the thread about nothing...

I hate the internet

Screenshot_20220711-170923_Messages.jpg
 
therealest1 said:
Those labels are dumb and uninformed because that's always been the standard in any relationship if there's a living together dynamic.

When a woman is in a relationship where they live with a male or female partner, they normally go outside to work or run errands or acquire necessities. It's called responsibility and being an adult.

It's OK for a woman to go out occasionally because she has to enjoy life, but to do it frequently like that person's mom did like a normal lifestyle is unacceptable. That person's mom never earned her leisure opportunities because she was enabled with them from the start of that sorry relationship.

If you had a woman living with you, would you be OK with her going out all the time for fun without having to work or handle responsibilities while you did all the work and earned money? I doubt you would be cool with having to fully support and enable her.

Most people assessed that was an unacceptable dynamic with that person's mom after I told them about it. How can it be acceptable for her to be out frequently when his mom didn't take care of the house and him? There was no excuse for her irresponsible habits just because she had no job. The idea of a housewife/stay-at-home mom is clearly defined. Since she had no job, why couldn't she stay home and be responsible and raise the kids?

Every housewife/stay-at-home mom I saw in my life did exactly that with staying home and holding it down and raising the kids.

It will never make any sense with that person's mom being out of the house way more than being in the house when she didn't have a job. That's just plain irresponsible and negligent to go out often to kick it than being there for her kids when she didn't work. She's was pretty much a freeloader who had kids.
Click to expand...

Bro what? Always been the standard? You're acting like your deeply misogynistic belief is some universal truth instead of what it really is: a standard set forth by a bunch of mostly white men in the 40s and 50s that didn't even want women to vote and thought black people should have separate schools and bathrooms. Honestly take a second and actually listen to yourself. You really think the only purpose of one half of the entire human race is to not leave the house so they can take care of the man and the kids. Do you know how insane that sounds?

And you know what doesn't get talked about nearly enough? Your "the man is the breadwinner and the woman shall have dinner ready, the house cleaned, and look pretty while doing it" mindset gave us the "**** you, I got mine" boomer generation that has screwed over every generation since and likely the planet irreversibly. Your outdated 1950s era woman-hating standards couldn't even produce decent kids for all the time they had the mothers spent at home.

So yes this is big time incel/Elliot Rodger/4chan energy coming from you. YOU think women have a "place" that YOU have created for them which is to take care of the home, the man, and the kids. It's also funny that you haven't mentioned the father a single time in all of this even though there is undeniable, very well documented proof about how important the father is in child rearing. You talk on and on about being in a relationship is about contributing and that's being an adult and yet you place child rearing solely on the mother. Really shows where your head is.

Honestly, the only people that still think like this are Christian fundamentalists and their "women are earthen vessels to carry man's seed" religion, incels, and the Taliban. It has no place in modern, civil society
 
Last edited:
Belgium said:
Well we’re not friends anymore :lol:
I immediately got my money + 20% extra back though so from that point I squashed the beef. We did hang out occasionally after the incident because of some mutuals but I never made an issue out of it. I did joke about it whenever I could sneak in a perfect reference. The story quickly went around to all our mutual friends too of course. Then as I got older and more mature, there was less and less communication both ways.

I’m a very calm, collected and conflict-averse person. So in this case, for me there was no more beef with the guy as soon as I got my money and 20% profit within an hour of giving him that ultimatum.

If anything I look back at it fondly as a hilarious moment. A robbery that ended up with the robber forced to drain 90% of what was left in his entire bank account to comply with my demand.
Click to expand...
friendship and money just doesn't mix at all and I have learned that the hard way.
 
DB Cooper said:
I would just leave it in there.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just leave it - the worst that could happen is that it will work its way in and then you’ll have a blowout on the highway…

You need to get that fixed before you continue driving - some places will repair them. The more basic repair places won’t - they have a blanket policy that they don’t mainly because if the tire went down the reinforced sidewalls can hide damage. In your case the tire is still holding air so that isn’t an issue. They’re also keen to sell you another one…
 
nonnative said:
Bro what? Always been the standard? You're acting like your deeply misogynistic belief is some universal truth instead of what it really is: a standard set forth by a bunch of mostly white men in the 40s and 50s that didn't even want women to vote and thought black people should have separate schools and bathrooms. Honestly take a second and actually listen to yourself. You really think the only purpose of one half of the entire human race is to not leave the house so they can take care of the man and the kids. Do you know how insane that sounds?

