Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Winning the war against men, Part 2
World Net Daily ^ | July 12, 2010 | Vox Popoli

Posted on 07/12/2010 11:15:41 AM PDT by Christian Cage

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: Mrs. Don-o
An emotion-driven woman is a shrieking monster. True...

I suspect all shrieking women are emotional monsters, sure. But at least they're being honest about it.

It's the quiet ones who are emotionally driven that are dangerous for men.

It has nothing to do with volume.

21 posted on 07/12/2010 1:45:45 PM PDT by gogeo ("Every one has a right to be an idiot. He abuses the privilege!" Groucho Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

I wonder if, for example, the Catholic Church would marry two people under Canon Law without a state-issued marriage license. I mean, it seems to me that the secular institution stands in so many ways athwart the Catholic understanding of marriage that one would think that the Church would prefer to avoid any association with that institution in the public mind. I think that other Christian denominations might feel this way. If memory serves, the great R.J. Rushdoony (my favorite Protestant theologian) had something to say about this.


22 posted on 07/12/2010 1:53:46 PM PDT by Erskine Childers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Erskine Childers

I’m not Catholic, but I checked into getting married without a marriage license. Apparently it is illegal for a priest/minister/etc. to do so.


23 posted on 07/12/2010 2:22:55 PM PDT by RobRoy (The US Today: Revelation 18:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: gogeo
Well, that's true, too. I know a woman who...

(Eeek. Many a story will start out that way...)

Ah, skip the story. Let me just agree that quiet, emotion-driven women are dangerous for men. But I maintain that the same kind of man, is dangerous for women.

How's this: women are arguably both more emotional and more aware of their emotions, and so in a better position over the years to face, understand and develop deliberate strategies of self-control or self-management (because there's no option of ignoring female feelings, they're right out there like a rash on the face.)

Whereas men are slower to access their emotions, and likely slower to acknowledge, understand, or try to remedy them. (Because they carry them inside, like a deep inflammation they don't even know is there.)

In truth, I am not so very confident about my generlizations, since right away I start thinking of exceptions! And the people I know and like best, male and female, are "working on themselves," trying to do better on handling this stuff day by day.

So on that note, wishing you a good day, I bow and exit.

24 posted on 07/12/2010 2:35:17 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (In theory. there's no difference between theory and practice. But in practice, there is. -Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
I don't doubt that I'm angry now and much of this is emotion on my part. However I wasn't happy for many years in the marriage and never considered leaving, ever. I believe that once a couple has a kid, in spite of the vows they've already taken, the game changes. Even if you believe in divorce, which I don't generally, the first kid changes everything. Kids do better with both parents, it's not even a question, and parents owe that to their kids.

As far as all women, they are more emotionally driven than men, and this is a problem in business. I've worked under women who have the power to affect people's lives, and make those decisions based on emotion. It's an unstable way to run a business. The fact that many men now operate the same way is attributed to the feminization of our country. We are poorer for it.

25 posted on 07/12/2010 2:36:07 PM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Erskine Childers

They might in the future. They may only agree to marry people who wouldn’t get married by the state.


26 posted on 07/12/2010 6:14:58 PM PDT by BenKenobi (I want to hear more about Sam! Samwise the stouthearted!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Comment #27 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson