who has an opinion like mine..and I didnt assume that every woman has to do it (Read my posts). I think that Phyllis is a great example for women to follow, though...I know what happens whenever women are feminists..I think we all know (check out society today)....but I digress.

Please, tell me what happens when women are feminists.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Originally posted by pillowhead
Please, tell me what happens when women are feminists.

Not interested in writing a PhD thesis on tar baby for SDN, sorry....there is plenty of material available to read...check out anything by Phyllis for starters.

 

[care bear]

just wanted to throw in a few words of support for ndi_amaka and her viewpoint (which i largely share.)

i'm sure you'll be a wonderful wife, mother and doctor of any type! 🙂

 

[md_student2b]

I think having a family and being a surgeon is possible, though I can't say that optimism springs from any example I know. In my post-bac, during interviewing and finally being an MS1, I've had the pleasure to meet a lot of doctors, many surgeons, and noted that the most stable, happiest, and most equiable unions have been between a physician and someone outside of the medical community. The surgeons I know who are women haven't married, the married ones are all men who found wives more than willing to accept the "housewife" role, not because of gender but because of the extreme commitment in time surgery incurs. Saying that, I'm already gravitating towards surgery because that aspect of medicine fascinates me... and my gf is an aspiring medical student. However I will never forget why I want to be a doctor, it has always been a means to an end, to do something I love in order to support the family I never had. I want to be a father, and I don't mean using a paycheck as a proxy. I can't imagine the sacrficies that will be asked as my career advances, but I know that I will never put my family before my career. If you want to be a mother of four and a surgeon, it'll be hard, but nothing is impossible. You were willing to work hard and make sacrfices to get to this point right?

Oh, did you want to have 4 kids because you wanted 2 boys and 2 girls? That's why I wanted to have 4 kids, being an only child myself, I thought it would be easier for my own to have a sibbling of the same sex. My gf doesn't really see my logic though.

 

[IlianaSedai]

Originally posted by surge
I've seen it and heard it plenty of times not to question the validity of this statement (hey, energygirl). But, I'll be damned if I ever understand.

I mean, WOW, I want a woman who is at least as smart as me. Why would I ever settle for anybody else? Am I not trying to find someone to share my life with, someone who can and does see things the way I see them, who laughs when I laugh and cries when I cry, who is an equal partner, who constantly challenges me, who I can always teach and learn from, who I support as she supports me?

Yeah, it may be true that statistically, the more education and career you get, the less husband you get. But I think you're absolutely right, if you just want a "partner" who can tow the line and keep your house clean when you get home, that's a pretty darn boring relationship. Might as well get a housekeeper. 😀

The positive side of the story is that even if it might be "hard" to meet someone when you're really busy... you'll meet someone who has a brain and who'll accept you the way you are, and encourage you to do the things that'll make you proud of yourself. You have to be yourself, and if family practice isn't for you, then by all means go for surgery. There are great people out there who'll have no problem with it, and I'd rather be with one of <I>them</I>, than give it up in hopes of meeting one of those who does have a problem with it.

 

[::Seabass::]

Originally posted by md_student2b
Oh, did you want to have 4 kids because you wanted 2 boys and 2 girls? That's why I wanted to have 4 kids, being an only child myself, I thought it would be easier for my own to have a sibbling of the same sex. My gf doesn't really see my logic though.

in case you didn't see it in my post before, I'm the oldest of 6. 3 girls, 3 boys. (in the order of G,G,B,B,B,G)
it does balance things out nicely. my sister who is right after me, is in college now. sometimes when I go home the balance is thrown off and there is too much testosterone. then I have to come in and regulate. I love the fact that my 17 year old brother has yet to figure out he is taller and stronger than me now. 😀

 

[pathdr2b]

Originally posted by Mike59
I am deeply, no, terribly sorry to express AN OPINION about what I think a family should be. I aplogize for speaking and yield to the superiority of your ideal family, which is obviously the ONLY way, and the RIGHT way.
Hugs and Kisses,
Mike59😍

I am a woman and I understood EXACTLy what Mike59 was trying to say from his first post. I didn't find what he said sexist at all but having known and worked around maybe 100 woman doctors, I know that what he's saying is somewhat true.

