| Blogs > swallowtsui > Hopping Swallow 鍋爐焰焰 |
|
Women's History, the longer the more attractive? Actually, if my memory does not go wrong, this was a script line spoken by Mae West in one of her most remembered movie. My translation fm Chinese, not exactly: "Men are always interested in women with past history, because they wish history would be repeated." A woman with history sure has more experience of life and love. Sure this will add to her charm and sexiness. But would she repeat history with a new man or man's one-side tale? Reversely, does it mean woman of no history is unattractive? Your ideas, please. p.s. War, war, war... Israel vs Lebanon. Bush: self-defend! but caution abt the consequences. We discuss abt men/women relationship yet wars are never result of insufficient two sexes relationhip. |
|||
7/17/2006 3:30 am |
The exact quote is: Women with pasts interest men... they hope history will repeat itself. She had a few gems. Another one along the same lines is: When women go bad, men go right after them. What do you mean by "man's one-side tale"?
| ||
|
Women with past interest men...they hope history will repeat itself. When women go bad, men go right after them. Tks, EM, Mae West gems. Men's one-side tale means men's unilateral willingness. Sorry fr my inperfect Eng. Anachro & DVC, I C! but Can you go deeper than biological concern? when all comes to a fullstop at sex, sounds ...shallow...
| ||
7/18/2006 2:22 am |
No apology necessary, Swallow. If anything it should be me apologising for being a monoglot. Please don’t take this the wrong way or as a criticism, I admire anyone who is even conversant in another language that is not their own, but may I be so rude as to ask if you use some kind of programme to translate from the Chinese, because some of the English words you use are quite arcane? … So, it’s the old biological imperative at work. Essentially, there are only two types of women as far as men are concerned: The type they scr*w and the type they marry? And men are blameless for this fact because ‘all’ he’s doing is making sure the progeny she’s carrying is his. What about the men? Is it totally unreasonable then to expect they come with the same pristine past as she’s supposed to? What if she is a better WHITE liar than he is? Simply because nature has equipped women with more intuition than men, thereby, theoretically at least, giving them better skills of manipulation. I have had no great cause to lie in my life but I can see how easily (too easy) it can be done.
| ||
7/18/2006 9:52 am |
Your Holiness, No one’s asking for the man to be a virgin - the sound of which btw is as ridiculous to me as asking for the woman to be a virgin - but to demonstrate his ability to stick around to take equal share in the upbringing of the child ‒ commensurate with a lack of promiscuity. MEANING, he won’t be much use if he’s busy scr*wing around, fulfilling that good old biological imperative, whether by actually multiplying his own gene pool bunging in as many buns in as many ovens as he can manage, or acting it out in part. We’re not talking about female chimps clamouring for the favours of the alpha male of the pack who more often than not does NOT have a hand in the raising of any offspring. With the economic power of (human) women catching up with men, human males are losing what may have worked until now as a sound biological basis (excuse) for bad behaviour, lying, abuse and dominance. It used to be his pedigree as a prime breeder was determined by all the outward signs of physical vigour, strength, aggression, political power AND the ability to provide. I can’t speak for all women, perhaps I may still be in the minority, but these are NOT the sole qualities I would look for in a permanent partner. Perhaps I can only be taken seriously by using the same motifs that society only understands when I acquire a younger trophy husband, but then I’d only be slapped down again by other ugly stereotypes designed to keep women in their rightful submissive place. Non-invasive DNA testing is getting cheaper and easier all the time, done with a swab on the inside cheek, faecal matter, hair, sweat, amniotic fluid, whatever. Just like they do in field studies of chimpanzees to show that while our closest cousins do not have the same boring social shackles we invented to incarcerate or torture ourselves but inbuilt mechanisms just to make sure they don’t mate with close relatives to prevent inbreeding. With such tests costing less than US$1000 a pop, a tiny fraction of the total costs to raise and educate a child till they’re at least 21 if not beyond, just what is it REALLY that men fear? Surely not… losing the last bastion of control over women? *mock gasps* It’s Mould by the way, if you please, not EM.
| ||
|
DVC, "what kind of delirious control some women hold over their men? Only some, or most women? In my experience, most". Are you mistaking women's care for men as control? Some women are caring, mother-like to their men, and want to be treated same, so they interfere w/ the men's track, probaly everything. Well, this creates the problems for men but women think it's love and care. A question of to sustain a two-in-one world, or a harmonic two persons' world, or two individual worlds. No control at all. Apparently, two-in-one world may be wrong. Btw, men are animals of malice when they feel offended.
| ||
|
And, DVC Who's the teenagers and young guys fighting for the "Monsters"? Their sons? No, no! Do you think they would break up their "happy" family by sending their offsprings to war? Those in war are sons/daughters of lower strata, but their leadership keep their "happy" sweet home right in comfort zone, with their sons/daughters in Oxford(s), Yale(s). My supposing that war launchers protect their own happy life/family well does stand w/ facts.
| ||
7/21/2006 7:23 am |
As I am more interested in fundamental research than in applied research, DNA testing methods/cost leave me cold. As a matter of fact, when my first child was born, there was some reason to believe I may not have fathered him. It was a matter of seconds before I decided I would not enquire any further: the baby was nice and healthy, and environment is, in my opinion, more important than genes. What good would it have made to whom to know he was somebody else's child? I took fundamental reasearch into account, which teaches me how a given species acts, and I saw that I did not need applied research to help me, as I was -- and am -- an individual who is not to be dictated to act like a species. This may be called consciousness... Your Holiness, I like the two central ideas in bold. May I ask for a clarification though: Was it because you were in a stable, monogamous partnership with the mother of the child at the time? What if you weren’t or even no longer in partnership with her but child support was still demanded of you, would you then have challenged paternity? You don’t have to answer such a personal question of course. No offence intended. I am not questioning your honour or morals which are entirely your own. Just curious. I completely doubt my ex husband’s. And not because of any residual acrimony towards him but, simply and plainly, what I do know of his predisposition to act in unacceptable ways for a responsible adult. He is in essence only my little girl’s biological father ie. he hasn’t been a Dad to her in the daily thick of the battle sense since she was four. It isn’t personal conscience that makes him contribute a small monthly token for her expenses but only the weight of social expectation (shame) that he plays out this thinnest of façades of still being some kind of provider. If I ever joked with him that my little girl is not his biologically, and even though he repeatedly declares he “loves” her because, really, he has never chosen a more demonstrative recourse, as if only by repeatedly declaring it to all my family members he might convince them or himself that he does, I have zero faith in his capacity for unconditional love as a parent. He sees her as being biologically, and therefore and ONLY because of that, part of him. His existence to me figures no more (and no less) on my personal consciousness than if he had been an anonymous sperm donor. I’m sure one of the first thoughts to cross his mind won’t be a sense of loss of a child he always thought was his, but instead dumbfounded shock and annoyance at having being duped, followed quickly by relief of being relinquished of the financial obligation. He would forget her in a day. Please note I say all this not with bitterness but as a matter of fact, observation. I don’t know what an equivalent question would be for me. Maybe… What if I got a call after all these years telling me I had taken the wrong baby home from hospital? Still, the elements do not come anywhere close to matching those of the question of paternity you earlier pointed out, since it was also hospital policy never to have the baby removed from the mother’s side at any time after it is born. Ask me another question, if you like. Maybe, if I had to look after a new partner’s children who were not biologically mine? Hard to say, have never been in such a situation and it would depend on all the factors involved specific to that case only. As for ignorance, you’ll be surprised how “tradition” can be cited in the name of abuse even by those apparently educated enough to know better. My father is a man of science, one of the trail blazers of his generation and country who came back from one of the great institutions of the UK. Even though chiefly English-speaking he has always prided himself as a “Confucian”-type patriarch, that is, upholding it in its worst caricatures, and had variously expressed his regret for having let us, his daughters, grow up in the UK and derided us for being “feminists” with no notion of “filial piety”. In my second last violent altercation with him, after striking me publicly, he smirkingly remarked “In Asia children get killed for disobedience to their parents”. Every time you say something back at me I feel like I’m being reprimanded for generalising on the behaviour of men. I am not. Though of course you’re too smart and elegant to say it directly. In any case, I welcome the discussion and exchange.
| ||
|
Hey dear two Holinesses, On one hand, human society is constructed based on biological links,like the other species. On the other hand, both mankind and species are not merely biological, they can be intellectual and emotional. Spending time long together sharing love/care can also bond those without gene connections. Therefore we have adoption found in human and animals. If you pour love to your kid for 12 years and one day find out he/she is a mistake - not your genetic kid, by then another your real biological kid appear fm another family where he/she also live happily. What's yr reaction? Would you correct the displacement? What matters more, genes or environment, as you said?
| ||
7/23/2006 8:27 am |
Swallow, If I found out my child were not genetically mine, it would open up a Pandora’s box of moral issues, doubts, worry, yes. I really can’t say how I would act until I am in such a situation. I have often surprised myself with what I have eventually done opposite to premeditation or “common sense”. There are infinite variables, because it really depends on the factors specific to the circumstances and individuals involved, as I said earlier. For example… I wouldn’t give up the non-genetic child I raised because of the intense emotional bond and I’m not sure if I would tell her of her real background until she reaches legal adult age. The world is very simple to children ‒ it boils down to material comforts. I give her a comfortable life, not extravagant but not too frugal either with little luxuries. I don’t think it would be too much of a contest; at this age she would pick the obviously wealthier family even if they were strangers. Or maybe not, because we have a more egalitarian, discursive relationship than many. She says she misses me when we spend time apart. Then again, she says she misses her friends too and they come and go. She is more a partner to me than a child and is actively involved in all the decisions that affect both of us; we have heated arguments! I still wouldn’t be brave enough to let her have her own decision on this matter, so in the end I would overrule her on power of veto alone. Risking her resentment when I tell her only at 21 would be worth it. It would be for my own selfish reasons, wouldn’t it? What would I be depriving her of if I withheld the information until then? What if you were the non-genetic child I’m raising? However, I would also have to find out to my satisfaction that my genetic child is indeed happy in the family that raised her. What if I didn’t like the ethos of the family that was raising her/him even if s/he seems happy? It’s a different issue when I see all around me and don’t agree with the way other people raise their children. But this is my genetic child here being raised by people I don’t like. What if I thought I was the best family to raise BOTH the non-genetic child and genetic child? For myself I don’t feel close to my own parents or relatives. Apart from the outward physical resemblances or mannerisms, in outlook and core values I’m so different they sometimes treat me as… a polite stranger. They were not the passionately doting and protective parents that I am to my little girl. Especially if they had known the adult I turned out to be and they’ve expressed it many times since, I’m sure they would have gladly made the simple switch and got back their genetic child.
| ||
7/25/2006 10:58 pm |
Rinpoche, But if I hear about someone else's mistreated and unhappy child in any family, I would also care for them... We’re not talking about child abuse here, just if one just doesn’t agree with the way a child is raised. Eg. my cousin and his wife are raising a whiny rude little brat who will grow up to be a tyrant. I wouldn’t stand for a child of mine to be raised by such people who by any reckoning have the same rights as anyone to have children but whom I personally think of as idiots. ... I started writing the above last night but I will have to continue another time. Shaken by some bad news this morning. A family friend lost a child yesterday. I like chatting with both you and Swallow very much. It is my privilege to make your acquaintance. You say and ask interesting things that calm me down and make me sort out my thoughts.
| ||
|
By the way, may I suppose that so many Chinese women "with sexual pasts" are turning to Western men also (or mainly) because their Eastern men still do not want them... It is indeed very strange, because there are fewer women than men in China, so they should be in great demand. Apparently, old traditions in China are still stronger than the market law, and Chinese men still obey basic biology laws... DVC, Well, an irony: China has the oldest tradition but as well embraces the newest virtues and standards fm the West. Bad! Miserable! So pls dont worry abt excessive Chinese women becoz there's no such a thing. The case is that today the women choose men, an up-side-down with the past.
| ||
|
Mould, Though we may not always agree due to that we grow up in dif. environment, I also like communicating w/ you, a woman w/ independent ideas and thoughts and honestly reflect them. I shall find tme to reply to yr long comment to my provocation of your Chinese roots. A nice weekend.
| ||
7/30/2006 1:02 am |
Even told without bitterness, your story sounds like a very sad one. If I may ask: how an undoubtedly smart woman like you could make such a big mistake as to marry this man in the first place? (I'm not saying your ex is necessarily less good than you, but judging from what happened to your relationship, that both of you were incompatible.) Thank you for your vote of confidence! Do you understand that people can be thrown into unexpected trajectories and experience rebirths within a single lifetime? I don’t recognise that person as me any more, so when I find myself answering similar questions to yours from friends who have also met my ex and are incredulous we could ever have been together I relate it as a colourful morality tale or soap opera, unemotionally, about someone else who isn’t me. It seems blatantly simple with hindsight but going through the process of discovery must have been a necessary part of my own growth. I was probably still very much a product of my upbringing or the limitations of one belief system at the time. In a nutshell, my ex was my first long term boyfriend and for a long time I excused his behaviour and egocentrism, I really thought all men were like that, like my father. I know a bit better now; I'm ridiculously grateful and relieved to know that they (you) are not all like that, lol. The lesson I took away from that other lifetime ago was to recognise, avoid or bat off if need be needy takers who are drawn to my energy to their own ends. What I do still draw on however is this trait I’ve always had of seeing and accepting people as they are without over romanticising them.
| ||
|
Correct me if I am mistaken, but I thought that neither the future husband nor the future wife used to choose each other: this was traditionally done by their families... When and what period are you referring to? DVC Even as early as in 1970's and early 1980's, they had freedom in love and marriage choice. My father married my mother despite my grandparents didnt like her. My auntie loved and married my ex-uncle, a cynical bad guy as read by deceased my grandfather, which turned out to be true - he left the wife and son to Panama, leaving my aunt as a single mother without any support, and came back China to take away the son cunningly when he was 17, then he was divorced by my aunt. When I said women chose men, i meant more after marriage. (In love, they come close and choose each other mutually.) If the husband is not good, the women would leave and divorce them. But, on the other hand, a Chinese man will never divorce a wife.
| ||
|
But isn't it the price to pay for this long sought-after equality? If a woman feel fury when she was turned down even by giving herself "thoroughly", that means she doesnt put herself in the equal position w/ men. If she offered herself, a means that she thought a man must not reject; once rejected, she fell hurt - indignified. Her logic: What? I give but you dont take, insult! If women still unconsciously feel inferior to men, equality doesnt exist.
| ||
|
DVC The police case is anachoronistic. It went on until 1980's, 1990's. Even today if the police have some halt-prostiture task. You sometimes have anachoronism twds China. As your Chinese friend, I must correct you when you say "their marriage is arranged by family."
| ||
|
I will do a post "Gone with the wind", just to provoke DVC. You cant admit Scarlet is a real lady of vanity, but also who knows how to survive. I love Rhett and Scarlet's furious flirting.
|
