tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10539912.post8589037522177646272..comments2009-07-01T11:42:37.263-04:00Heartcrossingshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11611681863892546438heartcrossings@yahoo.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10539912.post-45027293098242672772009-07-01T11:42:37.263-04:002009-07-01T11:42:37.263-04:00HC,<br /> In earlier times people <i>in general</i>:<br /><br />a) embraced inter-dependence and made required sacrifices for it.<br /><br />b) accepted that one cannot be or get everything.<br /><br />Our root unhappiness post-women&#39;s-lib is that women are getting mixed messages. The messages being: <br /><br />1. a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle. <br />2. Success is everything. To be a success, one has to have it all: family (husband, kids), a great job, high material status (house and possessions). A man&#39;s success is wealth and how many women he can &quot;land&quot;.<br /><br />1&amp;2 are inherently contradictory. Premise 1 has encouraged men to be irresponsible and takers in relationships (but not givers). Premise 1 created by extreme feminists is fallacious because:<br /><br />a) men and women need each other biologically and otherwise.<br />b) alternative stable support systems have not evolved for families and individuals - friends are there but could drop off after a move or marriage.<br /><br />Premise 2 is a bit more sane but combined with Premise 1 somehow ensures that women have to be the pursuers when it comes to matrimony. Taken together the premises imply that having a family is not so important to men but somehow crucial for a woman.<br /><br />Also as long as a biological clock exists there is no true equality.<br /><br />Priya.Priyamvada_Khttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06797797769716970487noreply@blogger.com