Family practice is a good field for a woman that wants to have 4 children. This doesn't mean that a woman surgeon should not have children but that she needs to be realistic about the number of children she has and the role she wants to play in their lives. Almost all of the the women doctors I've met have either 1 or 2 children or none at all. This sounds much more realistic to me than 4 kids although it's certainily not impossible.

 

[surge]

Originally posted by Blitzkrieg
In my opinion, my wife will best be happy at home with my kids; In my opinion, it will be the best thing for her, my kids, and for me...
....
She will have alot of cool things to do, but first and foremost, her job is to be a mother to our children....
....
I know what happens whenever women are feminists..I think we all know (check out society today)

I can't believe you are actually saying that a woman that doesn't see your wisdom and doesn't understand that staying at home to take care of you and your children is not only 'her job', but also 'the best thing for her', is a feminist. 😱

To me, that's simply a strong, smart and independent woman.

And to claim that our society is the way it is today because of the feminist movement is just flawed logic. I hope you don't apply this kind of 'critical thinking' when treating your future patients. 🙄

 

[pillowhead]

Originally posted by Blitzkrieg
Not interested in writing a PhD thesis on tar baby for SDN, sorry....there is plenty of material available to read...check out anything by Phyllis for starters.

No no no, don't weasel your way out of this one by just referring to someone else's writings. That's pretty pathetic. Let me address some of thing peope think feminists are/believe.

1. man haters? Not here. I think I have been the one most defending the role of fathers in children's lives as being more than sperm and money donors. One of the most tragic things that can happen to a child is the absence of a father in his or her life, but someow in this modern world, it's okay for women to say, well I don't need a man, and somehow that's supposed to mean her child doesn't either. Totally disagre.

2. Support affirmative action for women? BS. i can compete with any man without needing a leg up from anyone, esp. the gov't. And if I can't, it certainly isn't because I'm inherently some way or another, it's because I simply lack the knowledge.

3. Support welfare programs? I'm a huge opponent of of almost all welfare programs with the exception of a handful that will eventually help the recepient become self-sufficient.

So I hope you enjoyed my "PhD thesis". I would love to hear a response, Blitzkreig, describing your (not some already published author) stereotype of how all feminists are. Because you know, we all think exactly the same

 

[pillowhead]

Originally posted by surge
I can't believe you are actually saying that a woman that doesn't see your wisdom and doesn't understand that staying at home to take care of you and your children is not only 'her job', but also 'the best thing for her', is a feminist. 😱

To me, that's simply a strong, smart and independent woman.

And to claim that our society is the way it is today because of the feminist movement is just flawed logic. I hope you don't apply this kind of 'critical thinking' when treating your future patients. 🙄

Thank you surge. I love how it's okay to always bash the feminist movement, but the civil righs movement...whoa baby! That's like holy ground. Both started with excellent intentions, and in recent years, both have had problems with very radical members who aren't interested in equality but actual special treatment. Please don't assume all feminists wholeheartedly support organization like NOW or are just waiting to cry sexual harassment. My male boss at work last week brushed against my backside and then apologized profusely later for fear I would accuse him of harassment. Trust me, I think that's a very sad state of affairs and do not believe that's what the original feminist movement ever had in mind as an ideal America. I am more than happy to have a man act chivalrous to me on a date and don't think his opening a door for me implies I'm the weaker sex. But when we're talking about legal treatment under the law and treatment in the workplace with regards to hiring, promotions, wages, etc, men and women should be treated as complete equals. If you really believe that a woman surgeon cannot also be a good mother, than that is necessarily going to affect the way you treat and hire female surgeons which is a pretty scary thing in America in the year 2003.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Originally posted by surge
I can't believe you are actually saying that a woman that doesn't see your wisdom and doesn't understand that staying at home to take care of you and your children is not only 'her job', but also 'the best thing for her', is a feminist. 😱

To me, that's simply a strong, smart and independent woman.

And to claim that our society is the way it is today because of the feminist movement is just flawed logic. I hope you don't apply this kind of 'critical thinking' when treating your future patients. 🙄

LOL....

Actually, what you said here:

"I mean, WOW, I want a woman who is at least as smart as me. Why would I ever settle for anybody else? Am I not trying to find someone to share my life with, someone who can and does see things the way I see them, who laughs when I laugh and cries when I cry, who is an equal partner, who constantly challenges me, who I can always teach and learn from, who I support as she supports me?"

Is exactly what I have been saying this whole time. Not suprisingly, my words are misconstrued by people...I gave this example to someone asking last night...

Ex: I want to do missionary medical work. Therefore, a woman I would find to be an ideal wife and mother would probably be a woman who was a well rounded doctor, fluent in a few languages.

Get the idea?

It isn't sexism..far from it..I think that the most successful marriages come when a husband and wife combine their resources towards a common goal. What's so bad about that? I'm sure someone will find something.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

No no no, don't weasel your way out of this one by just referring to someone else's writings. That's pretty pathetic. Let me address some of thing peope think feminists are/believe.

She's already done a good enough job, and I dont want to get in a tar baby that will end up with y'all calling me sexists or bigoted..something that always happens due to the twisting of my words.. Besides, I have a completely dfferent philosophical viewpoint; One that I believe I have already layed out on this thread enough for one to get the idea.


1. man haters? Not here. I think I have been the one most defending the role of fathers in children's lives as being more than sperm and money donors. One of the most tragic things that can happen to a child is the absence of a father in his or her life, but someow in this modern world, it's okay for women to say, well I don't need a man, and somehow that's supposed to mean her child doesn't either. Totally disagre.


I agree...the father should be in the kid's life fulltime. Don't diagree there.


2. Support affirmative action for women? BS. i can compete with any man without needing a leg up from anyone, esp. the gov't. And if I can't, it certainly isn't because I'm inherently some way or another, it's because I simply lack the knowledge.

Well, you can't compete with men on the field of battle; Barring that, you're probably right. Affirmative action for women or anyone else is inherently racist/sexist, because it implies that they need a leg up: They dont. I never said that I dont want my wife being very well educated and having a career..Did I? No, I did not.


3. Support welfare programs? I'm a huge opponent of of almost all welfare programs with the exception of a handful that will eventually help the recepient become self-sufficient.

Good....funny, I see us agreeing..What did you disagree with again?

So I hope you enjoyed my "PhD thesis". I would love to hear a response, Blitzkreig, describing your (not some already published author) stereotype of how all feminists are. Because you know, we all think exactly the same

What was the thesis statement? "How blitz and I agree?" I didn't really see the point of this post except it shows you how much you and I agree LOL.

 

[pillowhead]

I was not happy with the fact that you were basically implying all feminists would think the same when you said "I know what happens whenever women are feminists." So I asked you to tell me how all feminists are the same, to further expand on this statement. You refused (copped out in my opinion) by simply referring me to another author's writings. So I stated three common misconceptions about feminists and why they are misconceptions. I have been trying not to call you sexist or bigoted because one, I'm not interested in name calling, i'm interested in discussing, and two, when you throw out the names, people just get defensive and conversation ceases to be productive.

So if you'd be willing to tell me what you think about feminists, I promise to refrain from attacking you. Because really, I want to know what you think. I'm glad we have some common ground to work with...as is usually the case in life, humans have much more in common than they have different.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I was not happy with the fact that you were basically implying all feminists would think the same when you said "I know what happens whenever women are feminists."

I do know what happens whenever women are feminists: Society crumbles. LOL.

So I asked you to tell me how all feminists are the same, to further expand on this statement. You refused (copped out in my opinion) by simply referring me to another author's writings.

Yes, an author who has wonderful writings on the topic; I can't top Miss Phyllis, who is a dear woman indeed!


So I stated three common misconceptions about feminists and why they are misconceptions. I have been trying not to call you sexist or bigoted because one, I'm not interested in name calling, i'm interested in discussing, and two, when you throw out the names, people just get defensive and conversation ceases to be productive.

I didn't throw out any names; I stated my position and was ridiculed for it. LOL. I thought the conversation was fine until people started calling me names and telling me that I shouldnt apply my flawed logic to my patients.. You feminists and liberals are too much.



So if you'd be willing to tell me what you think about feminists, I promise to refrain from attacking you. Because really, I want to know what you think. I'm glad we have some common ground to work with...as is usually the case in life, humans have much more in common than they have different.

What I think about feminists? I don't like them. Feminists, in my opinion, are those that undermine the basic family values upon which a successful society is built. Of course, those basic family values are built upon the foundations of scripture. Therefore, if someone (which most SDNers do) disagree with the foundation of scripture, the rest of the argument is pointless. However, if you will assume with me that the foundation of scripture is valid, then we can have a discussion, starting right there. Otherwise, there is no reason to proceed 🙂

If that is the case, then I point you to Phyllis Schlafly..She attacks feminism head on, something I dont have time to do on SDN...However, if you want to start on the bottom and work up, we can.

Additionally, it seems that we agree (mostly) on the role of a woman and man in marriage; I don't exactly see your beef except that I claim to not like feminists (as any red blooded American young man would say). 🙂 Perhaps you can clarify once again?

 

[shamthis]

Pillowhead,

If you're so adamant about women's rights and societal reform, I suggest you stop whining and make an active effort to affect change.

You can do it!

Love
Sham 'Title IX' This

 

[VienneseWaltz]

Originally posted by Blitzkrieg

Well, you can't compete with men on the field of battle

Right, because the government says we can't. (1) Most battle today isn't hand-to-hand. (2) Women are smaller, more flexible, and have a higher threshold for pain. This can be an advantage in combat. I would NOT concede that a properly trained male soldier would necessarily win a battle with a properly trained female soldier.

Keep digging, Blitzkrieg ...

 

[VienneseWaltz]

Originally posted by shamthis
Pillowhead,

If you're so adamant about women's rights and societal reform, I suggest you stop whining and make an active effort to affect change.

You can do it!

Love
Sham 'Title IX' This

WTF?! You just want her to shut up because she's making you look bad.

Publishing one's opinion is a primary means of effecting social change, which is exactly what she's been doing.

We are changing things by going into medicine and refusing to accept the current situation. Eventually, we will drown out these troglodyte opinions.

Keep posting, pillowhead.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Originally posted by VienneseWaltz


Right, because the government says we can't. (1) Most battle today isn't hand-to-hand. (2) Women are smaller, more flexible, and have a higher threshold for pain. This can be an advantage in combat. I would NOT concede that a properly trained male soldier would necessarily win a battle with a properly trained female soldier.

Keep digging, Blitzkrieg ...

ROFL. I'll dig in for whatever bombardment you have: Men are better on the battle field than women are. There may be exceptions (the best trained women could whip a man in one on one), for sure, but just ask any veteran of any combat. Men were built for combat physically and psychologically; Women were not.

Everyone, VienneseWaltz is an example of a feminist. That answer your question pillow?

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Originally posted by shamthis
Pillowhead,

If you're so adamant about women's rights and societal reform, I suggest you stop whining and make an active effort to affect change.

You can do it!

Love
Sham 'Title IX' This

Title IX..

 

[shamthis]

A fiesty one, aren't you?

Actually, pillowhead is not making me look bad; criminy, she has yet to "dignify" the scientific statement I posted earlier. I think debate is fun, it's sport at its most intellectual. Don't let our comments, our opinions, rouse you. You are clearly a stong liberal-minded individual, and your drive will take you places doubtless.

I think you're efforts here are futile. As a woman you have every opportunity to accomplish whatever it is you care to accomplish. I have scrubbed in with female orthopedic surgeons, I have watched women win NASCAR races, and I have lost to women in road races. There is no question in my mind that women are capable of great things.

Argument on your behalf indicates insecurity. I urge you to stop striking back with uncertain, blindly flailing retorts and shine on through life. I seek strong women, like my girlfriend, who accomplish great things without trying to 'prove' something. People like Mike59 and Blitz aren't unfair or shortsighted. They only desire a tradional family setting, and hence a more domestic wife. There's nothing dishonorable or malicious about that. So please, relax. If you can't enjoy the sport of debate, get out.

