I'd be interested to know what people here think of with regards to marriage?
Is it simply a government recognised contract that protects and supports the unity of a family, thus if a breakup occurs then the family members get some disbursement of the assets, or that child care is properly provided or that hospital or prison visits are supported for family members?
It seems to me that government recognition of de-facto relationships, largely makes marriage in the eyes of the law, redundant.
With regards to social norms, it seems to be socially acceptable for non married people to live together, to have sex, to have children.
With countries that don't allow gay people to be married but instead allow Civil Union, what is the difference other than a name? Why don't heterosexual couples opt for civil union instead, in support of anti-discrimination against gays?
When I got married, there was no religious element, my wife retained her last name, we were already living together, hadn't had children at the time though. But I am thinking, if I were to get married in today's time, I would opt for Civil Union. But then again why bother with marriage at all?
I think an informal gathering of friends and family to celebrate the forming of a family and a commitment towards this family is great, and I would still do that, but why bother with the government legalities? Maybe a pre-nup would be important for some people, but then again, with government recognised de-facto, pre-nups are required for some people whom are merely dating.
The only reason--ONLY-- reason i would get married are for the benefits. I find it unfair for the most part and utterly pointless. But I know that is does give me a tax break and if my lovey dovey ends up in a coma, i have rights to see her/help her through whatever hard time in the hospital/ICU.
Other than that, it's a pretty useless contract.
A contract and nothing more.
As far as the government (should be) concerned, yes, it (should be) simply a legal contract that confers certain rights and responsibilities to people.
I think for the social aspect of it, people love a ritual, and the coming together of two families is a great occasion for a ritual. Is it necessary? No, not if the couple themselves don't want it or care about it. I was glad that we had a wedding, and I am happy to be married, but I recognize that other people may not want or care about it, and that's fine with me too. My only concern about it is that I think all consenting adults should have equal (legal) access to it.
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 12:54:42 AM
As far as the government (should be) concerned, yes, it (should be) simply a legal contract that confers certain rights and responsibilities to people.
I think for the social aspect of it, people love a ritual, and the coming together of two families is a great occasion for a ritual. Is it necessary? No, not if the couple themselves don't want it or care about it. I was glad that we had a wedding, and I am happy to be married, but I recognize that other people may not want or care about it, and that's fine with me too. My only concern about it is that I think all consenting adults should have equal (legal) access to it.
Hear, hear, Ali~ :)
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 12, 2012, 01:02:04 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 12:54:42 AM
As far as the government (should be) concerned, yes, it (should be) simply a legal contract that confers certain rights and responsibilities to people.
I think for the social aspect of it, people love a ritual, and the coming together of two families is a great occasion for a ritual. Is it necessary? No, not if the couple themselves don't want it or care about it. I was glad that we had a wedding, and I am happy to be married, but I recognize that other people may not want or care about it, and that's fine with me too. My only concern about it is that I think all consenting adults should have equal (legal) access to it.
Hear, hear, Ali~ :)
I agree. I personally like being married (I must get round to asking the wife what she thinks about it). But I can understand why it would not appeal to others.
I think the definition of marriage is increasingly moving into a bit of a gray area. And, as someone who is married, I don't really mind one little bit. I know some couples who are in long-term relationships, own houses together, obviously love each other and I don't view my relationship to my husband as any more "real" than theirs. If anything, I know a couple of people who are married who may not last as long as my un-married friends.
Gay marriage is legal throughout Canada, so the whole "civil union" thing is moot here. Civil unions don't exist in Canada, actually, besides in Quebec (but that province is always their own kettle of fish, anyway). Common-law relationships are acknowledged, but they're not so much about a ceremony and signing anything, as they are about living arrangements (once you live with someone that you're in a relationship with for a year, you're considered common-law -- or at least, that was the way it was when I was living with my boyfriend previous to my current relationship). Common-law rights/benefits aren't as strong as civil-union or marriage rights/benefits, though.
So the distinction between common-law and marriage is still pretty stark in Canada. I think there's still a shift in attitudes, as a lot of young people aren't in a rush to get married and are perfectly content with common-law status -- but if you want the official ceremony and the thorough legal rights and benefits, marriage is still the number one way to do it here.
Not for me. People can do whatever they like follow whatever customs they want its all fine with me, I don't mind if they get married to an inanimate object. Just make sure you invite me and have a free bar.
Quote from: Crow on July 12, 2012, 01:20:13 AM
Not for me. People can do whatever they like follow whatever customs they want its all fine with me, I don't mind if they get married to an inanimate object. Just make sure you invite me and have a free bar.
I think the party is of the utmost importance. :P I'm still hearing all kinds of crazy stories from our wedding and it was almost four years ago.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 12, 2012, 01:18:01 AM
I think the definition of marriage is increasingly moving into a bit of a gray area. And, as someone who is married, I don't really mind one little bit. I know some couples who are in long-term relationships, own houses together, obviously love each other and I don't view my relationship to my husband as any more "real" than theirs. If anything, I know a couple of people who are married who may not last as long as my un-married friends.
Gay marriage is legal throughout Canada, so the whole "civil union" thing is moot here. Civil unions don't exist in Canada, actually, besides in Quebec (but that province is always their own kettle of fish, anyway). Common-law relationships are acknowledged, but they're not so much about a ceremony and signing anything, as they are about living arrangements (once you live with someone that you're in a relationship with for a year, you're considered common-law -- or at least, that was the way it was when I was living with my boyfriend previous to my current relationship). Common-law rights/benefits aren't as strong as civil-union or marriage rights/benefits, though.
So the distinction between common-law and marriage is still pretty stark in Canada. I think there's still a shift in attitudes, as a lot of young people aren't in a rush to get married and are perfectly content with common-law status -- but if you want the official ceremony and the thorough legal rights and benefits, marriage is still the number one way to do it here.
First off, Canada rocks.
Secondly, i'm glad you mention how being married that automatically equal a long lasting relationship. Nothing against marriage, but i don't even know why some people get married in the first place.
My co worker Jessica is constantly complaining about her abusive, muslim husband. Oh yeah- then why did you marry him , bitch? Argh, it gets me my nerves. Like, i really don't need to hear about her marital crap while i am trying to work. Keep it home (or on a forum like me XD )
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 12, 2012, 01:22:16 AM
My co worker Jessica is constantly complaining about her abusive, muslim husband. Oh yeah- then why did you marry him , bitch? Argh,
I take it your not Jessica's biggest fan then?
