tell him to go to bed already.

anyways, the guy from saturn. the intellectual liberal. . . there are plenty of them, obama is one
those skinny nerdy guys are hot!!

daprince:

Dave, why not save your breath?

Art thou for us or for them? For they that are not for us are against us.

WesleyanA:

anyways, the guy from saturn. the intellectual liberal. . . there are plenty of them, obama is one
those skinny nerdy guys are hot!!

Your naivety makes me laugh. Obama my foot, do you live in his house? Have you personally questioned his wife or you are merely basing ur conclusions on what you see and read in the news? Talk about believing a politician.

I like "hot" and "liberal" guys like Obama, when you pry beneath the false veneer of "liberality" to see the real person behind the mask please dont come crying back o.

The woman who is married and refuses to cook is nothing but a lazy woman, she should also get a life. Why will I seriously date a woman who believes she shouldn't cook?

gender role in marriage is different now. women are becoming more financially stable and the main reason the marriage institution started was to provide financial stability for the "wives"

Categorically false. Not surprisingly, it's only feminists that view marriage primarily as a means to provide financial stability for wives. Selfish pieces of crap, marriage is intended to form the basis for the growth of a new family, growth of kids, kids who will become the adults of tomorrow and carry on the human legacy. They are the reason for marriage, not financial stability for wives.

Marriage is meant to provide a stable environment for children to grow up in, it wasn't meant as security for women. You're here running your mouth, you do not know how many women will absolutely LOVE to be full time housewives.

The arrangement is natural and has been shaped by evolution. Women have the skills to rear kids, they're more likely to stay at home and take care of kids they bear.

I'm surprised that u are still arguing with Wes. She's young and still got a lot to learn before she meets Obama from Venus or Pluto (oh, Pluto is now gone, so are those liberal guys Wes).

@haters, keep sipping on the haterade.
none of you got nothing on me

liberal guys, gals are ultra hot.
there's a reason why women and ethnic minorities tend more to vote democrat.
i'm going to be a civil rights lawyer myself, so davidylan, your wife might be coming to me for domestic violence help.

Donzman:

The woman who is married and refuses to cook is nothing but a lazy woman, she should also get a life. Why will I seriously date a woman who believes she shouldn't cook?

this has nothing to do with feminism
feminism =/= lazy.

It has everything to do with being lazy!. . .Most of these women do not even care to clean up where they leave, disgusting! I just avoid them!

I wonder who instilled the rubbish belief in your mind that marriage was meant as security for women. No wonder you people go at this blindly, it's about the KIDS first and foremost. Dads work and sweat it out, to take care of the kids.

When did feminism entail - not cooking?
I believe that women in a household should not do all the cooking - once in a while, husbands should pamper women.
It's not laziness to defy a norm - it's just standing up for what you believe in.

donzman, you're talking about dirty, lazy people. or have you also bought into the anti-feminism media propaganda?


I love feminists. 'cause they got me the right to vote.
i also read books and get inspired by plenty of them.
If you listen to onyeka onwenu, you listen to a feminist.

no need to feel threatened lol we're not coming to bite you

I don't feel threatened, just feel sorry for future kids who will grow up in increasingly broken homes, it's a pity.

Donzman:


I wonder who instilled the rubbish belief in your mind that marriage was meant as security for women. No wonder you people go at this blindly, it's about the KIDS first and foremost. Dads work and sweat it out, to take care of the kids.

you clearly don't know the history of marriage.
anyways, in today's world, women are also sweating it out to take care of themselves and their kids.

Who writes out the history of marriage? . . .How do you know when marriage started?. . . History of marriage in Israel isn't marriage in Kafanchan, Jos, Nigeria. What history of marriage are you exactly talking about?. . .Marriage has been around as long as man, who was around to witness the beginning of marriage?

Donzman:

I don't feel threatened, just feel sorry for future kids who will grow up in increasingly broken homes, it's a pity.

do you realize that there are men who do avocate and not opposed to equal rights for women?
not all men are like you, you know.

liberals are hot

anyways, single parent families are increasingly gaining accorded respect.

by the way, let's be clear.

what's is your definition for feminism?
yours seem to be a dirty woman who likes broken homes.

that's not my definition (people who belief in social, economic and political equality for sexes).

Why is everyone blaming broken homes on women? Don't men play a part in it?