Sham

 

[VienneseWaltz]

Blitzkrieg, you know very little about my politics. Let's just say someone has to be pretty far to the right on a subject to make me look like a liberal. You clearly mean "feminist" pejoratively, however, so I'm thinking that whatever your definition, I should consider it a compliment.

So, what about black people? Their physiques differ from Caucasians, and who knows, maybe their psychologies, too? Who's "better" in battle? Because it's REALLY IMPORTANT that we decide, for every conceivable occupation, who among us is "best" for it based on genetic composition.

 

[VienneseWaltz]

That's kind of funny, sham, that "argument" indicates insecurity, whereas trying to get the other side to stop talking apparently indicates some kind of confidence.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Originally posted by VienneseWaltz
Blitzkrieg, you know very little about my politics. Let's just say someone has to be pretty far to the right on a subject to make me look like a liberal. You clearly mean "feminist" pejoratively, however, so I'm thinking that whatever your definition, I should consider it a compliment.

So, what about black people? Their physiques differ from Caucasians, and who knows, maybe their psychologies, too? Who's "better" in battle? Because it's REALLY IMPORTANT that we decide, for every conceivable occupation, who among us is "best" for it based on genetic composition.

I said feminists AND liberals. I didnt say that you were both; I was addressing a general crowd. As shamthis said, "I seek strong women, like my girlfriend, who accomplish great things without trying to 'prove' something. " I am the same way. I have a traditional view of women in marriage; Something I think liberates and honors women far more than any resolution passed by the hags at NOW.

What about black people? Some of the most valient men in combat have been black men. your point? Men and Women are completely different physiologically and psychologically..What med school do you go to? LOL. Please, go take a physiology course..Maybe you'll learn that women and men are different after all.

Men are built for combat, both physically and psychologically. Women are not. In no way does this degrade women! My gosh, men are protecting women on the battlefield...that is more honouring to women than nearly anything I can imagine. Women can have a role in the military, as they do now...But not on the field of battle. Sorry if this burns your NOW-cultured buns, but that's the way it is, and the way it will always be 🙂

 

[shamthis]

Originally posted by VienneseWaltz
That's kind of funny, sham, that "argument" indicates insecurity, whereas trying to get the other side to stop talking apparently indicates some kind of confidence.

I'll reiterate (in big bold easy-to-read letters): If you can't enjoy the sport of debate, get out. I tried to get that to start flashing, but to no avail.

Relax
Sham 'Secure as Elton John at a Yankees game' This

 

[VienneseWaltz]

If you think I support *anything* that NOW says, you REALLY don't know my politics ...

My point in referring to race was to illustrate the lunacy of arguing ex ante that genetic endowment dictates who's good at doing what.

What you have yet to acknowledge is different physical traits have different advantages and disadvantages. Strong, large people have less maneuverability in a physical altercation, which a fast, flexible small person could exploit. You would not assume that a large man would automatically beat a smaller man in a fight, right? That's exactly what I'm talking about--men are not automatically better at battle because of size and strength (and I don't know where your psychology argument comes from). This isn't a matter of politics so much as facts.

 

[VienneseWaltz]

Sham, you keep illustrating my point.

I also would like to point out that I have not resorted to insulting other people's intelligence as a substitute for making my arguments.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

If you think I support *anything* that NOW says, you REALLY don't know my politics ...

LOL. You support women in combat. NOW supports women in combat. I think you have a problem!

My point in referring to race was to illustrate the lunacy of arguing ex ante that genetic endowment dictates who's good at doing what.

Your point was taken, and then discarded as the lunacy that it is. IF you believe that the differences between the black and white races are as great as the differences between male and female, then many people would call you a racists. LOL.



What you have yet to acknowledge is different physical traits have different advantages and disadvantages. Strong, large people have less maneuverability in a physical altercation, which a fast, flexible small person could exploit. You would not assume that a large man would automatically beat a smaller man in a fight, right? That's exactly what I'm talking about--men are not automatically better at battle because of size and strength (and I don't know where your psychology argument comes from). This isn't a matter of politics so much as facts.

