Men and women are different, but complement each other.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Abz2000
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 73
  • Views Views 16K
Women will be "equal" to men when men will be "equal" to God.
 
A simple example: If I ask my wife were the personal property tax receipts for our vehicles in 1999, she'll tell me, "Downstairs. Blue desk, left hand drawers, middle drawer. Manila envelope 1/2 to the back." And she will be right. Every time. I try not to ask all the time, but it could take hours for me to find that, if at all. I am glad when I know where my car keys are in the morning.
Women have good memory. While men?, sorry, I mean me. I can't remember how many times my wife told me "you forget everything, forget everything! if your hand could be removed and replaced you must be forget where you put your hand!"

Ooh, a memory with my beloved wife.

Ardianto, even with all he's been through lately, is still good for a story that makes me laugh everyday.
That boy was very naughty. Escape from home was his habit, no wonder if his parents had getting bored with it. But his parents didn't worry because he's a boy, like described in first part "They are boys! they can protect themselves! but she is a girl! if something bad happen to her, then how?!".

By the way, there was a joke among the boys when I was teen

"When our sister didn't back home on time, our parents were worry. When our parent lost their favorite stuff, they search it everywhere. But when we escape from home, our parent were calm and relax. So, if we want to escape from home, we should bring our parent favorite stuff, then they will search us everywhere"
 
An excellent article.

By saying that men and women are the same and by not acknowledging the differences between the sexes, what is happening is that women are being turned into men. How else can women be the same as men if not by turning women into men. This is why we now have women doing a lot of things that were once men's work, like even construction work and heavy labor. So when you start making women into men, it basically means that "femaleness" is an inferior thing. To be a woman is inferior. That's not equality with men. That's acknowledging men's superiority and women's inferiority and even uselessness unless she work's like a man, thinks like a man, behaves like a man, etc.
 
An excellent article.

By saying that men and women are the same and by not acknowledging the differences between the sexes, what is happening is that women are being turned into men. How else can women be the same as men if not by turning women into men. This is why we now have women doing a lot of things that were once men's work, like even construction work and heavy labor. So when you start making women into men, it basically means that "femaleness" is an inferior thing. To be a woman is inferior. That's not equality with men. That's acknowledging men's superiority and women's inferiority and even uselessness unless she work's like a man, thinks like a man, behaves like a man, etc.


I think that it's more equally of opportunity. If my girlfriend wants to work in construction and she can do the job - why shouldn't she?

I disagree that equality of opportunity leads to the inferiority of women - I think it actually promotes the opposite. You hear similar things said about the feminisation of men - a man staying home with the baby whilst his wife works, for example. I don't think that's true either. Again, if my girlfriend's job was better paid than mine, why wouldn't we choose for me to stay home? It wouldn't make me less "manly" or her less "womanly".

Obviously practically, many jobs may be unsuitable for one sex or the other, but it should be on a case-by-case basis as to whether an individual is suitable for the work. The days of "womens' work" or "mens' work" are, hopefully, over.
 
I think that it's more equally of opportunity. If my girlfriend wants to work in construction and she can do the job - why shouldn't she?
There are women in my place who work in construction projects, but not as construction worker who put the bricks to on the wall. Those women are working in other division like design or project administration.

Every woman must be have feminine nature although the level of feminine nature may different between one woman and another woman. The feminine nature make women in my place avoid job that too masculine except if they have no other choice.

Excuse me, are you sure your girlfriend would work as construction worker if she has other choices?

I disagree that equality of opportunity leads to the inferiority of women - I think it actually promotes the opposite. You hear similar things said about the feminisation of men - a man staying home with the baby whilst his wife works, for example. I don't think that's true either. Again, if my girlfriend's job was better paid than mine, why wouldn't we choose for me to stay home? It wouldn't make me less "manly" or her less "womanly".
Wow, wow, if you live in my place you would be laughed if you choose to stay at home just because your partner is paid better.

There are husbands in my place who have salaries lower than their wives, but they still work and not stay at home and live with the wives money.

Yes, this is related to manliness value.

Obviously practically, many jobs may be unsuitable for one sex or the other, but it should be on a case-by-case basis as to whether an individual is suitable for the work. The days of "womens' work" or "mens' work" are, hopefully, over.
I have enough much experiences in looking for employees for my companies or the company where I was working. I've ever opened job opportunities with clasification "for man or woman". However, there are some consideration that made me also opened job opportunities that for man only or woman only. It's because I knew the difference between men on women. So I tried to "put the right person in the right place"
 
Excuse me, are you sure your girlfriend would work as construction worker if she has other choices?

Well, my girlfriend doesn't want to work in construction, but if she did - why shouldn't she?

Wow, wow, if you live in my place you would be laughed if you choose to stay at home just because your partner is paid better.

There are husbands in my place who have salaries lower than their wives, but they still work and not stay at home and live with the wives money.

Yes, this is related to manliness value.

Where I live we don't measure masculinity like this. It's fine for a man to stay at home with the kids if he wants, I don't see that as "unmanly" at all.
 
No body ever said why the man has to support the family while the woman should not even if she has money.
 
The ideal spouse that you should focus on is the one that when you look at that person you have no trouble in saying MashAllah, SubhanAllah, and inshAllah, but hopefully not Astagfirullah. Sister's check this out.
 
Few weeks ago I was sitting in a food stall when a woman came. I saw there's no empty chair. Then I stood with intention to give my chair to her. But just I stood, and before I invite her to sit, a man suddenly sat on the chair that I left. So, I stood and she was standing too. Because this man, who didn't know how to respect a woman.

:hmm:

Men and women are different. All men know it. But unfortunately not every man know how to treat women in proper way, as a woman.
 
No body ever said why the man has to support the family while the woman should not even if she has money.

Allah gives you freedom of choice. You don't have to do anything. You can have a pre nuptial agreement to anything you please. If your future wife is rich, a bulk of it can be transferred into the husbands account so the man supports the family. It would make no sense for a man to toil all day for a pittance to support a rich wife.
 
Yes - so on what grounds would any secular state intervene to prevent any individual or group of individuals from entering a particular profession? Why should women be prevented from taking any job, if they proved themselves good enough to get the offer in the first place? Why should the state decide instead of the employer, who surely knows his/her own business best?

Physical jobs are in decline in the west (because of automation and the decline of heavy industry) so strength is less and less of an issue every year. It has turned out that women are at least as good as men in a whole range of jobs from which they were formerly discouraged or even barred. Why should the state make that judgement rather than the individual employer?

As an individual, I want complete equality of access to every profession - but I don't look for favouritism. I don't expect that some groups (eg women) should be removed from the competition altogether, just to make life easier for me. I also don't expect that any group, whether men or women, should be given unfair advantage over me. If I look for equality for myself, I have to be prepared to give it back to everyone else.

Whatever I achieve, I want to achieve by my own abilities, not because the opposition was artificially eliminated.

The main reason employers throughout the ages didn't like to employ women was because they got pregnant or if they didn't get pregnant they got period pain. Lets face it, you would rather employ a bullock to pull the load than a cow. Generally a females prime directive is to have babies the males is to provide for the family and to defend the family. The Soviets really pushed for equality, have you seen a Russian woman? Some of them can pick up a horse!
 
Well, my girlfriend doesn't want to work in construction, but if she did - why shouldn't she?



Where I live we don't measure masculinity like this. It's fine for a man to stay at home with the kids if he wants, I don't see that as "unmanly" at all.

Yeah some African cultures are like that. The women do all the work and the men just hang around chatting, but the men will defend the village and give the women some stick if they don't get their chores done. Sounds good to me LOL.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top