Quote from: Crow on July 12, 2012, 01:20:13 AM
Not for me. People can do whatever they like follow whatever customs they want its all fine with me, I don't mind if they get married to an inanimate object. Just make sure you invite me and have a free bar.
That reminds me of when Peter Griffin tried to marry a piece of pie on family guy. Sadly the pie did not make it through the process before being eaten. Back on topic I would agree with the majority. It is a contract and nothing more. I am against even getting married a country where there are people who still aren't allowed the priviledge.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 12, 2012, 01:22:16 AM
My co worker Jessica is constantly complaining about her abusive, muslim husband. Oh yeah- then why did you marry him , bitch? Argh, it gets me my nerves. Like, i really don't need to hear about her marital crap while i am trying to work. Keep it home (or on a forum like me XD )
Sweetdeath, if she's actually in an abusive relationship, this seems like an incredibly insensitive thing to say.
Quote from: Crow on July 12, 2012, 01:28:41 AM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 12, 2012, 01:22:16 AM
My co worker Jessica is constantly complaining about her abusive, muslim husband. Oh yeah- then why did you marry him , bitch? Argh,
I take it your not Jessica's biggest fan then?
Not really XD
she has been working for 8 months longer than me, but is so slow. She 'looooves' surveying men. (I think she is a bit slutty in that aspect as she is always flaunting herself and wearing way too much make up.)
I usually dont wear make up to work, as i use my personally for marketing, not my awesome looks. :F
Okay, I know that everyone's on eggshells lately, but I'm going to say this anyway.
I find it pretty offensive to refer to other women as "slutty" because you don't like them (or because they "wear too much makeup" or "like surveying men" or whatever). SD, you often wax on about your love for equality, but can't you see that when women call each other "sluts", it's not really helping anyone's cause? If she has a shitty personality, fine. She has a shitty personality. Hate her for her shitty personality. But when you try to use her sexuality as a weapon against her, it hurts all of us.
I've always thought of "slut shaming" as being a representation of outdated and unfair patriarchal norms in a society. The idea that women can't be openly sexual or that they have to conform to some internalized patriarchal norm seems unfair to me, unequal. Attaching a stigma to being a "slut" is just a way of reminding a woman that she lives in a world where her sexuality is controlled by others, not herself. If you remove the negative connotations, slut simply means someone who's openly sexual, and I cannot imagine anything wrong with that in and of itself. It's healthy to own one's sexuality, to represent it honestly, and to not allow outdated patriarchal norms to prevent people from expressing who they are, so long as they're not harming others or themselves.
Moreover, we live in a society where women can and do internalize the same patriarchal norms that men internalize, so as society teaches women that their worth is tied up in their appearance and their use as sexual objects, sometimes (oftentimes) women start to, on some level, think this utter garbage is true. This is one of the consequences of being raised in a sexist culture. It's not enough that women are met with external sexism, but many are met with internal sexism, by believing stereotypes and lies that culture tells us about what it is to be a woman.
I won't pretend for a second to know the first thing about Jessica, who she is, how she acts, or who she's married to, but if we're to condemn her for any reason, let it be a reason that isn't about shaming her for being openly sexual (which is perfectly healthy) or, perhaps, for internalizing sexism (which starts happening during infancy, so it's largely outside of our control).
I know feminism gets a bad rap these days, but the truth is that atheism and feminism have a lot in common (fighting outdated, backwards, unfair systems that oppress people who think for themselves and fight against being relegated to second-class citizenship), and feminism probably has a big place in both a discussion about modern marriage and about how women should/do act in relation to their sexuality.
Sorry for the weighty post. This kind of thing is kinda a big deal to me.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 12, 2012, 01:52:03 AM
Okay, I know that everyone's on eggshells lately, but I'm going to say this anyway.
I find it pretty offensive to refer to other women as "slutty" because you don't like them (or because they "wear too much makeup" or "like surveying men" or whatever). SD, you often wax on about your love for equality, but can't you see that when women call each other "sluts", it's not really helping anyone's cause? If she has a shitty personality, fine. She has a shitty personality. Hate her for her shitty personality. But when you try to use her sexuality as a weapon against her, it hurts all of us.
Ahh, i suppose i do seem like a bad person, but it is one of those things where i cant properly explain it. Or "You just have to meet her to know what i mean..."
I am the last person to refer to a women as 'slutty' because she wears waaaay too much makeup or low plunging dresses.
Though for our jobs, it seems extremely unnecessary. And she has even told me she loves to manipulate men.
I don't like her at all. I agree that i really shouldnt comment on her looks or attire, but yes, her as a person really bothers me to no end. She is also extremely catholic.
As for the abusive relationship: She married whoever she married... I mean, what am i suppose to do? She complains, but it isn't my business. Not like she is showing up to work with bruises. If she wants to fight with her husband, it is not my business nor problem.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 12, 2012, 02:39:04 AM
Ahh, i suppose i do seem like a bad person, but it is one of those things where i cant properly explain it. Or "You just have to meet her to know what i mean..."
I am the last person to refer to a women as 'slutty' because she wears waaaay too much makeup or low plunging dresses.
Though for our jobs, it seems extremely unnecessary. And she has even told me she loves to manipulate men.
I don't like her at all.
I'm not saying you're a bad person or that she's a good person. My point is that calling her "slutty" re-enforces the idea that sexuality should be used as a weapon to bring people down. And, for the record, I've known plenty of horrible, manipulative, sexual women, so I don't really think the "you'd have to know her" is a great defense. It has nothing to do with her, really. It's about language that is specifically designed to tear women down for being sexual beings. Can't you see that when you call her "slutty" for the way she acts, it validates the opinion that someone can use YOUR sexuality against you, if you don't conform to their ideas about how a woman should behave?
You do know, that for some people, being a lesbian automatically makes you a "slut". When you call other women sluts in this way, no matter what they are like, you are helping people who think like that.
Anyway, as for the domestic abuse situation - no, it's not your problem. I don't know enough about what's going on to really comment further. I was just expressing some surprise because it seemed like an insensitive comment.
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
What about men? Is there a male "look" that is deserving of the title slut? If its the metrosexual look, personally I wouldn't call them slutty, but I also wouldn't hang out with them either, as they are far to easily manipulated by crab people.
Quote from: Genericguy on July 12, 2012, 04:09:31 AM
What about men? Is there a male "look" that is deserving of the title slut? If its the metrosexual look, personally I wouldn't call them slutty, but I also wouldn't hang out with them either, as they are far to easily manipulated by crab people.
We're living in a patriarchal society, so directly comparing men to women on issues like this doesn't work.
I *am* slutty. I am a slutty gentleman. I'm assertive, I like to strike up conversations with women I find interesting or attractive, I do not dress conservatively, I've been in and out of sexual relationships with women since my teens, and not once have I ever been made to feel ashamed for my sexuality. The issue is that society doesn't tell me that my entire worth is tied up in being a sexual object. When I go to see movies, most of them are either about men, or about women who only talk about or think about men. There are sexy men and sexy women in ads, but you'll never see a Victoria's Secret for men commercial, or if you do it will be satirical. If anything, society teaches me that I'm somehow entitled to not just a woman, but a beautiful woman. When you take a step back and look at all this, it's completely crazy.
I can go into more detail, if you like, but I don't want to derail the thread, which is supposed to be about marriage. Out of respect to OP, I'll try to get back on track.
Quote from: Genericguy on July 12, 2012, 04:09:31 AM
What about men? Is there a male "look" that is deserving of the title slut? If its the metrosexual look, personally I wouldn't call them slutty, but I also wouldn't hang out with them either, as they are far to easily manipulated by crab people.
I think male sexuality is generally approached differently, so calling a guy a "slut" probably doesn't have the same kind of impact. I think sexist attacks on men are usually focused around trying to tear down their masculinity in other ways. Traditionally, male sexuality is framed as a juxtaposition to women's (men pursue, women are pursued; men are dominant, women are passive; men always want sex, women have to be "woo'd"), so the biggest "insult" is to compare them to a woman in some way, either directly or indirectly. I think calling a guy a "fag" is an illusion to this in a round-about way, because gay men are seen to challenge the male/female sexuality dichotomy.
Haha, sorry. Like Will, I seem to be derailing this thread further than I intended. :-X
I completely agree and it has always bothered me. I just couldn't resist slipping in the south park reference. I guess no one got it, though. I apologize for future references and similes centered around television. It's one of my favorite things to do. Kind of like the Mary Cathrin Gallagher skit on Saturday night live when she acts out scenes from movies to better express her feeling.... Shit, I just did it again!
</derail>
SHOCK HORROR ! Old Git actually turns a thread back on track for once:
I agree with what Ali was saying a while back: one very important thing about marraige is the celebration. All human beings need solemn events to mark major milestones like birth, coming of age, marraige and death. It's in our genes.
Now we have contraception, so much has changed. It's no longer so vital to make people marry so as to look after the children. Women's rôle in society has improved hugely, they can now be financially and socially independent. But IMO there's still a lot to be said for making a formal bond and starting it off with a public celebration. The couple solemnly commit to each other.
We enjoyed our wedding hugely and so did our daughters, and we're glad we did it and have been pretty happy since. If any couple wants to do it differently, that's fine; I have no objections and it's up to them. I do hope, though that they aren't missing out on something which would have been to their benefit, just because that's the trend these days.
Quote from: Stevil on July 12, 2012, 12:33:21 AM
With countries that don't allow gay people to be married but instead allow Civil Union, what is the difference other than a name? Why don't heterosexual couples opt for civil union instead, in support of anti-discrimination against gays?
I would, in particular, like to address this point.
There are three main reasons, as I see it, why there is so much fuss over same-sex
marriage, emphasis on the
marriage, from the LGBT community (and its supporters).
- 'Civil Union' simply is not romantic. We're not going to say "we're going to enter a civil union", or "he's my civil partner", we're going to say "we're getting married!!"
- There is no reason to form a distinction between same-sex marriages and heterosexual marriages. In fact, there is reason not to. Various state supreme courts have found that even just referring to them separately opens the door to unequal treatment, just as "separate-but-equal" schools were found illegal.
- Referring to same-sex marriages as anything other than marriage indirectly reinforces the view that the relationship is significantly different or inferior. If the only thing you knew about same-sex couples was that they were denied the right to call themselves married, it would be a bad impression.
And I know this will sound a little melodramatic, but the gay community definitely has pride, and it can pretty much ruin your day when you hear about discrimination happening -- or make your day when you hear about positive changes.
Quote from: Wrath on July 12, 2012, 09:52:03 AM
- Referring to same-sex marriages as anything other than marriage indirectly reinforces the view that the relationship is significantly different or inferior. If the only thing you knew about same-sex couples was that they were denied the right to call themselves married, it would be a bad impression.
Yup, so I would say, that if your government does not allow gay people to be "married" but allows people to form a "Civil Union" then that is what all people should do, either that or not marry at all. We aren't so precious of the "marriage" label but would prefer to use it. Our power in this "war" is to ruin the sacredness of marriage, which is opposite to the misguided religous folks intent behind excluding gay people from it.
We have the power here, we need to co-ordinate ourselves at take advantage of it.
Quote from: Stevil on July 12, 2012, 10:08:31 AM
Quote from: Wrath on July 12, 2012, 09:52:03 AM
- Referring to same-sex marriages as anything other than marriage indirectly reinforces the view that the relationship is significantly different or inferior. If the only thing you knew about same-sex couples was that they were denied the right to call themselves married, it would be a bad impression.
Yup, so I would say, that if your government does not allow gay people to be "married" but allows people to form a "Civil Union" then that is what all people should do, either that or not marry at all. We aren't so precious of the "marriage" label but would prefer to use it. Our power in this "war" is to ruin the sacredness of marriage, which is opposite to the misguided religous folks intent behind excluding gay people from it.
We have the power here, we need to co-ordinate ourselves at take advantage of it.
A great example of this would be Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie refusing to get married in support of gay marriage. I've never cared about celebrities, but because they have the power to actually reach people, it really brightened my day when I found out, knowing that they could put this kind of message out there.
I wouldn't expect anybody to do it though -- or begrudge them for getting married. Being able to choose what to do with your own relationships is what we're after here, right?