And you know what doesn't get talked about nearly enough? Your "the man is the breadwinner and the woman shall have dinner ready, the house cleaned, and look pretty while doing it" mindset gave us the "**** you, I got mine" boomer generation that has screwed over every generation since and likely the planet irreversibly. Your outdated 1950s era woman-hating standards couldn't even produce decent kids for all the time they had the mothers spent at home.

So yes this is big time incel/Elliot Rodger/4chan energy coming from you. YOU think women have a "place" that YOU have created for them which is to take care of the home, the man, and the kids. It's also funny that you haven't mentioned the father a single time in all of this even though there is undeniable, very well documented proof about how important the father is in child rearing. You talk on and on about being in a relationship is about contributing and that's being an adult and yet you place child rearing solely on the mother. Really shows where your head is.

Honestly, the only people that still think like this are Christian fundamentalists and their "women are earthen vessels to carry man's seed" religion, incels, and the Taliban. It has no place in modern, civil society
Click to expand...

I have no issues with you since I don't know you and we'll never meet in the real world, but I will never agree with your stance about relationship dynamics because you clearly misinterpreted my context.

I actually posted something about this issue after this one in response to DCAllAfrican DCAllAfrican that you clearly missed or didn't read thoroughly.

It's quite ignorant to tie a man having expectations with a woman in a relationship with those internet labels, foreign cultures or bygone era standards because a stable relationship where a couple lives together means both sides do their part. Both sides should share responsibilities. They also split the household expenses.

All that bygone era crap you conveyed is irrelevant with how a stable dynamic between partners is. There is nothing misogynistic about what expectations a man should have with a woman in a relationship. I didn't convey that a woman in a relationship has to be subservient to the man similar to Middle Eastern households like you claimed.

I clearly didn't say a woman should only stay home and take care of the man and the kids in a relationship. She should work if she's mentally and physically capable to do so.

I'm reiterating a woman should also do her part in a relationship whether it's working to earn money or staying home to take care of it and the kids. A woman should be able to go out and enjoy life occasionally, but it shouldn't be her sole purpose that causes her to neglect her responsibilities. There should be a balance between responsibilities (a job or being a housewife) and leisure. If a woman in a relationship solely focuses on her leisure and not her responsibilities, then it's just plain wrong.

I never said I would expect my wife or girlfriend should have dinner ready and the house cleaned because it's something I hate as I see it as worthless and freeloading from the woman if she can only do that while I have to work and provide her a home and provisions. I will always expect my woman to work and earn money to split our household expenses in a relationship.

Both sides should raise the kids. The issue with that sorry marriage with my former schoolmate's parents was that his mom didn't have a job and she didn't maintain her responsibilities as a wife/mom because she only went out to enjoy herself and neglected the kids. Parenting is supposed to be about doing her part and raising the kids, which she didn't because she only cared about herself.

Anyone you ask about this will echo the standards that a woman should either work or take care of the home and raise the kids. I doubt anyone will see it as acceptable if a mom only takes care of herself and neglects and responsibilities and the kids. Being a married woman with kids who only goes out to kick it daily while neglecting her responsibilities will always be wrong.

I don't get how you think it's acceptable for a woman in a relationship to be enabled and neglect her responsibilities. It makes no sense.

That's why that person saw it as normal for him to benefit or gain something in a friendship because his mom set a bad example with her leisure lifestyle that was enabled by his dad. His concept of friendship was warped predicated on seeing his mom's habits and lifestyle. This was a perfect example of "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.". His dad was busy working because he owned a business. Perhaps his dad and his mom shouldn't have had kids if he was occupied with work and she was focused on leisure.
 
Wordle 387 6/6*

⬛🟩⬛⬛⬛
⬛🟩⬛⬛⬛
🟩🟩⬛⬛⬛
🟩🟩⬛⬛⬛
🟩🟩⬛⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

This isn’t even from today btw. Forgot most of Monday but I had already started it so my streak has started over :smh: MADAM
 
Last edited:
I remember I was in Marshalls and saw the back to back version. Didnt buy it cuz I'm not a hat person at all and also because it was white.

I regret not buying it.

Snatch that bad boy up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HIM
|| DFS Player Props Thread || Prize Picks - Underdog - etc. ||
Replies
24
Views
1K
HIM
HIM

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom