Inter-racial attraction

[Miyavifan]

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

1. You suggested earlier that women now have too much power in relationships, throwing true relationships out of whack. Do you feel that, if a man were fighting for a 50-50 relationship, the relationship would fall apart? Do you think, then, that a man should submit to the woman so that the
3. Today, vocabulary like gay, lesbian, queer, and bisexual are interchangeable because more and more people are starting to realize that sexuality is fluid. One day, I might only be attracted to women. The next, I might only be attracted to men. I'm sorry if I confused you.

This it ot, but they're not interchangeable, because they all mean different things.

[mercedesjin]

Originally Posted by Miyavifan

This it ot, but they're not interchangeable, because they all mean different things.

Today - while having discourses about sexuality - people tend to understand that a woman can be gay and still be attracted to men. In that sense, they do mean the same thing and are interchangeable. The idea isn't completely mainstream, though, so you're right - I should've been clearer.

[Miyavifan]

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

Today - while having discourses about sexuality - people tend to understand that a woman can be gay and still be attracted to men. In that sense, they do mean the same thing and are interchangeable. The idea isn't completely mainstream, though, so you're right - I should've been clearer.

Women aren't gay, they're lesbian. That's how I mean the terms aren't interchangeable.
and chances are if they're attracted to men too, they're bi-sexual.

I wasn't saying anything about mainstream-ness.

I'm sorry for OT. back to the topic?

[bELyVIS]

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

Thanks for answering them. But, they just bring up more questions for me. I'll use numbers too, just because it's easier that way.

1. You suggested earlier that women now have too much power in relationships, throwing true relationships out of whack. Do you feel that, if a man were fighting for a 50-50 relationship, the relationship would fall apart? Do you think, then, that a man should submit to the woman so that the relationship can then and only then achieve true equality?

2. Yes, I am an American citizen. (Though I'm a second-class American citizen. I don't have the same rights as those born on the mainland. Even the idea of being US "territory" makes me second-class.) I'm also West Indian. West Indian is my ethnicity. Believe it or not, though, I understand a LOT about American culture. America has influenced the USVI greatly. I've also spent the last two years living in New York.

3. Today, vocabulary like gay, lesbian, queer, and bisexual are interchangeable because more and more people are starting to realize that sexuality is fluid. One day, I might only be attracted to women. The next, I might only be attracted to men. I'm sorry if I confused you.

4. What do you believe is the man's role in marriage? Also, what happens if two men get married, or if two women get married? What will their roles be then?

1. Yes it would fall apart.
If women were traditionally the head of the family then yes the man should be submissive. (This isn't the case though)
2. I am an American citizen, but I would never think I really understood somewhere I wasn't raised especially if the culture is different like the Virgin Islands.
3. The terms are not interchangable. I suggest not labeling yourself until you figure out who you are(Bi sexual might be closest for you).
4. The traditional role of men is the head of the family. Since this role is changing, this is what is leading to the break down of the institution of marriage. If same sex couple marry, one always assumes the dominate role. Gay couples seem to have less problems in their relationship because this is a given. Two dominates would never work, just as two submissives wouldn't.
I predict that marriage will cease to exsist in a century due to this confusion of roles caused by "Equal Rights".

[mercedesjin]

Originally Posted by bELyVIS

1. Yes it would fall apart.
If women were traditionally the head of the family then yes the man should be submissive. (This isn't the case though)
2. I am an American citizen, but I would never think I really understood somewhere I wasn't raised especially if the culture is different like the Virgin Islands.
3. The terms are not interchangable. I suggest not labeling yourself until you figure out who you are(Bi sexual might be closest for you).
4. The traditional role of men is the head of the family. Since this role is changing, this is what is leading to the break down of the institution of marriage. If same sex couple marry, one always assumes the dominate role. Gay couples seem to have less problems in their relationship because this is a given. Two dominates would never work, just as two submissives wouldn't.
I predict that marriage will cease to exsist in a century due to this confusion of roles caused by "Equal Rights".