If anything, I'm more interested in questioning why we as a species, at least as a majority, are so hung up on this single form of family unit. Not saying I'm for polygamy, but it would be interesting to at least see how other organizations work out.
Quote from: Wrath on July 12, 2012, 10:17:24 AM
Not saying I'm for polygamy, but it would be interesting to at least see how other organizations work out.
I'm against laws that are against polygamy.
Adult ought to be able to choose their own path, government are overstepping their bounds. What concern is it of theirs anyway?
Quote from: Stevil on July 12, 2012, 10:34:48 AM
Quote from: Wrath on July 12, 2012, 10:17:24 AM
Not saying I'm for polygamy, but it would be interesting to at least see how other organizations work out.
I'm against laws that are against polygamy.
Adult ought to be able to choose their own path, government are overstepping their bounds. What concern is it of theirs anyway?
I'm sure that the current laws against polygamy were inspired by religious bigotry and the "traditional family". However, I could see some reasonable motivation for opposing polygamy -- that it is constantly used as a tool of religious cults to oppress and abuse young women. I suppose outright banning of polygamy could simply be replaced by stricter scrutiny, but that could still be viewed as prejudiced and unequal treatment.
Quote from: Stevil on July 12, 2012, 10:34:48 AM
Quote from: Wrath on July 12, 2012, 10:17:24 AM
Not saying I'm for polygamy, but it would be interesting to at least see how other organizations work out.
I'm against laws that are against polygamy.
Adult ought to be able to choose their own path, government are overstepping their bounds. What concern is it of theirs anyway?
i agree with this. why is everyone so against adults doing as they please if they are happy and consenting?
there is no such thing as traditional love or marriage.
Quote from: SDi agree with this. why is everyone so against adults doing as they please if they are happy and consenting?
Seconded. As the lady said, 'Does it really matter what these affectionate people do — so long as they don't do it in the streets and frighten the horses!'
Quote from: SDthere is no such thing as traditional love or marriage.
Now there I disagree. I don't want to force it on anyone, but I do recommend it from long experience.
Quote from: OldGit on July 12, 2012, 03:16:41 PM
Quote from: SDi agree with this. why is everyone so against adults doing as they please if they are happy and consenting?
Seconded. As the lady said, 'Does it really matter what these affectionate people do — so long as they don't do it in the streets and frighten the horses!'
Quote from: SDthere is no such thing as traditional love or marriage.
Now there I disagree. I don't want to force it on anyone, but I do recommend it from long experience.
What do you consider traditional love?
Two people?
two people of the opposite sex , but same race?
We adapt and evolve as a society. I hope...
No, SD, I'm sure love exists between same-sex couples, and is equally real and valid. Race is not relevant here.
QuoteWe adapt and evolve as a society. I hope...
We do, but that doesn't mean that none of the old realities exist any more.
Cohabitation. Much better, yes? Make a contract that states that should the warm and fuzzy go away, everyone retains what they paid for and all is golden, yes?
Quote from: OldGit on July 12, 2012, 03:16:41 PM
Quote from: SDthere is no such thing as traditional love or marriage.
Now there I disagree. I don't want to force it on anyone, but I do recommend it from long experience.
Prior to organised society, and the invention of marriage it would have been interesting to see how humans structured themselves.
Did we mate for life like some birds do?
Did we have an alpha male whom won the right to impregnate the pack?
Did we just have a free for all when women were in heat?
But of course we have rules now and social expectations and a tradition going as far back as the concept of marriage.
Quote from: Stevil on July 12, 2012, 08:32:46 PM
Quote from: OldGit on July 12, 2012, 03:16:41 PM
Quote from: SDthere is no such thing as traditional love or marriage.
Now there I disagree. I don't want to force it on anyone, but I do recommend it from long experience.
Prior to organised society, and the invention of marriage it would have been interesting to see how humans structured themselves.
Did we mate for life like some birds do?
Did we have an alpha male whom won the right to impregnate the pack?
Did we just have a free for all when women were in heat?
But of course we have rules now and social expectations and a tradition going as far back as the concept of marriage.
From what I've read, serial monogamy seems to be the closest to our "natural" way of doing things. As in, people tended to form monogamous bonds, but they usually didn't last forever. So, people would pick partners based on their current life stage (when you're young, you find someone who excites you; when you want to reproduce, you find someone who's a good parent; when you're older, you find someone who's a good companion. That sort of thing). It makes sense to me, because I think a structured idea of marriage came about as a means to try and keep people from wandering apart when they might otherwise be inclined to.
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 03:53:09 AM
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
I wouldn't personally ever employ the term slut, firstly because it implies a moral judgement. Have I ever mentioned that I don't do morals?
Secondly, I also believe that slapping labels on people is reductive and robs them of their complexity and humanity.
I dissent from the proposition however that a person of either gender who elects to create an impression of ready sexual availability in the workplace is advancing any cause or to adopt your hip parlance, Ms. Ali, that they "rock"
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 12, 2012, 01:41:03 AM
Quote from: Crow on July 12, 2012, 01:28:41 AM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 12, 2012, 01:22:16 AM
My co worker Jessica is constantly complaining about her abusive, muslim husband. Oh yeah- then why did you marry him , bitch? Argh,
I take it your not Jessica's biggest fan then?
Not really XD
she has been working for 8 months longer than me, but is so slow. She 'looooves' surveying men. (I think she is a bit slutty in that aspect as she is always flaunting herself and wearing way too much make up.)
I usually dont wear make up to work, as i use my personally for marketing, not my awesome looks. :F
Just a question SD. Would it be acceptable for this woman to refer to you as a 'Flirty Dyke who lust looooooves surveying women'?
Because if you do not find it acceptable you are being hypocritical in that you feel free to use offensive terminology/language to describe other people. Do you not look at women? Do you avert your eyes from sexy women. You say you use your personality rather than make up i.e. you flirt.
SD sometimes what you write does make you
look rather unaccepting of other people and very judgemental. Being in a somewhat oppressed minority I would have thought you would be more accepting other people's individuality.
I'm not a huge fan of marriage as a reality, but as a concept doesn't seem so bad. Two people stay together to raise their children and share effort of making a living. Seems that would be the best for all. In reality, however, it doesn't work out that way often enough to make it a recognized institution. I'm married for two reasons. 1. Benefits and rights that are given to married couples and spouses. 2. My wife has an old-fashioned view of relationships and marriage, and I am completely happy staying with her and having her company. I was fine marrying her because it fulfilled something she needed, while we both fulfill each other's needs on every level.
I don't think it should be considered a contract for life, especially since it can be broken at any time. I like Mexico's new idea... 2 year marriage contracts. If it doesn't work out, you don't have to spend a bunch of money on a divorce, the marriage dissolves after 2 years automatically if it is not renewed.
Quote from: En_Route on July 13, 2012, 09:44:00 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 03:53:09 AM
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
I wouldn't personally ever employ the term slut, firstly because it implies a moral judgement. Have I ever mentioned that I don't do morals?
Secondly, I also believe that slapping labels on people is reductive and robs them of their complexity and humanity.
I dissent from the proposition however that a person of either gender who elects to create an impression of ready sexual availability in the workplace is advancing any cause or to adopt your hip parlance, Ms. Ali, that they "rock"
I agree that overt sexuality in the workplace can be inappropriate.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 13, 2012, 02:21:17 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 13, 2012, 09:44:00 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 03:53:09 AM
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
I wouldn't personally ever employ the term slut, firstly because it implies a moral judgement. Have I ever mentioned that I don't do morals?
Secondly, I also believe that slapping labels on people is reductive and robs them of their complexity and humanity.
I dissent from the proposition however that a person of either gender who elects to create an impression of ready sexual availability in the workplace is advancing any cause or to adopt your hip parlance, Ms. Ali, that they "rock"
I agree that overt sexuality in the workplace can be inappropriate.
well, first i want to say i really, really wasnt saying she herself was a slut in any way. I understand i do word things very wrong sometimes. >_< i'm not sure why this happens. I apologize for my misunderstandings and don't want to stretch that subject out any further. It's not necessary. :-\
Well, this coworker is not a nice person. Doesn't make it right for anyone (me included) to call her names, which i don't in person or anything. To me, she is not a good person to work with though. I work in marketing , and i have to reach a quota every single day.
She is not only late for work 4/5 times a week, she tends to come in , speaking so casually about her personal life, then asking in return for information on yours. Then she'll speak of religion constantly.
Our boss is buddhist, and she is a very cool and laid back person. She NEVER brings up her religion or religious beliefs ever in the work place.
But this girl jessica will constantly go on about how god made us and how she is so grateful to be on god's earth. How we are all his children. And i am really biting my tongue so hard not to say anything, or i will just get off and leave the area. It drives me crazy. I mean, i wish there seriously was a real against speaking religion at work. She KNOWS I'm an atheist and none of that 'i'm so proud to be god's children' doesn't apply to me, but she will still go on about it.
So that's a big peeve. She doesn't work (she is the slowest of the group) and she loves to spout religious nonsense. Her as a person drives me mad. Like, she is the type of person i would never willingly be around.
So, that's all. 8)
Quote from: fester30 on July 13, 2012, 11:10:48 AM
I'm not a huge fan of marriage as a reality, but as a concept doesn't seem so bad. Two people stay together to raise their children and share effort of making a living. Seems that would be the best for all. In reality, however, it doesn't work out that way often enough to make it a recognized institution. I'm married for two reasons. 1. Benefits and rights that are given to married couples and spouses. 2. My wife has an old-fashioned view of relationships and marriage, and I am completely happy staying with her and having her company. I was fine marrying her because it fulfilled something she needed, while we both fulfill each other's needs on every level.
I don't think it should be considered a contract for life, especially since it can be broken at any time. I like Mexico's new idea... 2 year marriage contracts. If it doesn't work out, you don't have to spend a bunch of money on a divorce, the marriage dissolves after 2 years automatically if it is not renewed.
That's an interesting law.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 13, 2012, 02:21:17 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 13, 2012, 09:44:00 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 03:53:09 AM
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
I wouldn't personally ever employ the term slut, firstly because it implies a moral judgement. Have I ever mentioned that I don't do morals?
Secondly, I also believe that slapping labels on people is reductive and robs them of their complexity and humanity.
I dissent from the proposition however that a person of either gender who elects to create an impression of ready sexual availability in the workplace is advancing any cause or to adopt your hip parlance, Ms. Ali, that they "rock"
I agree that overt sexuality in the workplace can be inappropriate.
For that reason, I always left my mankini at home.
Quote from: En_Route on July 13, 2012, 09:44:00 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 03:53:09 AM
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
I wouldn't personally ever employ the term slut, firstly because it implies a moral judgement. Have I ever mentioned that I don't do morals?
Secondly, I also believe that slapping labels on people is reductive and robs them of their complexity and humanity.
I dissent from the proposition however that a person of either gender who elects to create an impression of ready sexual availability in the workplace is advancing any cause or to adopt your hip parlance, Ms. Ali, that they "rock"
Well, I would agree that if whatever they are doing is detracting from the professionalism or focus of their of job, that's a problem (just as it would be a problem if instead of working, they were talking really loudly on their cell phone, or haning out on HAF instead of doing their work. ;D) I'm just saying that in general, I am sick of society looking down on a woman for deciding that she can do whatever she wants with her own vagina.
Quote from: Ali on July 13, 2012, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 13, 2012, 09:44:00 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 03:53:09 AM
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
I wouldn't personally ever employ the term slut, firstly because it implies a moral judgement. Have I ever mentioned that I don't do morals?
Secondly, I also believe that slapping labels on people is reductive and robs them of their complexity and humanity.
I dissent from the proposition however that a person of either gender who elects to create an impression of ready sexual availability in the workplace is advancing any cause or to adopt your hip parlance, Ms. Ali, that they "rock"
Well, I would agree that if whatever they are doing is detracting from the professionalism or focus of their of job, that's a problem (just as it would be a problem if instead of working, they were talking really loudly on their cell phone, or haning out on HAF instead of doing their work. ;D) I'm just saying that in general, I am sick of society looking down on a woman for deciding that she can do whatever she wants with her own vagina.
well, as i should of stated, i don't care if people are open with their sexuality, or proud-- whatever. But when you are using your body and wearing tons of make up to get 'work' done, then to me, it seems tacky.