The only thing being gained from single parent families is income to pharmaceutical companies who make Tylenol and Advil to deal with the headache. Nobody benefits from single families except selfish women who place family above themselves (sorry to bruised and battered women who are obviously an exception here).

that's not my definition (people who belief in social, economic and political equality for sexes).

People who also do not believe that a man is the natural head of the family. We both know feminism is way more than equality, who doesn't want equality? Why will feminism come under a bad light if all it preaches is equality? Questions to ask yourself while you're at it.

j-girl:

Why is everyone blaming broken homes on women? Don't men play a part in it?

I actually believe feminism and this liberal crap has contributed to men cheating and reneging on their marriage commitments. Another discussion for another day. Aren't you the lady who claims that feminism looks to let women sleep with as many men as they can without being looked upon in a bad light?. . .Go ahead, sleep with your pet too, nobody is going to judge you, all men are equal.

i know right. men are supposed to be the "head" of the home. but the women are responsible when the home gets broken. lol

WesleyanA, neseel and J-girl

u guyz have no idea.

Men and Women are physically, emotionally and biologically different. Testosterone in guys programs them to act differently and makes them more suitable for certain roles in a family enviroment. Two people can never drive the same car. If two people struggle for the wheels, the car is most likely going to crash.

is it not a bit ironic that the majority of women still desire to be courted, proposed to, have the door opened for them, gotten flowers, have a strong willed guy beside them, shown soft affection, prefer a guy who is well to do etc. They still relish those roles that are for women but all of a sudden they now want to be men too at the same time.

Women and Men were never created the same and can never be the same irrespective of feminism.

Lets take a practical look at this with one issue as a case in point.

Feminists think that women can be sexually indiscreet as Men. im not gonna argue that coz im against societies double standards. But speaking from nature's viewpoints a man can have 10,000 kids but a woman cant. Infact a man can decide to have a whole city of full his blood kids while a feminist cant. For example i can decide to have hundreds of Sages runinig around town and no matter what equality a feminist seeks she cant do that. This is not sexism or chauvinistic, its nature.

There are certain things that women cannot fully comprehend as regards certain attitudes of Men.

Men tend to see women as primarily sexual objects. Be it our forefathers or us(lets face it people that basically classified women as marriage material and non marriage material, good or bad, used or 'fresh' based primarily on virginity and things related solely to sex). I dont think there is anything feminists can do about that. Even religious guys do that without realising it. Now a feminist thatz trying to change that or equal men in sexual issues will discover to there chagrin that men and women dont see these issues the same way.

Be it nature, society or whatever that influences them, many men regard virgin women as trophies and view women who have had sex before as deserving of less respect. As shocking as it may be many guys think of women who might have had even one sex experience as having been used even as a used article and would wholeheartedly jump for a virgin first if they had a choice (even though they have slept with over 50 women). I dont think women see men primarilly like that.

Basic emotional differences (or society) might also account for things like we see in the romance and sexuality section and in the general world in which men celebrate the day they lose their virginity and most women are always whining about wishing that they were still virgins and wish they could take it back and all. Why even the feminists count it neccesary to lie about the number of men theyve slept with dividing it by six and all while a man wont generally have a problem letting such an issue out.

Now Women dont have the same thought lines and intuitions like Men and neither do they have the same hormones and neither are they programmed for the same roles in the family.

Women should have rights to all but the bottom line remains that nature did not create them the same. It is not the making of men trying to put women in a particular role. Its nature.

DISCLAIMER

The above case study in no way reflects the personal view of the writer but a general view of what is obtainable to the larger society .

This dislaimer is neccesary before the disagreeing feminist brigade declares war on me for speaking the anti feminist truth


@WesleynA u are still young and vibrant. Ul realise a few things later in life

Most ancient societies needed a secure environment for the perpetuation of the species,a system of rules to handle the granting of property rights, and the protection of bloodlines. The institution of marriage handled these needs. For instance, ancient Hebrew law required a man to become the husband of a deceased brother's widow.

Some varieties of marriage are
# polygamy
# polygyny
# polyandry
# endogamy
# exogamy
# common law marriage
# monogamy

Different periods of time and different cultures have very different histories when it comes to women. Ancient Egypt, in theory, gave women equal rights, but it wasn't always practiced.