Facts: Testosterone pwns estrogen on the field of battle.
Facts: women and men dont mix well in combat situations.
Facts: women can have babies...men can't. Is that unfair? Should I demand equal rights? LOL
Facts: Men were designed for combat, physically and psychologically. They are better at it, they should protect women at home, and training civilized young men to suppress their inclinations to be protective and courteous toward women is not merely wrong and stupid, it is evil and wicked.

 

[VienneseWaltz]

Blitzkrieg--

You haven't responded to my points, so I don't know why I'm responding to yours, but here goes ...

NOW: I will never be picketing for women to go into combat. Frankly, it's an issue I don't care very much about. But I do take issue with the argument that women are necessarily inferior in that capacity. Whether they ought to be in battle, I don't know, but it's simply not true to say that one sex is superior over the other.

Also, I'm not sure why you keep assuming that I have a problem with courteous behavior. My husband opens the door for me, helps me into my coat, and walks between me and the curb on sidewalks. I love it. It's a far cry from chivalrous behavior to claiming superiority on the battlefield.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Ah, Viennese..perhaps you can explain the following discrepency:

Male PFT: http://www.unt.edu/afrotc/Cadet Information/PFT Page/PFT REQ/pft_male.html

Female PFT: http://www.unt.edu/afrotc/Cadet Information/PFT Page/PFT REQ/pft_fem.html


Why are there seperate PFT requirements for men and women?

pushups for 150 points (perfect): women: 46
pushups for 150 (perfect) points: men: 80

1.5 mile run for men: 200 points (perfect): 7 min 30 sec
1.5 mile run for women: 200 points (perfect): 10 min

 

[VienneseWaltz]

I think having separate requirements is wrong. And demeaning.

(See that one coming?)

🙂

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Blitzkrieg--

You haven't responded to my points, so I don't know why I'm responding to yours, but here goes ...

NOW: I will never be picketing for women to go into combat. Frankly, it's an issue I don't care very much about. But I do take issue with the argument that women are necessarily inferior in that capacity. Whether they ought to be in battle, I don't know, but it's simply not true to say that one sex is superior over the other.

I have been answering yours...You just dont like my answers 🙂 If it is an issue that you dont care about, then why argue it on here?

As for the issue that women are inferior in capacity...

They are. Physically and psychologically. It is true, and they shouldn't be in fields of battle. Aside from that, women should be upheld, protected, and treated with the utmost respect. Putting them on the battlefield does not accomplish this...As I said before, training civilized young men to suppress their inclinations to be protective and courteous toward women is not merely wrong and stupid, it is evil and wicked.



Also, I'm not sure why you keep assuming that I have a problem with courteous behavior.

maybe it's because you blatantly do! LOL You claim to not want to be protected on the battlefield by men, but want your equal shot to be shot, stabbed, smacked, and raped by an oncoming enemy.


My husband opens the door for me, helps me into my coat, and walks between me and the curb on sidewalks. I love it. It's a far cry from chivalrous behavior to claiming superiority on the battlefield.

I'm glad that your husband is treating you well; It's not a far cry at all. Why do you love it? Shouldn't you have the opportunity to take off and put on your own coat, open your own doors? He is showing his superiority over you! 😡

All the more so when the men of the 82nd Airborne take down the Republican Guard...They are protecting your right to vote, to be a feminist, to live here, or even to own a coat. Remember that 🙂

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Originally posted by VienneseWaltz
I think having separate requirements is wrong. And demeaning.

(See that one coming?)

🙂

Sure, I saw it coming...Let's make the requirements equal..Ah wait..we already do! In the special forces 🙂 Women can't handle those requirements (obviously), because no women are in the spec ops.

Still doesn't detract from my argument: Women should be upheld, respected, protected, and served.

Your argument: You're wrong, I should be equal, I deserve no special treatment from men, I can make it on my own.

Now, which one sounds better to you ladies out there? Being served, honored, protected, and upheld as the special women that you are? Or having the equal chance to be shot, stabbed, raped, and bludgeoned on the battle field?



Ladies?