I am all for women liberation and such, but too much sexuality at work just makes me uncomfortable. there are clubs and homes for that :P
i am an extremely sexual person, but i don't bring it to work. I certainly don't need my sexual to get men to do surveys with me. I do my job professionally. Which is why at the end of the day, i get the quota done the fastest and get paid the most of everyone. :D
Quote from: Ali on July 13, 2012, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 13, 2012, 09:44:00 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 03:53:09 AM
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
I wouldn't personally ever employ the term slut, firstly because it implies a moral judgement. Have I ever mentioned that I don't do morals?
Secondly, I also believe that slapping labels on people is reductive and robs them of their complexity and humanity.
I dissent from the proposition however that a person of either gender who elects to create an impression of ready sexual availability in the workplace is advancing any cause or to adopt your hip parlance, Ms. Ali, that they "rock"
Well, I would agree that if whatever they are doing is detracting from the professionalism or focus of their of job, that's a problem (just as it would be a problem if instead of working, they were talking really loudly on their cell phone, or haning out on HAF instead of doing their work. ;D) I'm just saying that in general, I am sick of society looking down on a woman for deciding that she can do whatever she wants with her own vagina.
I don't think we differ on this. It is a form of discrimination.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 13, 2012, 04:12:20 PM
Quote from: Ali on July 13, 2012, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 13, 2012, 09:44:00 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 03:53:09 AM
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
I wouldn't personally ever employ the term slut, firstly because it implies a moral judgement. Have I ever mentioned that I don't do morals?
Secondly, I also believe that slapping labels on people is reductive and robs them of their complexity and humanity.
I dissent from the proposition however that a person of either gender who elects to create an impression of ready sexual availability in the workplace is advancing any cause or to adopt your hip parlance, Ms. Ali, that they "rock"
Well, I would agree that if whatever they are doing is detracting from the professionalism or focus of their of job, that's a problem (just as it would be a problem if instead of working, they were talking really loudly on their cell phone, or haning out on HAF instead of doing their work. ;D) I'm just saying that in general, I am sick of society looking down on a woman for deciding that she can do whatever she wants with her own vagina.
well, as i should of stated, i don't care if people are open with their sexuality, or proud-- whatever. But when you are using your body and wearing tons of make up to get 'work' done, then to me, it seems tacky.
I am all for women liberation and such, but too much sexuality at work just makes me uncomfortable. there are clubs and homes for that :P
i am an extremely sexual person, but i don't bring it to work. I certainly don't need my sexual to get men to do surveys with me. I do my job professionally. Which is why at the end of the day, i get the quota done the fastest and get paid the most of everyone. :D
I agree with the bolded part. I would actually go on to say that makeup has no place in the workplace, but I'd temper that by saying that some people simply don't feel 'dressed' without makeup, and I wouldn't want to make people feel uncomfortable coming to work.
Re: makeup. When I was a waitress, I was told that I needed to wear more makeup. Specially, that I "should try to look attractive -- so that the men are interested, but not TOO attractive, because then the girlfriends get angry. Try really shiny lip-gloss."
And I wasn't working anywhere with any kind of sexual theme (like Hooters, or something), it was your typical mid-price family restaurant.
I didn't work there for long. :P
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 13, 2012, 06:25:08 PM
Re: makeup. When I was a waitress, I was told that I needed to wear more makeup. Specially, that I "should try to look attractive -- so that the men are interested, but not TOO attractive, because then the girlfriends get angry. Try really shiny lip-gloss."
And I wasn't working anywhere with any kind of sexual theme (like Hooters, or something), it was your typical mid-price family restaurant.
I didn't work there for long. :P
And now it's the norm to see all the female hosts and waitresses wearing tiny, tight black dresses that shows off their bodies splendidly. Not that I really mind a bit of T&A, but it's *so* common, I'm wondering if managers are specifically requesting "sexy dress". If it becomes an expectation, that's what I have a problem with.
I could never make it as a waitress then. I follow the Sarah Silverman "Make It a Treat" rule when it comes to makeup (i.e. only wear it on special occasions so people don't get used to it, and therefore it is a special treat to see you in it.)
I've never worn any makeup. I wonder if it'd suit me.
Quote from: OldGit on July 13, 2012, 08:07:29 PM
I've never worn any makeup. I wonder if it'd suit me.
If you ever decide to try it, Nyx has a few products that would suit you nicely. :P
Quote from: OldGit on July 13, 2012, 08:07:29 PM
I've never worn any makeup. I wonder if it'd suit me.
In a darkroom I would think so.
I like makeup. Adds some complexity to the simplicity... When done properly, that is.
But then, vanity is one of my greatest virtues.
I can appreciate a little eye liner (is that what it is called when they use a black pencil and thinly frame the eyes), making the eyes stand out.
Hate when they paint the skin above the eye but below the eyebrow, it looks hideous.
I prefer an unpainted face to a painted one.
But to each their own.
Quote from: Stevil on July 13, 2012, 09:45:46 PM
I can appreciate a little eye liner (is that what it is called when they use a black pencil and thinly frame the eyes), making the eyes stand out.
Hate when they paint the skin above the eye but below the eyebrow, it looks hideous.
I prefer an unpainted face to a painted one.
But to each their own.
I like a little eye shadow on special occasions, but I never put on bright colors.
In bellydancing, there's a saying about makeup: "Keep putting it on until you look like a Drag Queen. Then put on a little more." ;D It's the only time I really like wearing a lot of makeup. It's fun.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 13, 2012, 02:43:07 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 13, 2012, 02:21:17 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 13, 2012, 09:44:00 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 12, 2012, 03:53:09 AM
Totally agree, DJ and Will.
I have no idea if this woman is a nice person or not, but what I do know is that I am OVER slut shaming. Girls/Women that own their sexuality rock and more power to them.
I wouldn't personally ever employ the term slut, firstly because it implies a moral judgement. Have I ever mentioned that I don't do morals?
Secondly, I also believe that slapping labels on people is reductive and robs them of their complexity and humanity.
I dissent from the proposition however that a person of either gender who elects to create an impression of ready sexual availability in the workplace is advancing any cause or to adopt your hip parlance, Ms. Ali, that they "rock"
I agree that overt sexuality in the workplace can be inappropriate.
well, first i want to say i really, really wasnt saying she herself was a slut in any way. I understand i do word things very wrong sometimes. >_< i'm not sure why this happens. I apologize for my misunderstandings and don't want to stretch that subject out any further. It's not necessary. :-\
Well, this coworker is not a nice person. Doesn't make it right for anyone (me included) to call her names, which i don't in person or anything. To me, she is not a good person to work with though. I work in marketing , and i have to reach a quota every single day.
She is not only late for work 4/5 times a week, she tends to come in , speaking so casually about her personal life, then asking in return for information on yours. Then she'll speak of religion constantly.
Our boss is buddhist, and she is a very cool and laid back person. She NEVER brings up her religion or religious beliefs ever in the work place.
But this girl jessica will constantly go on about how god made us and how she is so grateful to be on god's earth. How we are all his children. And i am really biting my tongue so hard not to say anything, or i will just get off and leave the area. It drives me crazy. I mean, i wish there seriously was a real against speaking religion at work. She KNOWS I'm an atheist and none of that 'i'm so proud to be god's children' doesn't apply to me, but she will still go on about it.
So that's a big peeve. She doesn't work (she is the slowest of the group) and she loves to spout religious nonsense. Her as a person drives me mad. Like, she is the type of person i would never willingly be around.
So, that's all. 8)
I've worked with people like that also. It can drive you nuts.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 13, 2012, 06:25:08 PM
Re: makeup. When I was a waitress, I was told that I needed to wear more makeup. Specially, that I "should try to look attractive -- so that the men are interested, but not TOO attractive, because then the girlfriends get angry. Try really shiny lip-gloss."
And I wasn't working anywhere with any kind of sexual theme (like Hooters, or something), it was your typical mid-price family restaurant.
I didn't work there for long. :P
Yeah, fuck no. I would never work anywhere that told me to where wear makeup.
That's such thinly veiled sexism.
I dont wear make up to work.
Quote from: Stevil on July 12, 2012, 12:33:21 AM
I'd be interested to know what people here think of with regards to marriage?
Late to the party again. Personally, I have no interest in marriage and never did -- I always knew that wasn't for me. I saw good marriages and bad marriages growing up and wanted no part of any of it. Having written that, I will admit to feeling in a little in awe of long time couples who are still affectionate with each other.
I tend to think of marriage as a hold-over from primitive, tribal times which is constantly being tweaked to try to make it fit the modern world better. Maybe we don't really need legal marriage anymore, but as long as it still is a legal issue I'd like to see the rules about who can and can't marry be fair and reasonable.
So far, I haven't heard a single argument against same-sex marriage that makes a bit of sense, isn't rooted in personal religous beliefs or couldn't also be used to ban opposite-sex marriage. The same goes for polygamous marriages. As far as I can see, people involved in a marriage all have the same basic needs and as long as they're consenting adults it shouldn't matter to the law how many of them there are or what their sexes are.
Make up looks great when done well only problem is most people don't do make-up well. Scouse brows awful and the ridiculous amount of younger women these days seem to have mistaken looking like a drag queen for being sexy, btw it isn't. Personally I like natural looking make-up that matches the individuals skin tone and enhances certain features like these:
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbentrovatoblog.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Faaron-richter_ben-trovato8.jpg&hash=8ad8e4ce9c4c48152e788af63c90cfb299741cad)
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpayload.cargocollective.com%2F1%2F0%2F31246%2F1733594%2FI%2520Want%2520To%2520Make%2520A%2520Good%2520Impression%2520On%2520Your%2520Parents%2520-%2520LeslieMILES.png&hash=85273f5c27916a5ca092002d105cbc368bfc7d23)
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.xlr8r.com%2Ffiles%2Fdownloads%2Fthumbnails%2FLianne-La-Havas_11212.jpg&hash=f9a859485bfa2eeb7996172e8f699112bc839eed)
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fattheloft.typepad.com%2F.a%2F6a00e54ecca8b98833014e8a38ad5a970d-450wi&hash=ce843e96cd981e793c32a0c152b7de7cbd0c3405)
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_l2whk78f0X1qau50i.jpg&hash=16320b5e8e5886a24c3ab39880d0f2feac543e34)
I also like make-up that has more of an impact but seeing as I have just overloaded the page with images won't to do it again.
Crow, I agree with your strictures re the modern predilection for uber-slap. I also applaud your policy of using the flimsiest of excuses to post pictures of gorgeous women.
^^^ Haha, next he'll want to talk about how a bikini enhances the female form, with examples.... :D
Quote from: Ali on July 14, 2012, 03:28:20 PM
^^^ Haha, next he'll want to talk about how a bikini enhances the female form, with examples.... :D
Bring it on.
Quote from: En_Route on July 14, 2012, 03:16:20 PM
I also applaud your policy of using the flimsiest of excuses to post pictures of gorgeous women.
;D you noticed.
Quote from: Ali on July 14, 2012, 03:28:20 PM
^^^ Haha, next he'll want to talk about how a bikini enhances the female form, with examples.... :D
I don't rate bikinis. Lingerie on the other hand...
Quote from: Crow on July 14, 2012, 03:34:12 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 14, 2012, 03:16:20 PM
I also applaud your policy of using the flimsiest of excuses to post pictures of gorgeous women.
;D you noticed.
Quote from: Ali on July 14, 2012, 03:28:20 PM
^^^ Haha, next he'll want to talk about how a bikini enhances the female form, with examples.... :D
I don't rate bikinis. Lingerie on the other hand...
Oh, it's on...!
Quote from: The Black Jester on July 14, 2012, 03:36:52 PM
Quote from: Crow on July 14, 2012, 03:34:12 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 14, 2012, 03:16:20 PM
I also applaud your policy of using the flimsiest of excuses to post pictures of gorgeous women.
;D you noticed.
Quote from: Ali on July 14, 2012, 03:28:20 PM
^^^ Haha, next he'll want to talk about how a bikini enhances the female form, with examples.... :D
I don't rate bikinis. Lingerie on the other hand...
Oh, it's on...!
Even better off.
Quote from: Crow on July 14, 2012, 02:48:19 PM. . . Scouse brows . . .
I'm aware of the term "Scouse" but had never heard of "Scouse brow." I found an interesting article on the
Daily Mail's website (I know, but this sort of thing is what the
Mail excels at) which explores the regional variations of the great British female eyebrow:
Daily Mail | Forget Scouse brows, what about the plank, the tadpole and the happy brow? How women's eyebrows reveal where they hail from even better than accents (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2169188/How-womens-eyebrows-reveal-hail-better-accents.html)
So thank you for that! :D
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on July 14, 2012, 04:36:23 AM
Quote from: Stevil on July 12, 2012, 12:33:21 AM
I'd be interested to know what people here think of with regards to marriage?
Late to the party again. Personally, I have no interest in marriage and never did -- I always knew that wasn't for me. I saw good marriages and bad marriages growing up and wanted no part of any of it. Having written that, I will admit to feeling in a little in awe of long time couples who are still affectionate with each other.
I tend to think of marriage as a hold-over from primitive, tribal times which is constantly being tweaked to try to make it fit the modern world better. Maybe we don't really need legal marriage anymore, but as long as it still is a legal issue I'd like to see the rules about who can and can't marry be fair and reasonable.
So far, I haven't heard a single argument against same-sex marriage that makes a bit of sense, isn't rooted in personal religous beliefs or couldn't also be used to ban opposite-sex marriage. The same goes for polygamous marriages. As far as I can see, people involved in a marriage all have the same basic needs and as long as they're consenting adults it shouldn't matter to the law how many of them there are or what their sexes are.
Better late than never, Books.
Quote from: Recusant on July 14, 2012, 03:43:11 PM
Daily Mail | Forget Scouse brows, what about the plank, the tadpole and the happy brow? How women's eyebrows reveal where they hail from even better than accents (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2169188/How-womens-eyebrows-reveal-hail-better-accents.html)
So thank you for that! :D
I hate myself for knowing this but that article is wrong. :-[ - Then again the daily mail is always wrong.
Do tell!
Quote from: Crow on July 14, 2012, 03:59:49 PM
Quote from: Recusant on July 14, 2012, 03:43:11 PM
Daily Mail | Forget Scouse brows, what about the plank, the tadpole and the happy brow? How women's eyebrows reveal where they hail from even better than accents (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2169188/How-womens-eyebrows-reveal-hail-better-accents.html)
So thank you for that! :D
I hate my
It is a myth that the Daily Mail never prints the truth. It has the right price on it.
Quote from: Recusant on July 14, 2012, 04:07:55 PM
Do tell!
LOL
I got the sarcasm but seeing as I have nothing better to do it's really more like Elizabeth Taylors eyebrows but entirely made out of make-up. From the article the Middleton lass has the most scouse of brows but not as fake. This is a scouse brow (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGilU9tGQDs) and they are fucking horrible.
Cool. That one young lady with the black hair seemed to be a particularly good example. I actually like the more natural version the
Mail is calling the "South brow," finding heavily plucked brows off-putting. But then, being a unibrow myself, I suppose I'm just showing my tribal loyalty. (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg826.imageshack.us%2Fimg826%2F4195%2Flolbymissbangles.gif&hash=a459a670b2fef67538964246ce892a4b5f7d96e2)
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.friday-fun.com%2Ffiles%2Fsmilies%2Fgiraffe.gif&hash=10c3bbdc3364f9d4abe75169965d824126872059)
I had never heard of a "scouse brow" before, either.
I do have a make-up pet-peeve, though. Some women love to abuse the cat-eye look. When done well, it can look really sophisticated and flattering. But a lot of people take the "more must be better" approach and it just looks... bad (in my opinion). I had a supervisor who used to wear eye makeup similar to the second picture on a daily basis.
Nice Cat-eye
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmorningbounce.files.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F07%2Faquascutum-bty-f9-007-2.jpg&hash=3d99105db69ffbec1e9cc437f9184498ed8d292e)
Bad Cat-eye
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F_-BgDSH4_wWk%2FTCJlOmvj8JI%2FAAAAAAAABD0%2Ftil0uQ90Z9g%2Fs1600%2Fchanel%2Bfall%2B2009.jpg&hash=8bc862d244fc16b226d8e32eac2c0b303fc661e2)
I agree, Crow. The women you posted are all very beautiful with nicely done make-up that enhances rather than distracts. :)
Quote from: Recusant on July 14, 2012, 04:34:47 PMBut then, being a unibrow myself, I suppose I'm just showing my tribal loyalty.
Hmmm, evidence of the evil eye and he doesn't even seek to hide it....
I've never heard of a "scouse brow" before this thread. They are terrifying!
If I don't pluck I look like this:
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi46.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff131%2Faasaliman%2FBertPortrait.jpg&hash=a3ae6ea7b7498e5483f3e74433ed0cb119f75c03)
But I definitely don't go overboard, and I never ever ever (ever ever!) draw them back on!
to answer the op question:
for me, religious marriage (as seen in orthodox christian religion) is one big carnival parade. Also, boring and unoriginal. If you've seen one you've seen them all.
Political weddings for me...
just plain meh.
Personally, I don't "get" marriages. I cant see why there has to be this big ceremony and paper signing if you wnat to live with a person you love. But unlike baby christening, I am not AGAINST it, since its two adults (of whatever sex)
just not for me
Quote from: Crow on July 14, 2012, 02:48:19 PM
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbentrovatoblog.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Faaron-richter_ben-trovato8.jpg&hash=8ad8e4ce9c4c48152e788af63c90cfb299741cad)
If any one wonders what "my type" looks like, she is pretty much it (Disregarding the pretty-scale, on which by the way I'd say she's an easy 8, although I'd not go below 6 unless someone drugs my drink)
She looks like she's about to pounce and devour a small creature, so that might explain your attraction. :D
Me, I prefer girls with arms. But of course, like all things it is not mandatory.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 14, 2012, 10:07:27 PM
She looks like she's about to pounce and devour a small creature, so that might explain your attraction. :D
Yes. I go for the intensity. ;D
Quote from: Asmodean on July 15, 2012, 12:23:24 AM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 14, 2012, 10:07:27 PM
She looks like she's about to pounce and devour a small creature, so that might explain your attraction. :D
Yes. I go for the intensity. ;D
Any guesses to her age? My bet is 12 maybe 13.
Quote from: Stevil on July 15, 2012, 02:35:00 AM
Any guesses to her age? My bet is 12 maybe 13.
Older by possibly as much as a decade, or shabby skin quality.
Quote from: Stevil on July 14, 2012, 10:29:15 PM
Me, I prefer girls with arms. But of course, like all things it is not mandatory.
HAHA