Throughout history, and even today, families arranged marriages for couples. The people involved didn't and don't have much to say about the decision. Most couples didn't marry because they were in love but for economic liasons.

ome marriages were by proxy, some involved a dowry (bride's family giving money or presents to the groom or his family), some required a bride price (the groom or his family giving money or a present to the bride's family), few had any sort of courtship or dating, but most had traditions.

One nearly universal tradition is that of the engagement ring. This custom can be dated back to the ancient Romans. It is believed that the roundness of the ring represents eternity. Therefore, the wearing of wedding rings symbolizes a union that is to last forever. It was once thought that a vein or nerve ran directly from the "ring" finger of the left hand to the heart.

The notion of marriage as a sacrament and not just a contract can be traced St. Paul who compared the relationship of a husband and wife to that of Christ and his church (Eph. v, 23-32).

Joseph Campbell, in the Power of Myth, mentions that the Twelfth century troubadours were the first ones who thought of courtly love in the same way we do now. The whole notion of romance apparently didn't exist until medieval times, and the troubadours.

The statement of Pope Nicholas I in which he declared in 866, "If the consent be lacking in a marriage, all other celebrations, even should the union be consummated, are rendered void", shows the importance of a couple's consent to marriage. It has remained an important part of church teaching through the years.

There appeared to be many marriages taking place without witness or ceremony in the 1500's. The Council of Trent was so disturbed by this, that they decreed in 1563 that marriages should be celebrated in the presence of a priest and at least two witnesses. Marriage took on a new role of saving men and women from being sinful, and of procreation. Love wasn't a necessary ingredient for marriage during this era.


Years later, the Puritans viewed marriage as a very blessed relationship that gave marital partners an opportunity to not only love, but also to forgive.

Many people hold the view that regardless of how people enter into matrimony, marriage is a bond between two people that involves responsibility and legalities, as well as commitment and challenge. That concept of marriage hasn't changed through the ages.
[url=http://
marriage.about.com/cs/generalhistory/a/marriagehistory.htm]
marriage.about.com/cs/generalhistory/a/marriagehistory.htm[/url]


It is very hard to be able to establish a true date on the first marriages although the Old Testament in the Bible does mention a little about marriage as it was considered a family and household affair. The oldest male relative was the caretaker of the girls and the prospective husband would ask the father for the girl after first bringing him gifts to win his approval. The mother was dominated by the father and had no choice in the matter. The father would transfer the daughter to the prospective husband in public as this showed that he approved this transfer and that the groom had the father's approval. After this transfer the bride and groom ate a meal together with the families and then the groom took the bride home. In the Old Testament of the Bible there is no mention of a formal exchange of vows or of a preacher or priest being present at this union.

In the time of the Roman Empire (17 B.C.- A.D. 476) the lower classes who became Christians later had common law or free marriages. The father would deliver the bride and the agreement of the two was called a consensus to wed. Then eventually as Christianity spread the church interpreted a "free" marriage as a conscience marriage. This agreement meant that each partner was to keep the marriage vows and the marriage intact.

There were Romans who were very wealthy who would sign documents consisting of listing property rights and letting all know that they wanted this union to be legalized and not to be thought of as a common law marriage. Thus this began the official recording of marriages as we do today. Roman men could dissolve the marriage any time as it was a male privilege, not one accorded to females.

In A.D. 527-565 during the rein of Justinian lawyers drew up laws called the Justinian Code and this was a regulation of their daily life including marriage. Up until the time of the Justinian Code just saying you were married was enough.

Until the ninth century marriages were not church involved. Up until the twelfth century there were blessings and prayers during the ceremony and the couple would offer their own prayers. Then priests asked that an agreement be made in their presence. Then religion was added to the ceremony.

English weddings in the thirteenth century among the upper class became religious events but the church only blessed the marriage and did not want a legal commitment. In 1563 the Council of Trent required that Catholic marriages be celebrated at a Catholic church by a priest and before two witnesses. By the eighteenth century the wedding was a religious event in all countries of Europe.

In Colonial times in North America the customs of the old countries were followed. There were some who only wanted a civil ceremony and not a religious ceremony. The Colonists who wanted civil marriages passed laws to this effect.

Civil magistrates would perform marriage ceremonies and they would even include prayers in the ceremony.

Viriginia was a colony that stayed with the customs of the church and did not permit anyone to have a civil marriage ceremony as they followed the Church of England. By the end of the eighteenth century both religious and civil marriage ceremonies were legal in American.

In European countries today, civil marriage ceremonies are legal as in America. Even in England, the couple can choose to have either a religious or civil ceremony.

http://ks.essortment.com/historyofmarri_rimr.htm

@jgirl

Again, admittedly men are continually failing to live up to what is expected of them in a marriage. Does that imply women should also abandon their responsiblities when it comes to childbearing/rearing? Does equality say that when one party is irresponsible, the other party should also be irresponsible? Does equality imply abandoning responsiblities because another party fails to stand up to theirs? Where is the lesson for the kids if everyone decides to be irresponsible and leave the T.V. or Youtube to lecture kids and bring them up? What happened to the woman who stays at home with the kids? You know, the kind of women who inspired songs like "Sweet Mother"? The kind of woman who are the first people the kids run to in times of need, you do not think men respect their mothers even more when she is there for them and not pursuing some career?. . .Sorry for folks!

The real responsible women are those who are going ahead with their tasks without looking over their shoulders as to what the next male is doing. The woman who sets out and diligently takes care of her household and extra household responsibilities. The one who places family above career. In case you're wondering, use man and woman interchangeably in the prior statement.

@WesleyanA

Your article is flawed and I could proceed to pick it apart. I ask, how do these people know the real intentions behind the folks who started marriage? It's use may have evolved over time, do they account for that?. . .How can they tell us the same motives for marriage in Hebrew culture is the same motive for marriage in Papau New Guinea, Mayan Culture, Yoruba culture, Eskimos?. . .What about matrilineal socities like the Akan of Ghana where a woman inherits her brother's property? Why do they still marry if marriage is all about economic security for women?. . .Think!

I insist that marriage was meant to provide a stable environment for procreation and growth of offsprings which is why childbirth outside of marriage is prohibited in MOST if not all cultures. Any other perverted use people have decided to put it to does not change that.

Women and Men were never created the same and can never be the same irrespective of feminism.

Lets take a practical look at this with one issue as a case in point.

Feminists think that women can be sexually indiscreet as Men. im not going to argue that because im against societies double standards. But speaking from nature's viewpoints a man can have 10,000 kids but a woman can't. Infact a man can decide to have a whole city of full his blood kids while a feminist can't. For example i can decide to have hundreds of Sages Grin Cheesy runinig around town and no matter what equality a feminist seeks she can't do that. This is not sexism or chauvinistic, its nature.

There are certain things that women cannot fully comprehend as regards certain attitudes of Men.

again: definition of feminism is the belief in social, financial and political equality of the sexes.
there is no mention about biological equality.
'cause that's like saying blacks and whites should share the same skin color which is impossible.

we've increasingly gained our rights to vote, employment, access to politics, arts, spheres outside of the domestic, finance, influence, confidence, education, to be heard and plenty more stuff.
we are still going further (HILLARY '08)

yeah we can't be equal but the gap is closing every day

again, feminism is not about women growing joysticks. lol
it's more like the black civil rights to equality (only that feminists consists mainly of white women) black females aren't called double minority for nothing. lol

In your bid to westernize everything, you have forgotten Ellen Joshson-Sirleaf of Liberia or President Arroyo of the Phillipines. These are female heads of state, Clinton won't be the first and won't be the last but ofcourse you refuse to look outside of your Western box.

@ Donzman, there are few cultures that give respect to females but these are few. some do on they law but the laws aren't practiced.

Why do they still marry if marriage is all about economic security for women?. . .Think!

marriage has evolved.
it's now about love and intimacy between one man and one woman an that's why there are higher divorce rates. love fades, interest dissolves.
more women are financially secure. and society provides physical security too (you only need to call 911 if your husband lay his hands on you)

How can they tell us the same motives for marriage in Hebrew culture is the same motive for marriage in Papau New Guinea, Mayan Culture, Yoruba culture, Eskimos?

well i know the yoruba culture's marriage used to be polygamy. one man with several wives. with each rotating cooking days and sex days e.t.c
the kids lived with the women who have their separate houses from the husband.
and even with the igbo culture (you've read "things fall apart" by chinua achebe i'm sure).

marriage has evolved.
it's now about love and intimacy between one man and one woman an that's why there are higher divorce rates. love fades, interest dissolves.
more women are financially secure. and society provides physical security too (you only need to call 911 if your husband lay his hands on you)

What are you talking about?  . . .Obviously there are positive externalities associated with marriage, I'm talking about primary intentions. You say marriage was to provide economic security to women ( you can't tell me physical security because women have fathers and brothers). If it's all about economics, why do the Akan of Ghana, a traditionally matrilineal society (where the woman inherits her brother's wealth) get married?. . .Evolution of the institution does not answer the question because the Akan in this respect are a TRADITIONAL society. The woman is taken care of economically by the brother, why does she need to get married?. . .Answer is simple, marriage fosters a new family and environment for the growth of kids.

Thanks to feminists, family as we know it is dying in the West atleast. Your post does not answer the question posed to you concerning the Akan of Ghana because you already know your "economic security" theory fails in that respect.

Donzman:

I actually believe feminism and this liberal crap has contributed to men cheating and reneging on their marriage commitments. Another discussion for another day. Aren't you the lady who claims that feminism looks to let women sleep with as many men as they can without being looked upon in a bad light?. . .Go ahead, sleep with your pet too, nobody is going to judge you, all men are equal.

My pet? ha! It has nothing to do with that. In fact, i'm not the kind of girl that does it but what i'm saying is that how can men discriminate against a lady for having various sexual partners when men in fact have various sexual partners? There are so many examples i can give about women being called hos just because they enjoy one-night stands but men being PRAISED when they have a lot. It's this kind of double standard that gives men an edge to be controlling over women.

sage:

WesleyanA, neseel and J-girl

u guys have no idea.

Men and Women are physically, emotionally and biologically different. Testosterone in guys programs them to act differently and makes them more suitable for certain roles in a family enviroment. Two people can never drive the same car. If two people struggle for the wheels, the car is most likely going to crash.

is it not a bit ironic that the majority of women still desire to be courted, proposed to, have the door opened for them, gotten flowers, have a strong willed guy beside them, shown soft affection, prefer a guy who is well to do etc. They still relish those roles that are for women but all of a sudden they now want to be men too at the same time.

[b]Women and Men were never created the same and can never be the same irrespective of feminism.[/b]

Lets take a practical look at this with one issue as a case in point.

Feminists think that women can be sexually indiscreet as Men. im not going to argue that because im against societies double standards. But speaking from nature's viewpoints a man can have 10,000 kids but a woman can't. Infact a man can decide to have a whole city of full his blood kids while a feminist can't. For example i can decide to have hundreds of Sages runinig around town and no matter what equality a feminist seeks she can't do that. This is not sexism or chauvinistic, its nature.

There are certain things that women cannot fully comprehend as regards certain attitudes of Men.

Men tend to see women as primarily sexual objects. Be it our forefathers or us(lets face it people that basically classified women as marriage material and non marriage material, good or bad, used or 'fresh' based primarily on virginity and things related solely to sex). I don't think there is anything feminists can do about that. Even religious guys do that without realising it. Now a feminist thatz trying to change that or equal men in sexual issues will discover to there chagrin that men and women don't see these issues the same way.

Be it nature, society or whatever that influences them, many men regard virgin women as trophies and view women who have had sex before as deserving of less respect. As shocking as it may be many guys think of women who might have had even one sex experience as having been used even as a used article and would wholeheartedly jump for a virgin first if they had a choice (even though they have slept with over 50 women). I don't think women see men primarilly like that.

Basic emotional differences (or society) might also account for things like we see in the romance and sexuality section and in the general world in which men celebrate the day they lose their virginity and most women are always whining about wishing that they were still virgins and wish they could take it back and all. Why even the feminists count it neccesary to lie about the number of men theyve slept with dividing it by six and all while a man wont generally have a problem letting such an issue out.

Now Women don't have the same thought lines and intuitions like Men and neither do they have the same hormones and neither are they programmed for the same roles in the family.

Women should have rights to all but the bottom line remains that nature did not create them the same. It is not the making of men trying to put women in a particular role. Its nature.

DISCLAIMER

The above case study in no way reflects the personal view of the writer but a general view of what is obtainable to the larger society .

This dislaimer is neccesary before the disagreeing feminist brigade declares war on me for speaking the anti feminist truth

Emotional, biological and physical features are all linked. Testosterone and androgen gives men the deep voices, the shoulders, the hair growth while estrogen gives women the hairless nature (for most), the physical and definitely the emotional. During menopause, you see emotions that occur as a result of the withdrawal. Not all women are naturally emotionally sappy. Let me give you an excerpt from the book 'to be real by Rebecca Walker':
"The world was new to me, the strength of my arms and my legs untested, but i was already given the responsibility of caring for another object (dolls) that contained only what I invested for. Through dolls, the heart muscles of females are strengthened, ensuring that they will be ruled by compassion and, through that compassion, by others, for the rest of their lives."
By this alone, you cannot blame emotions on women. It's what society has put into us that women are supposed to have emotions but I can tell you now that it is not true. Things we read in books and watch on tv tells us that we have to be disposed to act in certain ways and this is what often confuses a lot of women.
Later on, the author writes this:
"To overcome these forces (the ones that push us to emotional limits), and to look at our lives autonomously, we need to shrug off what we women have been trained to care about above all else: other people, their thoughts, feelings, and concerns"
Need I say more?

Donzman:

In your bid to westernize everything, you have forgotten Ellen Joshson-Sirleaf of Liberia or President Arroyo of the Phillipines. These are female heads of state, Clinton won't be the first and won't be the last but ofcourse you refuse to look outside of your Western box.

I don't get you.
are you FOR or AGAINST feminism.
you guys were making the claim that america has more divorce rates because of feminism unlike in third world countries, but you're quick to claim that your teacher is female or the president of Liberia is female.

aren't this feministic principles/goals? equal opportunity for women to become whatever they want to be. whether politician or doormat, whether president or housewife.

no. instead you buy into the media propaganda of the lazy dirty woman who breaks homes portrayal of feminists.

I'm looking into the western box because here's where women rights' most extensive. women have overtaken men in rate of college education in the US.
where else in third world countries do women enjoy such rights? in nigeria where they're hundreds of housegirls per one female doctor?

i'm not saying it's perfect in the west (that's why there's still work to do) but it's considerably better.

I don't get you.
are you FOR or AGAINST feminism.
you guys were making the claim that america has more divorce rates because of feminism unlike in third world countries, but you're quick to claim that your teacher is female or the president of Liberia is female.

. . .Because qualified women get their opportunities, your feminist rants are uncalled for. Got it now?

"The world was new to me, the strength of my arms and my legs untested, but i was already given the responsibility of caring for another object (dolls) that contained only what I invested for. Through dolls, the heart muscles of females are strengthened, ensuring that they will be ruled by compassion and, through that compassion, by others, for the rest of their lives."

@jgirl

Don't be shortsighted. . .Did your greatgrandma back in Nigeria have barbie dolls? Was she a tomboy?Why then do you blame the emotional conditioning of women on dolls. Women are the emotional ones across culture, it's natural . .Think for yourself, emotions are natural to women, toys are just a natural consequence of that. I have little sisters, they never liked playing with the soldier toys I used, instead they'll prefer dolls where they'll plait their hair and stuffs like that.

At what point did your ancestors decide to make women emotional? They developed some sort of hatred for the female specie of man?. . .Women have their roles shaped by evolution, whatever you see in terms of upbringing and gender roles is a direct consequence of that. Atleast that is what I strongly believe when I look across cultures.

That was my reply to sage over the emotional thing. Women nowadays are not as strong as my great grandmother who i'm sure hardly had emotional breakdowns. Left to me - westernization has influenced us greatly. The way our grandmothers were treated is not the way we want to be treated. Trust me - evolution has also shaped women to sleep with guys for three reasons
1. Resources
2. Good genes
3. Good behavior

But not all of us do that that because we have the ability to control our actions.

If evolution has shaped women to be subjected to men, which it hasn't, we also have the ability to control ourselves, don't we? Evolution cannot be used to curb feminism because there are a lot of animals that don't exhibit sexism. Sexism is simply based on the paranoia of men to believe that we are dangerous.

Donzman:

What are you talking about? . . .Obviously there are positive externalities associated with marriage, I'm talking about primary intentions. You say marriage was to provide economic security to women ( you can't tell me physical security because women have fathers and brothers). If it's all about economics, why do the Akan of Ghana, a traditionally matrilineal society (where the woman inherits her brother's wealth) get married?. . .Evolution of the institution does not answer the question because the Akan in this respect are a TRADITIONAL society. The woman is taken care of economically by the brother, why does she need to get married?. . .Answer is simple, marriage fosters a new family and environment for the growth of kids.

That's not true.
if she's taken care of economically by the brother, doesn't that make her dependent on her brother?
or do you mean the brother is dead and she inherits the wealth? well in that case, what if the brother isn't dead.
I'll try to look into more stuff about the Akan of Ghana. give me time.

of course marriage wasn't all about economics. there have been multiple several different reasons over the centuries. but we know some of these reasons differ as society changes.

Thanks to feminists, family as we know it is dying in the West atleast. Your post does not answer the question posed to you concerning the Akan of Ghana because you already know your "economic security" theory fails in that respect.

why thanks to feminists?
cheating infidelity is the # 1 reason for divorce in the west and that's as a result of the modern reason for marriage (love and intimacy).
what has this got to do with feminists?

yes feminists agree that women who are in abusive relationships should get out of it. why didn't you just agree with this a couple of posts back?

i'm not trying to evade any of your questions.
a woman inherits her brother's property in Akan culture of Ghana. That's not new. the article i posted also states that the egyptian laws of the past gave men an women equal rights (even though it wasn't enforced)
in some societies, kids get the last names from their moms
i don't know if this property law in Ghana is enforced or not. and if it is good and i'm happy for the females.

As far as i'm concerned though, females and males don't have equality of rights in Africa generally. the gap is wide.
you can always point at the female president or the akan culture (not sure if it's enforced) but generally, things aren't great.

. . .Because qualified women get their opportunities, your feminist rants are uncalled for. Got it now?

what have you got to say about the feminists who got us the rights to vote?
what have you got to say about the feminists who published books at the time when it was considered "unnatural"

why do you think more women side with the democratic party than republican party?
why do you think equal opportunity/ affirmative action programs were created to counter discrimination females face in the work force?

to tell you the truth, the oppressor doesn't let the oppressed go until the oppressed demands freedom. you're christian and you know about the egyptians and israel. do you think isreal left egypt because they were now qualified to get their opportunity? NO. they left by force!!

do you think blacks who fight for their rights were just given opportunities because the whites found that they qualify? lol

Sirleaf johnson first president of Liberia is herself a feminist. so i don't get your point.
there would be more females in high places if only they were encouraged rather than told that their destiny belongs in cooking good food for their husband rather than becoming what they want to become.

Liberia now has her first female chief of police under sirleaf
talk about "qualified people get their opportunities" lol
she sure wouldn't have had that opportunity under a male president.

how many male presidents are actually qualified? Bush?

sirleaf has also pledged to include more women in govt. positions

@ j-girl

i was hoping that you could give me some answers to the emotional issue questions.

Even here on Nairaland and the larger world in general why do girls always end up with a lot of emotional stuffs going on for them.

You don't see plenty of men gather up in a thread or around each other all whining about there not being virgins and wishing they had this and that back. Why after a hit and run does a man generally feel accomplished and most women feel used? Why do women not classify men as marriageable, good and used or not used based on one sole factor. The average woman does not see a man and immedately start to classify him as used and view him with disdain.

I just used this example to show you that the biological thought process of men and women differ, and it counts.

If the feminists were allowed to become men for even only 10 minutes they will understand.

Most men would take a lady that would help them build up a house as opposed to one who will spend her time on feminist pursuits.

And how come women still enjoy desire to be courted, proposed to, have the door opened for them, gotten flowers, have a strong willed guy beside them, shown soft affection, prefer a guy who is well to do etc. They still relish those roles that are for women. Its displays a sense of confusion among feminists and also some hypocrisy. They criticize gender roles but still love those roles.

How about feminists buying a ring, falling on a knee and proposing marriage. Dont sound like what they will want to do but they still critisize gender roles.

Gender roles in a way are good. It maintains civility

In the family testosterone running in the body of a man makes him to want to make sure all is well in his family. It does not mean that men want to deny women rights or subjugate them. Its a desire that stems from wanting the well being of the whole family and knowing that as a man things are running smoothly.

Comments like how about a man obey his wife cannot come from an adult lady that has experience in her life