Tools for women

Re: Tools for married women by mrpleasantpreacher
http://www.youtube.com/user/mrpleasantpreacher

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• Re:
• Tools
• for
• married
• women
• by
• mrpleasantpreacher
• christinepeace
• guns

[ItsCoreyLynxxYall]

Oh wait. That's you! I wasn't listening at first. But yet you kick ass and serve the US! Something Mr Pleasant Preacher can't do.

[christinepeace]

@ItsCoreyLynxxYall Nope I served in the Canadian military honey but close.

Cheers Christine

[christinepeace]

@ItsCoreyLynxxYall Thanks darling p.s. love your vids

C

[spiritparaclete]

@ItsCoreyLynxxYall -- how do you know its a woman.. ha haa... maybe its a tranny

[spiritparaclete]

the chinese commie marxist were the first to create cloned woman soldiers like you... kinda gave UNISEX a new meaning... I bet you love the smell of blood too don't you?

[christinepeace]

@cheriblosm7 Thanks I am glad you likes it.

Cheers Christine

[ItsCoreyLynxxYall]

@christinepeace Oops. Well anyways you're a strong person who disproves the ignorance of people like him. =)

[ItsCoreyLynxxYall]

Hell yes! These women will kick any man's ass!

[Joeyal123]

now this is a Good video Honey

[ekhaat]

C7A1 with M203, my favorite.

Cheers

[heresthedamncartoon]

who fucking cares, assssshole. I'm ALL FOR women fighting overseas. Good, please stay there.

[lashkaretoiba]

Now that was hot.

[Flare400]

This still leaves out the single men and those who had lost female relatives in the quake.

These organizations could have simply simply made separate lines for males and females or given out unique food stamps for men and women.

[new2t]

You are right from the start the the end!

[Teloculos]

@Red

But I'm not sure what relevance any of that has to alimony.

I thought alimony is paid from a high earning partner to a low earning partner to enable them to keep the lifestyle to which they are used. So if the woman is a high earner she should pay the man. I doubt the law does this, but that seems only fair if alimony is going to be applied. Otherwise scrap it and just divide assets when the people go their separate ways.

I don't see what relevance men's or women's mating patterns have.

[Teloculos]

@Red

Personally, and I say this an an unqualified amatuer dilettante I think that humans are hypergamous sexually, but monogamous in who they will have children with.

Harems etc whilst seen as a desirable symbol of power even today, are as costly as they are beneficial and it was a well known source of political intriguing in the Ottoman Empire and others.

Monogamy is the most beneficial for children, and is largly a rule, but rules are only guidelines when you're talking about living beings.

[Teloculos]

@Red

Maam? Maam?

Bitch! Beard!

I am a man, a dude, a bloke, a male. I said so clearly in a previous post you blind fuckwit.

Both men and women would naturally be hypergamous, it's in our nature. The only downsides are disease (condoms and med tech takes care of this) and unwanted pregancy (and pills or coils are ok too).

Don't try to say men are naturally monogamous. We aren't. In polygamous cultures it's almost always lots of women for one guy. There is only one counter-example in India.

[Red0660]

@Teloculos You Say: "If alimony is retained, it should be as applicable for women to pay men as for men to pay women."

Maam, it is my belief that women are hypergamous in their mating behavior. If I may direct you to

The Study: Education and Hypergamy, and the Success Gap by Prof. Elaina Rose * Department of Economics University of Washington

I believe you will find that although women's economic acquisition has increased their hypergamous matting pattern has not subsided.

[Teloculos]

@Red

I agree, that would be very silly. 'And here's my receipt, for your receipt' kind of silly.

If alimony is retained, it should be as applicable for women to pay men as for men to pay women. But a one off divorce settlement seems more fair to me.

Each parent should support their child, and if one has custody the other pays support as a condition of playing an active role. It's called incentive. But the payments should be according the the means to contribute, not some kind of flat rate.

[Teloculos]

@Red

Isn't alimony adjusted, means-tested or anything? You are right, that does suck. If it's because you have a high income, if you don't anymore it seems unfair even insane to ask you to keep contributing the same amount...

It should be proportionate.

Deciding what the proportion should be is, I guess, the main issue

And yes - unless you are a violently abusive or twisted and manipulative bastard/bitch you should be able to play an active role in the life of your children.

[Teloculos]

@red

cont....

If you are contributing to your kid's life, you should be able to do so fully not just financially. Money is no substitue for love.

And on the economic level:

I think that unless there is a serious imbalance in the proportion of men and women in the workplace that affirmative action is not necessary.

Equality means equality. Not positive discrimination.

I don't want a job because I'm male, or European. I want it because I'm the best candidate

So I think we agree on that broadly...

[Teloculos]

@Red

and from what's i've read now, alimony does seem unfair, but I'm in the UK, where I think it's just a division of assets and that's it - no payments in perpituity.

Child support is dealt with seperately, but I think that unless there is a seriously good reason, parents that contribute to their children's welfare should have access to them if they are in the custody of an estranged partner. Of either gender.

[Teloculos]

@red

sex and gender roles are seperate, or they are beginning to fragment now that they are not rigidly enforced.

For the record, I'm a man, so I'm not sure what's with the 'giving [resources] to you' bit.

And no, I don't hate men, I'm just trying to view things objectively, without being biased towards my own obvious interests at the expense of the other, and vice versa.

I think some laws do discriminate against men too much, but I'm not familiar with US law.

[Teloculos]

Many countries were founded by men who left to find new territory, and took women from the people they found there. The rape (meaning theft in this context) of the Sabine Women, for instance. As for the Bible and the Kingdom of Israel...well, genocide except for the girls who have not known men was par for the course.

Then again, most countries run by men had women behind the throne, so it's never purely one sex ruling

We are strongest together as each 'weakness' is butressed by a 'strength'.

[Teloculos]

@Red

Different but equal.

Women have a greater proportion of fat to body mass, men have a greater proportion of muscle to body mass. Men have short-term strength, women have long-term endurance. Which makes sense, given the different roles that we developed into.

Men tend to be better at linear thinking, women better at networked thinking.

Each type of thinking has its merits, and I must stress this is totally general, so you will have many individuals that vary.