Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
G@G Community 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
How Do I Look? 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel & Leisure 
Trending & News +16
Wow, you really hate feminist extremists...
I agree in part when your idea, that you can't have a fuctional relationship if you expect something and are unwilling to put the same onto the relationship.
What is your opinion on couples who are a little less into traditional gender roles? Possibly those that are more equal in terms of how they divide work and home activities?
Not extremist, feminists. Saying feminist extremist is like saying racist extremist, sure one is worse then the other but both are bad. In order to be a feminist your basic premise is that women are oppressed by men i. e. that all women are victims and all men are evil oppresors. That is your foundational belief which all else is built off of. Now ignoring that this is provably false, its a hateful ideology to claim that an entire gender is just inherently evil and bad. You cannot claim to be for equality if you do not believe we are equals and you cannot believe we are equals if you believe that all men hurt women, that all men secretlly enjoy keeping women down, that all men are responsible for every bad thing to happen to you in life.
In order to believe that women were oppressed through out history you have to completely ignore all of women's privilege (and it was and is substantial (more so then men's in fact)) and completely ignore men's responsibilities. This is precisely what feminist have done. They say we are not equal because women don't get respected as authority figures like men do. Fine, but who's fault is that? Men fight each other for that position, they get racked through the coals to get to that point, they put in the hours, they take the abuse and women simply refuse to do that. You cannot expect to get the same outcome without putting in the same work but again, this is what feminists demand.
Feminism demand that women be exempt from responsibility and that men get exempt from humanity (as we are not seen as human beings by feminists (again, when an entire group tells you that you that you are monsters you can't then turn around and claim to see them as people, those are mutually exclusive view points.).
Now as for your question of non traditional relationships, well I think they are doomed to faillure. It ignores biological drives and desires. Statistically women do not marry "down" economically speaking. On the rare case that you have a woman who makes more then her husband she is more likely to cheat, divorce, and be unhappy in the relationship because biologically she is looking for a man to provide for her even if she can do it herself. This is biology not society. Women also want to be with their children and raise them and men want to provide for their children, again this is biology not society and fighting against it is a rather futile battle.
Now that said, I personally have no issue with others doing that as its their life to live and no one has the right to stop them. I think its going to fail, but I hope it doesn't obviously but I don't think it will succeed (but maybe you will be in the 1% that manages to make it work and be happy with the outcome).
My issue is that every woman wants a traditional man while being untraditional themselves. Its the hypocrisy that bothers me, not the attempt at "equality". If you are exempt from traditional gender roles so is he, period. Anything less then that is sexism. So you have to pay your half of the bill EVERY TIME. You have to step up and make plans as frequently as he does, you hear a noise or feel like your in danger you are as obligated to fight and endanger yourself on his behalf as he is you. You do half of the heavy lifting, half the dirty jobs, half of all bills and this includes rent/morgage etc. On holidays you spend on him as much as he spends on you (statistically men spend four times on women then women spend on them for holidays (for valentines day I believe it goes up to about 8 times as much).
If your willing to do that (and again, I highly doubt this will be the case as statistically women don't tolerate this ("rules for thee not for me" is the general motto of modern women and specifically feminists)), then I'd say go for it. To me that seems more like a roommate rather then a romantic partner and I don't understand the appeal but if its how you want to live your life, again, no one has the right to try and force you to live it differently. My only issue is again, your fighting biology and in almost every instance women do not tolerate men who do not provide and who do not protect and who do not lead (you can't expect him to be a leader and not follow, its like being a manager but with absolutely no authority at that point you just can't do anything and the job is meaningless. Same goes for relationships, women want him to lead but they don't want to have to respect his authority either which just creates massive disfunciton and disharmony within the relationship).
So its one or the other, their is no "more equal" in the division because that just means you get to do the things you want to do and he is nothing more then a tool for you to use (this is how most relationships are today. He has to do everything he traditionally does and she doesn't (which is why statistically men actually work slightly more then women do when you take into account all work (yet get absolutely no credit for anything they do and are told that they are lazy and worthless and how they as fathers are not important etc. etc.). So either the rules that you are bound to are the rules he is bound to or your just using and exploiting him (You both play by the same rules, thats fair isn't it? Whether those rules are traditional or non traditional isn't really the relevant point, its that both parties are bound by the same expectations and rules).
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!
As a massive pro-choicer and not religious, I am far from your wife material XD
But everyone has the right to pick who they feel would be their ideal mate and the right to say no. I hope you find (or have found) the right person for you
Never said you were, but there are women who claim to be feminist that are pro-life as well. The claim in of itself isn't a concern, but what she means by it. Wanting to add input is desired, controlling output is not. There are issues that face women that should be addressed, but how they are addressed is dependent on world view. All I'm saying is the title alone doesn't impact a woman's viability, only her world view. The women's company I entertain don't call themselves feminist, but still concern over women's matters. Some women call themselves feminist, but realize they a physically vulnerable and enjoy working with men. A woman like that is in a better place for marriage.
From my own experience both working is not the best way to parent.
A child really benefits greatly from having at least one parent at home. It's important to bond with your children when they're small if you want them to listen to you.
Also in my experience, the male staying home can lead to the woman losing respect for him over time and wanting out of the relationship.
The partner that works away from home is way more likely to cheat and since women get more attention in general it's just more likely to happen eventually.
That seems fair. I do hope this is not always the case, as it would make me worry for my sister and brother in law. They both work hard, and my sister isn't giving up her job when the baby arrives (that being said, it is good that at least she can work from home at the moment as she gets very tired)
Unfortunately in many cases yes, I dislike extremist feminists as they seem to play the blame game and ignore the real issues. The real idea of feminism was about equality, and I feel this idea has been tainted... then again what term doesn't get boicotted for someone's agenda?
What is your view on relationship where traditional gender roles are swapped, or both are more equal between the tasks?
I have no problem with relationship where traditional gender roles are swapped, or both are more equal between the tasks. People should do what works for them and not push their biases on others, which is what feminism does. Feminists are very judgmental of people who don't toe their party line and they shame women for choosing more traditional roles, which is terrible. There is nothing wrong with traditional relationships, in fact they are better in some ways, certainly for the children. But this is just one of the ways in which feminism is harmful. There are sooo many others. I am all for equal rights and gender fairness, but despite what it claims, feminism is not about those things at all. If it was, almost everyone would support it. But there are very good reasons why the vats majority of people don't support it today.
First wave was the Sufferagett movement in the beginning of the last century. The second wave started in 1963 with a book "The feminine mystique." Third wave is now.
Sufferagetts were looking for the vote, I believe black men had the vote before them (might have been 3/5 vote).
Second wave was when the men returned from war the women returned home, but they realized they could be more than a housewife. The could have careers and independence.
Third wave is everything you see going on now. TERF is just one example.
I think most people are rational but all we hear is all the noise of the 8% making a fuss. Most of us are just living our lives.
AI Bot Choice
Superb Opinion