1. Okay, cool. So, how does "the head of the household" fit into a 50-50 relationship? Do you think there can be an equal relationship if someone is appointed as "the head of the household"?

2. Have you lived in the Virgin Islands? Do you know about the culture of the USVI? How is the USVI culture so drastically different from US culture that you think I can't understand US culture?

3. Have you studied modern-day sexuality? Do you regularly have discourses on sexuality? Do you know what sexual fluidity is?

4. Same as #1, I suppose: how do you propose a relationship be equal if you feel that someone MUST assume the "dominant" role?

[bELyVIS]

Originally Posted by mercedesjin

1. Okay, cool. So, how does "the head of the household" fit into a 50-50 relationship? Do you think there can be an equal relationship if someone is appointed as "the head of the household"?

2. Have you lived in the Virgin Islands? Do you know about the culture of the USVI? How is the USVI culture so drastically different from US culture that you think I can't understand US culture?

3. Have you studied modern-day sexuality? Do you regularly have discourses on sexuality? Do you know what sexual fluidity is?

4. Same as #1, I suppose: how do you propose a relationship be equal if you feel that someone MUST assume the "dominant" role?

1. Yes, it's an honorary title.
2.No, but Hawaii is different and it's a state. Are you claiming there is no difference?
3.Yes, I am a counselor.
4.Someone needs to be the last word.

For someone with all the answers you sure have a lot of questions.

[bELyVIS]

How did we get here from "I prefer how Asian women because of how they treat me"?

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by bELyVIS

4.I am not saying that women should be oppressed. Just by their attempting to be equal, they have overshot this goal and think that they can only be equal is by castrating men. Men have to question their role in marriage now and that is why marriages are failing. My father doesn't oppress my mom, but his role is traditionally defined and he feels like he runs the family. In truth, my mother has feminine ways to manipulate him if need be without taking his manhood away.
Does this answer your questions?

How funny.

Just because you start a post with that sentence doesn't mean you can get away with the rest of what you say.

I mean seriously.. you paint the typical marriage between two Westerners as an inherently antagonistic power struggle and blame the failure of modern Western women for accepting their feminine role for it.

I'm sorry but that's just bullsh*t.

Even if the former were true (which I don't believe it is for a second), why would the latter be the fault of the woman? It could just as easily be presumed that the failure of the man to relinquish outdated traditions is to blame.

You haven't given us an insight into anything except your way of thinking. Please stop speaking for all Westerners (Americans????) and just speak for yourself.

[Ryzorian]

Um...ok I'll try to answer your questions as well as I'm able. That isn't saying much.

1. I think maybe the idea of "50- 50" is stressed too much. Relationships can be fluid or ridgid, it probably depends in part on the personalities of the individuals within the relationship. As to the idea of head of house..I'm the head of my house cause I'm alone. My mom is the head of hers, despite what dad likes to think. I suppose much of it would depend on the cultural influences of the people involved.

2. I never been anywhere on any island. I think these are off Africa? Thats about as far as I can go on that question.

3. I'm ex army...wich prolly means I'm a dim witted brute that can barely walk up right.

4. That would orginate from cultural and religious ideals. For those who were raised with that as thier base role model for happiness, they would in fact think of such a relationship as equal. I don't think I can answer this question very well, I'm sorry. Scientific method combined with human emotion can get complicated.

[bELyVIS]

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

How funny.

Just because you start a post with that sentence doesn't mean you can get away with the rest of what you say.

I mean seriously.. you paint the typical marriage between two Westerners as an inherently antagonistic power struggle and blame the failure of modern Western women for accepting their feminine role for it.

I'm sorry but that's just bullsh*t.

Even if the former were true (which I don't believe it is for a second), why would the latter be the fault of the woman? It could just as easily be presumed that the failure of the man to relinquish outdated traditions is to blame.

You haven't given us an insight into anything except your way of thinking. Please stop speaking for all Westerners (Americans????) and just speak for yourself.

If you were paying attention you notice I say "this is my opinion". I can only give you insight to my thinking because no one has any idea WTF you are talking about-EVER. (Nor do we care)